Video Assignment 3

.docx

School

University Of Arizona *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

301

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

3

Uploaded by PresidentTurtleMaster145

Destiny Clemons Video Assignment 3 The Coal Minors Are mining companies motivated by profit, or do they have a moral commitment to their customers and communities? Was Don Blankenship's conduct ethically acceptable, or was it just a narrow shareholder perspective? In this article, I will analyze the organizational factors that led to this tragedy and discuss whether Don’s actions are morally justified. On April 5, 2010, a major explosion at the Upper Big Branch Mine in West Virginia killed 29 workers. Government investigators blamed the disaster on poor management and a culture established by the company's divisive CEO, Don Blankenship, who they said prioritized output before safety. Blankenship was subsequently found guilty of conspiring to violate mine safety standards. Morgan Massey, the patriarch of the Massey family, was no longer with the firm at the time of the tragedy, but he stayed close to Blankenship and believes the common picture of the troubled CEO is incorrect. Blankenship, he claims, always prioritizes safety because "it's good business” (PBS). This proves Don’s moral value for the company didn’t align with the late mining men. Some of the relevant stake holders in this case were Stanley Stewart, Harley Taylor, who both worked at Upper Big Branch, Booth Godwin, a former U.S Attorney who oversaw the persecution for Don and Tim bailey, an attorney who represented the families of some of those killed. These men oversaw the need for the greater good of the overall minors even after death.
I agree with the film's portrayal of companies since profit is a big motivator for success. The two cases above demonstrate the impact of profit-seeking, and these corporations tend to dominate the excellent moral ones. Because the press loves tragedy and failure, when a corporation is discovered underpaying people, filing a lawsuit, or stealing, those are more likely to be publicized than a company contributing or paying a reasonable wage. I believe a defender of each of these views would evaluate Don one of two ways. First, by any means, what he did by placing these men in danger without thinking of the consequences first, shows how careless companies are in the mindset of putting profit first. Though the greater good of the company would satisfy the narrow view to a certain point, it would then be considered put in harm’s way. Under broad view, the first mistake was not taking pre safety measures for the community. This shows Don was only in it for the money and didn’t care what it took to get there even if it meant placing men in harms way. Under the narrow perspective, Don is morally permissible for the fact of the greater good of the company. He prioritizes the revenue rather than the employees on the job. Blankenship’s behavior was not acceptable in the Broad view because he was more selfish in the money- making part of the job, he forgot to ensure the safety of the men under it first. If wasn’t for the fact safety wasn’t the priority, the men’s lives who have been lost would still be here today. Don’s behavior was not morally permissible under the narrow (broad) perspective for he placed the entire crew into harm’s way without doing any proper checks to ensure these men would make it out alive. Works cited:
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help