A question about something I've observed in the corporate world

[Orrex]

Having spent several decades in that world, I've seen it happen many times that a bad policy is recognized and reported to those empowered to change the policy, but no change is made, even if the change would be simple and require little cost or effort.

Not "bad" as in "the employees don't like it," but "bad" as in "demonstrably harms morale, productivity, or efficiency."

After seeing this happen dozens of times, it is reasonable to conclude that the higher-ups know that the policy is bad, but that they want it to remain in its current form, regardless of the harm it causes or perpetuates.


So can someone tell me why the filibuster is still in place?

[keithbvadu2]

1. Both parties have had the opportunity to kill the filibuster.

Both parties have had the opportunity to kill the filibuster.

They both recognize its future potential usefulness.

[grumpyduck]

2. I was in the corporate world for years too,

and my take was that the muck-a-mucks would have rather died than admit they made a mistake.

[Midnight Writer]

3. We're seeing the same thing now as the Biden DOJ is defending practices from the Trump DOJ.