Massey Coal

Massey Coal Case A manybody is mor solelyy responsible for an injury or a wrong if 1. the person caused or helped caused it, or violateed to prevent it when he or she could have and should have 2. the person did so knowing what he or she was doing 3. the person did so of his or her prep ar free will Question 1 Massey Energy ships lodge should be held mor entirelyy responsible for the deaths of the 29 taprs. The U. S. Mine Safety and wellness Administration issued too much citations for the violations in the taps Massey Energy Company owned.The bon ton always challenged several of the citations and corrected teeming of the significant and substantial violations to stick out its total violations to fall below the level needed to force its closure. This factor in terms of gum elastic, the troupe only make significant sentry duty change in order for their mines non to be totally unkindly but non make a major safety changes in order to follow all the guidelines of MSHA and eliminate all possible endangerment in the mines. Massey should be held morally responsible because of the overleap of effort the company rate in to improve the safety quality in their mines.Question 2 jade Blankenship should be held morally responsible for the deaths of the 29 miners. Don wrote a memoranda stating that managers should concentrate on producing coal and not waste period responding to requests to condition things. It was not clear what had ignited the explosion of April 5 but it was almost authentic that is was caused by accumulations of methane and coal dust. If Don had enforced the managers to focused more(prenominal) on the safety of the mines and the miners so that they are up to MSHA safety standards quite an than only to concentrate on producing coal, the April 5 incident could well be prevented.Don Blankenship lack of take for the miners and prioritizing profit over safety are enough reasons for him to be held morally responsible for the deaths of the 29 miners. Question 3 MSHA should in some manner be held morally responsible for the deaths of the 29 miners. First of all, the company does not operate up to the standard when it comes to protecting the lives of the miners. The agency was understaffed and its quizzers were overworked. Also, the week before the mine explosion, half of the agencys inspectors failed to attend infallible training courses and the agency neither kept track of their attendance nor did it second them.Not only that, but the company cant shut downwards a mine unless the total violations of these coal mine companies are to a higher place the level needed to force its closure. Most of the coal mine companies challenged MSHAs citations and corrected enough of the significant violations so they fall below the shut-down level. This is unequivocal on MSHAs side. Thy should enforce a tighter and stricter rules when it comes to violations. MSHA should not just obligate fines on the company but they sho uld be more stern when it comes to safety violations by the company.Also, waiting until there is too much violations by the company to close the mines will endanger the lives of the miners. When people lives are on stake, MSHA sure as shooting are not up to the standard of that task. Question 4 The miners had some idea of the risks of operative in the Upper Big split up mine however that is not enough for them to be held any responsibility for their own deaths. Don Blankenship had released a memo to the managers specifically stating to ignore wasting time responding to requests to fix things. Managers then would be afraid to object to Don Blankenship requests since they could get fired.During the congressional hearing, survivors and relatives of those who had died testified. Most of the testimony states that they are afraid to go to commission and state their fears of the lack of safety in the mine. They are afraid heed would look for ways to fire them. So afraid of being fire d, miners should not be held responsible for their own deaths because of the lack of freedom they have to express their feelings. Question 5 There is a huge divergence amongst mines without coalescencys standardised the Massey mines and other mines that had unions.The huge difference is the safety regulations. A union would fought for better enforcement of safety regulations to protect the miners. According to the testimony of Gary Quarles, the huge difference is when MSHA inspector comes to the mines. When an MSHA inspector comes onto a Massey mine property, the code words go out weve got a man on the property. When the word goes pit all effort is made to correct any deficiencies or direct the inspectors attention away from any deficiencies. Also when an MSHA inspector comes to a Massey mine, he/she is only accompanied by Massey people.No coal miner at the mine can point out areas of concern to the MSHA inspector. While in union mines, workers at the mine would accompany the M SHA inspectors during the inspections. Workers alike have the make up to refuse to work in unsafe conditions without fear of their transmission line. Clearly, in mines without unions like Massey, the people are trying to deceive MSHA inspectors to that they would not get citations for several(predicate) violations. Seeing the huge difference in enforcing safety regulations, all mines should be forced to have a union. Question 6The average salary for all chew overs in the United States is $43,000 while miners in the Upper Big Branch mine were paid $60,000. Even though a work of a miner required no more than a high naturalise education, the risk of their suppose is very high, probably the highest. Wages will fail to provide a level of compensation proportional to the risks of a job when markets do not register risks because the risks are not yet known. For example, the wellness risks involved in mining or using a certain mineral such(prenominal) as manganese may not be known un til many years afterward. In this case, wages will not fully compensate for risks.Workers also might accept risks unknowingly because they do not have adequate accept to education concerning those risks. Workers dont have the money or the tool to collect information needed to assess the risks of the jobs they accept. Workers might accept known risks out of desperation because they lack the mobility to enter other less risky industries or because they lack information of the alternatives available to them. Massey is only paying $17,000 more than the average of all jobs in the United States. Knowing all the risks as a miner such as exposure to methane nd all other lethal gases and also the high rate of accidents in Upper Big Branch mine due to poor safety regulations, a wage of $60,000 surely does not cover the all the risks that the miners are exposed to. Only $17,000 more on the wage of the miners than the average wage of all the jobs in the U. S. is not an honorable approach by th e company. There is a far more safer job even though they are lower in wages. But the $60,000 in wages is not worth it for the miners considering all the job risks Massey doesnt method of accounting for. So, Massey was not handling job risk in an ethically tolerate manner. Question 7Massey Energy Company did not fulfill a circulate of ethical obligations. The company violated the ethics of care. An ethic of care says they we should care for those dependent on and related to us. The miners are dependent of the managers and CEO of the company to enforce tighter and stricter safety regulations, however Massey failed to do so. The company violated the ethics of contamination control. Massey was faced with the problem of disposing millions of gallons of coal slurry the mines were producing. They did not control their pollution of coal slurry into the environment, thus violating the ethics of pollution control.Massey also violated divergent rights. Positive rights state that duties of other agents (Massey) to provide the holder of the right (the miners) with whatsoever he or she needs to freely pursue his or her followings. The miners interest is to have a high quality safety regulations in the mines and Massey failed to provide this interest. Massey also failed the fairness of wages and the fairness of employee working conditions. The wage they are paying to the miners are not enough to cover all the job risks the miners are exposed to in the mine. Massey also failed to provide proper working condition in the Upper Big Branch.