The SEC set a major precedent in 2023, by holding SolarWinds’ chief information security officer responsible for the company’s lax cybersecurity. In contrast, Wyden urged regulators not to scapegoat UHG’s head of cybersecurity, who had not previously worked in a full-time cybersecurity role prior to being elevated to lead cybersecurity for UHG. Instead, Wyden urged regulators to hold the company’s CEO and its board of directors responsible.
7 replies (most recent on top)
Senator my CIO loves Steve Martin!! Next up James Bond, Bryan Adams. We play games for 2 hours with all IT staffs every quarter, that should qualify.
Right now, everyone from the board down is probably trying to figure out just who and how much they have to sacrifice to appease Wyden and others enough to get the heat off UHG.
If the board thinks they'll win points with Congress, they'll ditch AW, but unless they think they're getting a win they'll keep him as a bargaining chip with Wyden & co.
SD is probably toast the moment they can sh*tcan him and not look weak. Faster if Witty thinks he can pin blame (100x of it!) on him.
SM's career just took a massive nosedive. Getting essentially called out as incompetent and possibly a management patsy by a powerful Senator pretty much makes you toxic at any company that has anything with government oversight or might need friends in Congress.
I don't think Wyden even cares if SM has dirt on his superiors... so his usefulness is only as an example of how bad his bosses are at their jobs. No real chance he can get a retraction or redemption from Wyden unless he's got serious criminal activity level dirt on his bosses.
Execs: "The worse we do our job, the harder it is to do, so you need to pay us more to do it."
Board: "That's the kind of brilliant logic we need from people to best run this company! Here's your millions!"
100x took the blame and became 3x. Walking the talk.
I voted no on the compensation. I also voted no on ever single board member on that was on the compensation committee. If you read their report, the executives took double digit million dollar bonuses. They justified their compensation by saying in the report:
"In determining 2023 executive compensation, the Compensation and Human Resources Committee considered the Company’s strong growth, operating performance and financial results, all of which were achieved in an uncertain environment, as well as individual executive performance." However, they told the employees the performance was poor an we didn't meet targets and therefore could only get a 3% raise but only if you were at a certain grade level or below. So, what's the real story here. Sounds like your holding people to two sets of standards.
Clearly this is the case. With the security breach, internally we are told and preached to that we have keep better track of our passwords and computers. That's how hackers got into the system. It was some lowly "worker bee" that messed up and caused the whole system to fall apart. Um...not so fast. The reality is it was your CIO that knew there wasn't two factor authentication on a server and did nothing about it. That's how the hackers got into the system. Two factor authentication is an industry standard and has been for sometime. No one shared a password or left it in a vulnerable place, Hackers found their way in because you left the door open for them.
shareholders, Remember to vote to NOT agree to the executive compensation, Andrew Witty can go F^&K himself.
Board of Directors will dump the Sir from across the pond. Hemsley will protect his own legacy. Order Popcorn!