As a "wage slave" I get certain benefits that the self-employed do not such as generally better and cheaper health plans, access to more capital equipment such as better and faster PC's, better office equipment, better working conditions.
When I worked for small companies I noticed that the computers were old and slow. The offices were usually cramped, and the health benefit choices, 401K choices, etc. were all worse than what I enjoy now.
A couple of the companies I worked for ultimately went out of business through no major fault of my own. I may have contributed a bit by not working that extra hour a night, etc. but usually it was business conditions and poor management decisions that doomed us.
In those cases many innocent people lost their jobs and their lives were thrown into a tizzy. Some were able to find work relatively quickly in the same city while others had to move, or had to move in with their parents, etc.
Not fun. But then again while they were working for the corporation they were doing much better than the average worker.
However corporations fail, whether by market conditions, poor management decisions, criminal behavior, etc. it is always going to redound to everyone that works there. That's just part of the tradeoff.
It would be best if the guilty individuals could be identified and punished singly. Corporate laws and legal precedents, however, make it difficult to completely separate the guilty from all of their innocent coworkers.
This is especially true if the guilty ones run the corporation and start using the corporation and its assets to put up a defense. The harder they work to prove their own innocence, the more complicit they make the rest of the company when they finally go down.
Greetings!
If I understand you correctly, you are basically saying that —
there are choices that are a normal part of working for a living - choices such as working for one’s self or for others, and choices as to the size or structure of the organization one works for - small business, large corporation, etc. And, that there are also benefits and risks involved in any of these choices. One such risk being that - the company one works for might fail, that it might do so for many reasons, and that, included amongst such causes for failure are situations where a company is taken down by LE agencies for crimes committed by those who manage it and in which the operations of said business are involved.
And that, finally, it is rough for everyone when that kind of thing happens but., essentially, they are just a normal part of life as lived by people who make their choices and are adult enough to own up to them.
Do I got it?
If i do, then, my reply would be that - even in regards to the kinds of risks usually taken as being inherent/internal to the market, there is normally some effort made to do justice to those who are not responsible for failure and to cushion the effects that events of that kind might have on them. For example, when a company goes bankrupt, some effort might normally be made to encourage the development of a plan for restructuring the business - or even to find a buyer willing to sustain its operations, so that creditors, investors and employees might have some chance of retaining an income or some proportion of their assets. And, if worse comes to worse, these same persons would the primary recipients of whatever assets are obtained through liquidation of the company.
On the other hand, criminality is exactly what the authorities are supposed to protect the market - and those who participate in its workings - from. In a free republic the very reason for the existence of LE agencies and judicial bodies is to attempt - as best as they can - to protect the innocent from the misdeeds of others and to insure that justice is actually done.
Therefore, however difficult it may be to -
“...completely separate the guilty from all of their innocent coworkers.” as you put it. it is the job of such agencies to try their very best to do so. And, as protection and justice is supposed to emanate from their operations - it is simply intolerable that they do any harm in the execution of their duties that they cannot reasonable be expected to avoid (truly accidental/good-faith shootings being amongst the kinds of things which at times CANNOT be avoided).
So, criminality is not just another risk of the market and the agencies who are supposed to protect us from it cannot be allowed treat it as such, but, they must do their best to ensure that justice is done and that the very least harm is inflicted on those not deserving of it.
Best and G-d Bless!
DIM1