No biz wonk I, but why don't stockholders force dimwits like Tilton

[blondeatlast]

to resign or be fired?

Benefits the company he's already ran into the ground (UAL) and benefits the employees.

The AFA/UAL insists that he resign or they won't come to the table.

So the best way to avert a strike or deadly slowdown is for Tilton to get the boot, someone competent to take his place--poof, all of a sudden, UAL has a slim possibility of survival.

Am I missing something obvious--it seems way too easy to me right now?!

[rogerashton]

1. The advice to small or medium shareholders is

if you don't like the management, don't try to vote them out. Sell the stock.

Thing is, it's good advice.

You want companies that throw out bad management? Put the workers in charge.

[blondeatlast]

4. But what about the large investors?

I suspect I'm just missing the obvious, but isn't it in their best interests, too?

[Wapsie B]

2. Force him to resign

and freeze his golden parachute. Better yet garnish it completely. This CEO welfare has gone on long enough.

[Cleita]

3. Small investors don't have much control.

Selling the stock of a badly managed company is the best way.