MGMT 6 CHAPTER 4 RESPONDING TO TRAGEDY
MGMT6
Management Decision
Chapter 4
Responding to Tragedy
On April 5, 2010, an explosion at the Upper Big Branch coal mine in Montcoal, West Virginia, killed 29 workers. Over the next several weeks and days, as nationwide attention turned to this tragedy, it was discovered that the mine’s operating company, Massey Energy, was cited for numerous safety and regulatory violations. One month prior to the accident, the mine was written up more than 50 times, with 12 of those notices relating to an excessive buildup of coal dust and methane, conditions that can cause explosions like the one that occurred. The very day of the explosion, federal regulators identified two more safety violations, a failure to have updated maps of escape routes in case of an accident and a failure to outfit miners with required communication and tracking equipment that would help them stay in contact with aboveground employees. All told, officials found 1,342 safety violations at Upper Big Branch from 2005 to April 2009. And according to these investigators, miners at Upper Big Branch lost more time to work-site accidents than any other mine in the country.
In spite of the large number of violations, Massey continues to insist that they are committed to safety. On its website, the company proclaims “Safety is the top priority for every Massey member. … We work hard to instill a zero-tolerance policy and commitment from all members, whether they work at corporate headquarters or in the mines, to make safety the number one priority—every day.” However, the company’s reactions to regulators’ citations have generally been resistant and confrontational. According to government records, Massey has contested or appealed a good portion of the violations it has received since 2005. By doing so, it has been able to avoid paying the fines and making the safety changes required by regulators. The question for you, as a manager at Massey Energy is this: How will you address your company’s
Management Decision
Chapter 4
Responding to Tragedy
On April 5, 2010, an explosion at the Upper Big Branch coal mine in Montcoal, West Virginia, killed 29 workers. Over the next several weeks and days, as nationwide attention turned to this tragedy, it was discovered that the mine’s operating company, Massey Energy, was cited for numerous safety and regulatory violations. One month prior to the accident, the mine was written up more than 50 times, with 12 of those notices relating to an excessive buildup of coal dust and methane, conditions that can cause explosions like the one that occurred. The very day of the explosion, federal regulators identified two more safety violations, a failure to have updated maps of escape routes in case of an accident and a failure to outfit miners with required communication and tracking equipment that would help them stay in contact with aboveground employees. All told, officials found 1,342 safety violations at Upper Big Branch from 2005 to April 2009. And according to these investigators, miners at Upper Big Branch lost more time to work-site accidents than any other mine in the country.
In spite of the large number of violations, Massey continues to insist that they are committed to safety. On its website, the company proclaims “Safety is the top priority for every Massey member. … We work hard to instill a zero-tolerance policy and commitment from all members, whether they work at corporate headquarters or in the mines, to make safety the number one priority—every day.” However, the company’s reactions to regulators’ citations have generally been resistant and confrontational. According to government records, Massey has contested or appealed a good portion of the violations it has received since 2005. By doing so, it has been able to avoid paying the fines and making the safety changes required by regulators. The question for you, as a manager at Massey Energy is this: How will you address your company’s
Cited: for Myriad Safety Violations,” The Washington Post, April 7, 2010, accessed September 4, 2010, from www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/05/AR2010040503877.html; “Safety,” Massey Energy Company, accessed September 4, 2010, from www.masseyenergyco.com/safety/index.shtml; and Ian Urbina and Bernie Becker, “As Rescue Efforts Continue for Miners, Officials Press for Answers,” The New York Times, April 8, 2010, accessed September 4, 2010, from www.nytimes.com/2010/04/08/us/08westvirginia.html. Forum: Ch 4 Weekly Case Coal Mining 1. How would you describe Massey’s current approach to its ethical and social responsibility? It seems that Massey’s doesn’t have any ethical or social responsibility, except in theory. They seem to believe that because they state that they have these values on their website that they exist, when in actuality, they do not. They only seem to care about their profitability, which is of course an economic approach, and only reactively respond to tragedy. 2. Which approach to social responsibility would you recommend that Massey take in the future? Massey desperately needs to be proactive in their social responsibility. They need to bring in or hire company safety inspectors, listen to what they recommend, and make necessary changes to stop being in violation of safety and regulatory code. They should be more concerned with the safety of their employees, and the nearby residents, then they should be with their bottom line. In the end, it will cost then less anyway, because people are not going to want to continue to work there, and people will call for the shutdown of the facility unless things are changed. 3. How might the temporary closure of dangerous mines and the investment of funds into new safety systems, be an economic stimulus for Massey? It is an absolute necessity at this point to close the mines, and invest in safety systems. The company cannot stand without doing this. People will demand its closure, unless they are sure it is safe. Even after Massey fixes all the problems, people will probably still be skeptical of them initially. However, once they see that Massey’s keeps passing inspections, and doesn’t receive any more safety or regulatory violations, people will begin to trust in them again. Once they build up their reputation, they will get back lost business, and gain new business. This is especially true if they are ahead of the game, in whereas other mining companies could be having the prior problems that Massey did, and people will now prefer to do business with Massey over those other unsafe companies.