I am very curious about how people who do things like these remain employed. Is there anyone who has been on the back-end of one of these decisions? What's the motivation for keeping a predator around?
No, stop, that's hardly a cost worth paying attention to for a large company. An exec is worth much more than almost anyone of lower rank.
That's the problem, though. There is no way you can appeal to a large company in terms of the cost of lost employees who are victims of assault by higher-ups. The media storm is what gets them, it's the bad publicity they fear-- in my opinion that is the only way to get anything "done" in terms of assault cases like this.
At the same time, when we rely on bad publicity to force action, we risk ruining the lives of innocent people. Men and women in powerful positions are often targeted with these sorts of accusations for the sole purpose of getting them out of the way.
I have no proposed solution but appealing in the way you have is not it. It just does not make sense.
That's why execs even bother to put out damage control emails like the one Astro Teller sent. Or the ones following mass layouts. They are trying to stop the morale bleeding to avoid a crisis. Maybe it will work this time, maybe it won't and they'll have to fire DeVaul.
Also, I'm sure a lot of employees weren't, and maybe still aren't, even aware that an accused man still works at their company. Most employees at any company don't have reason to be in contact with or have any information whatsoever about the executives of that company and, apart from that, businesses will work hard to keep that info under the radar.
Mass layoffs definitely get around in the workplace because it's directly related to everyone's job security. Some exec accused of sexual assault doesn't really affect job security, so most people don't really care to know, if they ever catch wind of it anyways. There isn't a huge cost here when the majority of your workforce doesn't know and doesn't care.