Today, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor (formerly Prince Andrew)
was arrested by British police on suspicion of misconduct while in public office. The arrest is, of course, related to Andrew’s longstanding relationship with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. That relationship led to Andrew losing his title—an extraordinary step that has now gone even farther. King Charles, Andrew’s brother, said in a statement that “the law must take its course.”
Andrew’s fall from grace in the U.K. is perhaps the most prominent example of Epstein-related fallout. Meanwhile, companies and organizations around the world are deciding how to handle new revelations about prominent figures’ dealings with Epstein, from Kathy Ruemmler’s
resignation from Goldman Sachs to the exit of
Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem from the Dubai-based logistics group DP World.
My colleague Claire Zillman
has a new piece out analyzing exactly how businesses are making these decisions. (It’s part of a new
Fortune digital issue, which you can check out
here.) Per her reporting, here are a few factors companies are considering when determining whether heads will roll—or not:
- Cost-benefit analysis: Are this person’s contributions to the business worth weathering the outrage? (That seemed to be the calculation Goldman had made about Ruemmler, up through her resignation.)
- Safety in numbers: Some boards may believe that there are so many prominent business figures caught up in Epstein’s web that they can’t all be ousted forever. The sheer vastness of Epstein’s network may be shielding some of his former associates as companies decide to wait it out.
- #MeToo overcorrection: Some decision-makers likely believe boards were too hasty in firing some business leaders during the peak of the #MeToo movement, and want to wait longer before cutting ties.
These may not be the questions survivors of abuse and other advocates for justice would ask—but they are the conversations that are happening in boardrooms right now.
Over the next few days and weeks, we will likely see more of these decisions play out. One is on the L.A. 2028 Olympic committee, which
is facing increasing pressure to cut ties with chair Casey Wasserman, whose communications with Ghislaine Maxwell were revealed. When Wasserman agreed to sell his talent agency following the start of a talent exodus led by Chappell Roan and Abby Wambach, he said he would focus on his work to bring the Olympics to Los Angeles—and the committee’s executive board backed him. (Like Ruemmler at Goldman, Wasserman expressed his regret for his past association and denied knowledge of wrongdoing, but said he risked becoming a distraction for the business.) But an Olympic committee isn’t a safe haven. Candidates in California’s governor’s race
were asked whether Wasserman should step down, and most said yes.
Emma Hinchliffeemma.hinchliffe@fortune.comThe Most Powerful Women Daily newsletter is Fortune’
s daily briefing for and about the women leading the business world. Subscribe here. 