|
Volume CXXXII, Number 2 |
 |
The risk of malfeasance
TIMOTHY RIEMER
COLUMNIST
With all the corporate malfeasance over the past year, it is very refreshing to see a company like Hershey Foods actually listen to investors and the community about what it should do and actually act to benefit them. The Hershey Trust Co., who controls 77% of the company's shareholder votes and 31% of common stock, decided against the sale late Tuesday listening to the complaints of investors, employees and the community in which Hershey is located. The Hershey Trust Co. is a charitable trust whose sole beneficiary is the Milton Hershey School for disadvantaged children. Hershey Foods is deeply intertwined with its surrounding area of Derry Township, PA and any type of change would have had a profound effect on this community.
However, there is something about this decision that, at least to me, has much broader implications on our society. Why should I be so shocked by the good actions of the Hershey Trust Co., or for that matter of any company? In my opinion these types of actions should be the norm, but the exception.
We should be hearing more stories like those of Calvin Broadus, or more commonly known as Snoop Dogg, who as achieved acclaim not only as a rapper, but know also an entrepreneur of sorts culminating in a story about his recent successes on the cover of the Wall Street Journal.
We should less stories about people like Martha Stewart, and Dennis Kozlowski, who is now charged with running a criminal enterprise and grand larceny (among other charges) for stealing more than $170 million from Tyco Ltd.
What this has done for me is lead to a great distrust in corporate America, as it has for many Americans. This distrust, however, has taken on a greater significance for me this fall. As I have begun my search for a job next year, I have come to the realization that almost every company that I am interested in applying to has faced or is facing some sort of charge of corporate wrongdoing in the past year.
This has serious implications on my future, not just because these might not be able to hire me (not they would anyway), but if one of these firms did actually, out of some act lunacy, decide to hire me, and I decided to work for them-investing my future in the company-what is to say that this company would not commit an act of misconduct again? And, thus, end up like Enron or WorldCom and leaving me without a job.
As seniors-those of us who are in search for jobs next year, we must consider in our job search the risk of such horrendous cases such as Enron and WorldCom where corporate malfeasance has led to the downfall of these companies, and unfortunately the downfall of many of the futures of their former employees due to lost pensions and 401(k)'s. In our job searches, we must look for aspects or actions that companies have taken that instill a belief that there is no risk or little risk of such misconduct occurring again. My overall point here is that we should look for companies to work for like Hershey Foods; companies that respect their employees and the community.
I am not trying to give a sermon here, despite the resemblance to one, but this is a consideration that I do not think classes before have had to consider. It is true, that one has always had to consider the risk of a company floundering because of poor economic times, but never before this year has anyone really considered the risk of a company floundering because of corporate malfeasance or excessive greed. The risk of a company going under due to corporate greed or malfeasance has now become as important a factor as any other in the job search process.