The Disaster Damaged Bhp 's Reputation And Benefits

First, the “un-engineered” dam violated two laws; second, Pittston knew the dam was not safe; third, Pittston did not have a warning system in place to alert residents in case of disaster; fourth, by convincing the deputies to discontinue their warning efforts, Pittston negated the last-ditch effort that could have saved 125 people (Nugent 183). The most tragic finding from the multiple investigations and studies is that Pittston could have built a safe dam for less than 200,000 thousand dollars, an amount that was a mere “one-half of one percent of its 1971 profits” (Nugent 184), a small sacrifice that could have saved many lives. Pittston’s culpability lies in its reckless greed. One of saddest reminders of the horror of Pittston’s wanton disregard is a tombstone that reads: “This Tiny Trio / Boy-Girl-Boy / Who were the Victims of the Feb. 26, 1972 Buffalo Creek Disaster are unknown to us by name but to Our Heavenly Father they are known as three little angels” (Stern 47). The article Remembering Buffalo Creek, 40 Years Later commemorates the tragedy saying: “We have a responsibility to teach each future generation what happened and why, so that they cannot only reverently remember but make certain that history does not repeat itself” (1). One can hope all companies have this etched in their minds and hearts and souls when they think of sacrificing safety for a

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the legality and ethicality of the corporate governance activities that occurred in an ethics case presented in the text. The paper will provide relevant details regarding the legality of the activities, the criteria by which Sarbanes-Oxley would apply to this case, the ethicality of the activities, whether or not the activities were equitable to internal and external stakeholders, and the next steps representing best interest of all stakeholders.

Reputation is very important when it comes to a company, a certain group, or even an individual. It is important because it is what people will judge one off of which leads to whether or not people want to associate themselves in anyway with one’s reputation because it can look bad to others on their part. This can be avoided for the most part by using ethics, social responsibility and sustainability to better his, hers, or its actions in everyday situations. When these basic obligations are ignored, tragedy can ensue on a small or large scale. In this case, the Buffalo Creek Disaster was large scale, impacted many people, and was an example of the greed companies have. Pittston, the sole shareholder of the Buffalo Mining Company allowed the corporate veil to be pierced that in turn brought Pittston to the same level as the people who were impacted by the breaking of the dams. Corporations such as Pittston try to intimidate and use excuses at to why certain problems occur, not wanting to take responsibility for their actions; it

In this unfortunate event, the San Esteban Mining Company needed to tread carefully in how they would communicate to the world about the incident. If the company does not properly communicate what has happened, it would be viewed as careless, and heartless to the world, employees, and the families. The San Esteban Mining Company needed to release information in three ways. First, the families would have priority concerning communicating to different parties involved in this incident. The person(s) that will be updating the family’s needs to be competent and show empathy, honesty, and be trustworthy and compassionate.

The stakeholders are the shareholders, managers, and employees. The current situation has caused a dilemma that affects all stakeholders equally. When the business is at risk, everyone involved should be concerned about the future of the organization. However, the responsibility falls to the senior leaders of the organization to solve the current issues. However, holding 80% of the company’s stocks is concerned not only about the organizations current issues but also with the value of his investment, as he gets closer to retirement. This creates an ethical dilemma due to his personal finances and retirement being directly affected by the company’s performance. In addition, the CEO believes that the status of the organization is not as bad as some of the senior leadership team would say. The shareholders interest is purely profit. The impact of how Huffman Trucking runs the business and implements change has a direct reflection on the company’s image.

According to the IEEE code of ethics, “a person must disclose promptly factors that might endanger the public or the environment.” The engineers here are guilty for not following the IEEE as they would have known the implications of such a disaster and should have tried to warn the company heads or if need be to be more radical, the higher authority which would have stopped

While they have arrangement and discharging control over the directors of the enterprise, shareholders in expansive organizations, for example, the criminogenic Shell, Exxon, Occidental Petroleum, Union Carbide, Dow Chemical, Ford Motors, La Roche-Hoffman, BHP, A.H. Robins, General Electric, Johns-Manville, James Hardie, all enterprises whose disregard and willful dismissal of surely understood norms of conduct has brought about shocking mischief, have minimal impetus to guarantee that these supervisors carry on legitimately. This happens because financial specialists who don't lawfully own the property of the company used to do any harm, they have no individual legitimate obligation regarding any such damages brought about by the misapplication of that property. The rich shareholders who are continually telling the riches less and poor people to be responsible and in charge of the route, in which they act and live, are, in law, unreliable for the (regularly detestable) behavior of their companies. It deteriorates the

The key takeaways from this case are the importance of having a decision making process in place, as well as not relying on bias to fix a situation. There should have been policies and procedures in place so that when disaster strikes there are guidelines to follow. The model for rational decision making could have been followed. The problem should have been identified, general alternative solutions should have been discussed, evaluate alternatives and select a solutions, and then finally implement and evaluate the solution that was chosen. Had BP and Transocean had effective communication the oil rig may not have caused such a disaster (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013).

In developing a communications plan and message for the miners' families and company employees (groups directly affected by the incident), it is critical o understand the stake of each group about the event itself and its potential or eventual outcome, whether good or bad. For the miners' families, it is critical to understand that their concern is the

The breakdown of Dick Smith Electronics has aroused wide concerns in Australia since it brought losses to the related parties at different levels. This essay focuses on analyzing how the company could have possibly avoided the failure if it had applied the third edition of ASX Corporate Governance Principles more effectively.

An effective corporate governance regime includes prosecution for individuals who conduct unethical or illegal acts in the name of the enterprise [4]. Why so that there were no discussions in regards to the person/s responsible for dumping pollutants in the adjacent stream? Wasn’t the disposal unethical enough to violate the name of the enterprise? The management’s failure to recognize that such action ruins the reputation of the company is ineffective itself.

The series of ethical issues that took place leading to the disaster are complex, and other factors such as economic and political issues arose after the catastrophe happened. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the ethical issues that took place before the disaster happened, and investigate the moral obligations, social responsibility and justice at an individual and organizational level. The ethical dilemma is broken down into three categories, which include the company’s management priority to reduce costs and time, neglecting safety issues addressed by staff, human misjudgment and errors in neglecting pressure reading; and finally, overlooking the technical design flaws that were not tested by BP before installing to use. The

BHP was founded in 1885. BHP is the largest and began with silver and lead in Australia and a South African ancestor briefly served as the vital link. The company grew to become a global natural resources company, with a diversified commodity suite that included minerals, oil, gas, and steel. The company forayed into steel making in 1915, commissioning its first steelworks at Newcastle, New South Wales.

Widely known as the champion of the energy industry, Enron is suddenly faced with a corporate crisis in the form of a scandal. This scandal involves not only Enron’s accounting practices but also its corporate governance and culture (Lawrence & Weber, 2008). This report will recommend some potential strategies for Enron to move forward from the scandal. To do this, we must incorporate stakeholder theory, which “argues that corporations serve a broad public purpose; to create value for society” (Lawrence & Weber, 2014, p 6.). This means that Enron must take responsibility for the scandal it created and take actions to regain its stakeholders’ confidence. To accomplish this, we will first identify and analyze Enron’s primary

Although the accident was caused by a mechanical failure, it spiralled out of control because of an insufficient safety system. BP acted inefficiently and their carelessness cost the lives of people and damaged the environment, nevertheless this does not mean they acted in an unethical way as