Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Copy of [BPMN3123] Death At Massey Company
Transcript of Copy of [BPMN3123] Death At Massey Company
The management of Massey Energy Company should held for the deaths is because of the safety violation.
The company only make significant safety change in order for their mines not to be totally closed but not make a major safety changes in order to follow all the guidelines of MSHA
Besides that, the Massey Energy Company violates employee right.
Safety inspection of non union mines which is Massey Energy Company was much different in the union mines.
The Upper Big Branch mine was clearly not safe and as a result 29 miners died, the management of Massey Energy Company needs to be held responsible for these deaths. In your judgment, and given only the facts described in the case above, should the management of Massey Energy Company be held morally responsible for the deaths of the 29 miners? Explain your answer. Do you think Don Blackenship should be held morally responsible for the deaths of the 29 miners? Did not obey the utilitarian principle.
Creating environment problem.
Causes bad effect to the society such as lost of clean water source.
Also violates moral rights or human rights.
Had written a memo suggesting managers concentrating on the production of coal.
Insisted not to waste time responding to request to fix things.
This shows that he priotize profit compared to human life.
As a leader, he should take care of the health and provide safety workplace for his workers.
Don Blankenship should be morally responsible for the deaths of the 29 miners. 3. Given the fact described in the case above, should the MSHA morally be held responsible (at least in part) for the death of the 29 miners ? MSHA has the authority to closed down the mine if the mine.
agency inspectors failed to attend required training courses.
the agency neither kept track of their attendance nor did it sanction them.
MSHA had never forced the entire mine to shut down in order to force it to make significant changes.
However, MSHA also cannot be fully responsible.
This is because when the MSHA inspector come to a Massey Mines, the only people
accompanying him are Massey company people.
No coal miner at the mines can point out areas of concern to the MSHA inspector
All effort is made the Massey company people to correct any deficiencies or direct the inspectors attention away from any deficiencies Death at Massey Company 4. The miners seem to have had some idea of the risks of working in the Upper Big Branch Mine. Should they be held at least partially responsible for their own deaths? Yes I do think the miners should be held the partially responsible for their own deaths. This is because they know they will face the great risks by working in the Upper Big Branch Mine.
The miners fulfilled their loyalty by continuing to obey superiors on ignoring the multiple violations the miners had , even knowing it was their own safety , and lives on the line.
Employees were stifled in their ability to take action with the threat of losing their job because all of them need money .
A relative of one of the dead miners said (Alicia Peters) :He told me that , at least seven times , he was told by Massey supervisors that , if he shut down production because of the ventilation problems , he would lose his job”. 5) In light of the differences between mines without unions like the Massey mines, and other mines that had unions, do you think all mines should be forced to have a union? NUR FARHIN BT PAHROR REDZI 212821
NOOR AMIRA BT MOHD ISA 212858
LIM YONG EOW 213047
ONG SHI BIN 213101
FAM WEI LOON 213106
NUR EZZATY BT AHMAD KAMAL 213833 April 5,2010 an explosion occurred in the Upper Big Branch coal mine at Montcoal, West Virginia, killing 29 workers.
Greatest mine disaster since 1970s
This mine had been cited for a huge number of safety violations in three years.
In 2009, the mine had been cited eight times for "substantial" violations of their methane monitors.
For safety purpose, the methane monitors are supposed to be calibrated once a month but this mine did every three months. Stakeholder Analysis Don Blankenship Workers/Miners Community US Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) Shareholders Massey President, CEO and Chairman since 1992
Stepped down at December 2010 after the accident
Money and profit goal orientation
1100 safety violations in past 3 years. "If any of you have been asked by your group presidents, your supervisors, engineers or anyone else to do anything other than run coal you need to ignore them and run coal. This memo is necessary only because we seem not to understand that coal pays the bills." - Don Blankenship The scarifier
They work without union
Psychological instinct as they pressure to obey instruction Coal is the only thing that brings money into the area
Did not do much to raise issue about poor working conditions, assuming:
lack of knowledge of conditions in the mind
did not want to lose those jobs Safety governmental agency
Flagged Massey Energy Co. for not obeying standards
Being blamed for the accident Investors of the company
Interested in revenues, profits Massey Energy was founded in 1920 in Richmond Virginia.
Produce, processess and sell coal
Known for several lawsuits, bad environmental record and poor mine safety such as waterway pollution in Kentucky and WV and mine placement nearby schools
Upper Big Branch: Massey Coal Mine
Located in Raleigh County, West Virginia
Coal mining is one of the key industries in West Virginia
Don Blankenship, CEO responsible for this case Introduction Case Analysis Ethical Issue or Concern raised by this case Lack of Internal
Whistle Blowing Absenteeism of union Job Risks Employee did not want to bear the risk of losing job
Limited working opportunity in Montcoal Union is the only platform for them to fight for their right.
As Upper Bigger Branch opposed to be unionized by threaten the union by closing the mine if unionized. Company handled job risks by giving higher salary which is an inappropriate way is also one of the ethical issue. Act Utilitarian Legal and
Moral Right Miners in the Upper Big Branch mine were paid about $60,000 a year (in some cases less, and in other cases more, depending on seniority and several other factors) for work that required no more than a high school education. The average salary for all jobs in the United States is about $43,000. In light of the chapter’s discussion of job risks, would you say that the company was handling job risk in an ethically appropriate manner? Rule Utilitarian According to act utilitarian, the company handled the job risk ethically.
Act utilitarian view that holds that actions and policies should be evaluated on the basis of the cost-benefits analysis
The company pay more the market wages which outweigh the costs bear by miners. According to rule utilitarian, the company handled the job risk unethically.
Rule utilitarianism begins by looking at potential rules of action.
As the work environmental is no longer safe anytime, although it is high paid salary, it still violated the rule utilitarianism. If according to legal right and moral right, the company handled the case unethically.
Legal right is an entitlement that derives from a legal system that allows or empowers a person to act in a way or requires other to act in certain ways toward that person.
Moral rights are the rights that all human beings everywhere possess to an equal extent simply by virtue of being human beings.
In this case, every miner has their rights to ensure they work in a safe environment. However, the company ignored their miner right but only focus on the profit. The company should take the extra wages to improve a better working environment. 7.List all the ethical obligations that you believe the management of Massey Energy Company did Not fulfil .Explain the ethical basis of each of the obligations on your list . Moral Right Utilitarianism Philosophy Kant’s and moral right. This is because they did the violation of right to safe working conditions. All people in this world, have the right to life while engaged in an essential as a human function and the right not to be killed on their job operations .
The company also violated the rights by lying to the employees about the conditions of the mine and the management will find the way to fire the one who was complain to the management. In this theory we have to never use people only as a means to the company ends, but always treat them as they freely and rationally consent to be treated and help them pursue their freely and rationally chosen ends .
Based on the idea that humans have a dignity that makes them different from mere objects .And we should treat people equally and not use them as objects to gain their own benefits. Actions and policies should be evaluated on the basis of the benefits and costs they produce for everyone in society .Specifically , utilitarianism holds that the morally right course of action in any situation is the one that , when compared to all other possible actions , will produce the greatest balance of benefits over costs for everyone affected.
The company also create the environment problem to the nature and bring the causes of bad effect to the society such as lost of clean water sources for their own benefits What is Union? What is the benefit of working in company with union? Should all mines be forced
to have a union? What is a labor union?
Why do employees need union? Higher pay
Wider medical coverage
Hours and job duties are well defined
Job is secured
Safe working condition Yes! Why? Video Time!!!