Can he? How can he know whether the new one will or will not be retroactively invalidated 5 years from now? Do all executives need to get permission from a sitting judge before signing a contract now to be sure it's not going to be retroactively invalidated in the future?
> Do all executives need to get permission from a sitting judge before signing a contract now to be sure it's not going to be retroactively invalidated in the future?
All public company executives need to get their pay package approved by a real board that can actually tell them no (or at least sound like it in the minutes), not a handful of fawning sycophants. Or, if their board is actually a handful of fawning sycophants, they need to not lie about that when describing the pay deal to shareholders. Or they can take their chances on what a judge may think in the future. Doesn't seem unreasonable.
Up to a point. Tesla has a staggered board, which is well-known as a technique for making it hard for shareholders to control the board, and in general it's very rare for shareholders to vote board members out even in companies with more shareholder-friendly charters. Support for Tesla's directors in their most recent election was well below the median, partly because ISS had recommended voting against them (which is again unusual), but didn't reach the level of removing them.
> How can he know whether the new one will or will not be retroactively invalidated 5 years from now?
Get a real board to negotiate and approve the package. Boards and CEOs are already buddy buddy, but this is so far beyond even that. Heck, one of the members is Musk's brother - not even trying to appear objective. Musk's hubris bites him again.
