Goldman Sachs Keeps Employees in Japan
In the wake of Japan’s nuclear disaster, what should big business do with any employees it has in the vicinity? In the case of the investment giant Goldman Sachs, the word on the street is that executives held a meeting with in Tokyo whereby they ordered employees to remain in place in order to project an image that business would go on as usual to allay business fears. Attendees described the vibe as very clear, “No one is to leave. If you do leave, you can’t come back and expect to still work for Goldman.” This all transpired during the turbulent period when reports on radiation levels and safe distances were being disputed between Japanese officials, plant works and American nuclear experts. Is it right for a business to potentially endanger its employees for the sake of protecting a perception?
Similarly tagged OmniNerd content:
- Statist health care, by the numbers, by LordDilly almost 4 years ago
- Very Small Business Banking: Checking, Savings, and Investments, by Brandon over 5 years ago
- Radiohead Lets Consumers Pay What They Want for Latest Album, by Brandon over 5 years ago
- Making the Switch to Unadulterated Online Banking, by Brandon almost 6 years ago


Print Friendly
Write an Article
A Call For Safety by thumbs52
This action, to protect a perception, is dangerous to the employee. It makes a great case for unions and the protections they try to enforce for their members.
Money is everything in certain worlds. Wall Street is all about greed. Goldman Sachs is all about Wall Street. Greed is all about personal gain. After the nonsense of the past few years with the market swinging wildly, Goldman Sachs can’t afford another shift in profits. Of course they would use job security as leverage in the everlasting search for stability in profit-making. Greed doesn’t have scruples, or safety, as a factor.
The employees must decide if their safety is worth the job. It’s a choice. How many employees stayed? They, too, are affected by greed.
RE: A Call For Safety by Occams
It is a bit surprising. Goldman would be nothing without its employees, and it must know that. I guess it has been exploiting its wannabe juniors for so long now it has forgotten that they are human.
This kind of treatment should send an alarming message about the relationship in both directions.
RE: A Call For Safety by VnutZ
How many employees stayed?
According to the original story – nearly all of them. Many sent their families away while they themselves remained behind.
RE: A Call For Safety by Occams
I guess that if you have the mentality of an investment banker you might consider this a good way of managing risk to family and career.