From Coal Mine To Court Room

[quote]kkwik1212 wrote:

However, coal miners are paid very well for risks they face everyday.

[/quote]

My grandfather worked in the mines, so did my dad.

As did I for a couple of years. It put me through college.

I bet management makes more money than the miners do. So don’t give me that crap about them being paid well for the risk. That doesn’t give someone the right to play with their lives.

I’m totally lost about how such a “miscommunication” can occur. And why it would take so long to correct it. Somebody goofed up big time. And we need to get to the bottom of how the accident could happen, and about the “miscommunication”.

Perhaps you should use this excuse a couple of times in your work. See how long it would hold up.

I think the grief lawsuit issue is silly, but people in grief don’t have to think clearly.

However, if it turns out the the company didn’t bother taking timely corrective action when they were cited for safety violations, that would be more worthy of a lawsuit.

There is a reason for safety standards, and adhering to them is the responsibilty of management, whether they like it or not.

[quote]Wreckless wrote:
I’m totally lost about how such a “miscommunication” can occur. And why it would take so long to correct it. Somebody goofed up big time. And we need to get to the bottom of how the accident could happen, and about the “miscommunication”.
[/quote]

There’s no way to tell what started the miscommunication and we’ll probably never know.

As for why it wasn’t corrected, well, it’s the same answer as why the safety violations weren’t corrected. Someone in command failed to do their job. In tough situations like this, most people run from responsibility.

[quote]carter12 wrote:
Wreckless wrote:
I’m totally lost about how such a “miscommunication” can occur. And why it would take so long to correct it. Somebody goofed up big time. And we need to get to the bottom of how the accident could happen, and about the “miscommunication”.

There’s no way to tell what started the miscommunication and we’ll probably never know.

As for why it wasn’t corrected, well, it’s the same answer as why the safety violations weren’t corrected. Someone in command failed to do their job. In tough situations like this, most people run from responsibility. [/quote]

The excuse given was that after they released that the 12 were alive, word came back that they were still checking vital signs. Instead of calling the family members and saying, “some are dead and some aren’t but we don’t know who”, it was decided to wait until they knew for sure that time before spreading anymore false info. I can understand that. This is one reason why none of this info should have even been leaked at all until they were all found. The fault of our media and society seems to be attempting to be the first one who announces the news. It is why some newspapers had even begun releasing front page cover stories entitled “Miracle in the Mines”. Being the first isn’t a new thing, however. It is just that in this day and age of camera phones and internet, it takes milliseconds to spread news…false or otherwise.

The letigous nature of the modern west is starting to become shocking. Whilt responsibility and blame should be aportioned (not in this case specifically, i dont know the ins and outs) it need not be monetary. The shame, dread and self loathing as well as the social stigma that must be attached to such a thing would haunt the person(s) to such an extent, that merely sueing someone is indicative of greed and oppotunism.

[quote]miniross wrote:
The letigous nature of the modern west is starting to become shocking. Whilt responsibility and blame should be aportioned (not in this case specifically, i dont know the ins and outs) it need not be monetary. The shame, dread and self loathing as well as the social stigma that must be attached to such a thing would haunt the person(s) to such an extent, that merely sueing someone is indicative of greed and oppotunism.[/quote]

This is a great point. The idea of profiting from one’s grief is nothing short of disgusting. It’s like saying “well, I can live with my grief if I can gouge millions of dollars out of the entity/person who caused it.” It takes the focus off of the memory of the loved one and turns it to the selfish desires of the survivor(s).

I do think that a family who loses a breadwinner through the negligence of another party, as may be the case here, is indeed entitled to just compensation at the expense of the negligent party, but some of these lawsuits and the resulting damage awards are becoming obscene. Maybe this is turning into a tort reform thread?

There has to be a reasonable medium somewhere that isn’t rewarding frivolous gougers seeking easy money (and the trial pimps who enable them), and at the same time is allowing the just compensation of those who have been legitamately wronged.

I know, I know…I have just devised the perfect solution without offering a means to implement it. So sue me :slight_smile:

hey look its a tough and dangerous job, i think the family deserves proper monetary compensation for that alone…if they have to sue to get it, what the hell…i agree that it does take away from the actual individuals who lost their lives tho

as far as ridiculous lawsuits go tho, i dont think the story of the guy suing apple for having to use their music program is that bad of a law-suit…one could argue its false advertisement or something like that…

There is no way to make drilling a big hole in the ground and sending people down into that hole to work for 8 hours safe - I don’t care what kind of safeguards or government regulations you impose on the mining company. They are still sending people down into a big assed hole that can cave in on them.

I really doubt that in our current sue-happy society, that a business would take such a huge risk as to be negligent of vital safety measures.

If they did, then the families of the miners just won the lottery.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
There is no way to make drilling a big hole in the ground and sending people down into that hole to work for 8 hours safe - I don’t care what kind of safeguards or government regulations you impose on the mining company. They are still sending people down into a big assed hole that can cave in on them.

I really doubt that in our current sue-happy society, that a business would take such a huge risk as to be negligent of vital safety measures.

If they did, then the families of the miners just won the lottery. [/quote]

I have never believed that it even should be absolutely safe. The sewer-pipe workers in New York call it, “a man a mile”, meaning that they expect to lose the life of one man for every mile of work done down there because of the hazards. That is why I wrote that the families should also take SOME personal responsibility in this. They knew every time they sent their husbands, sons and fathers off to work daily that they could lose their lives that day. Who thought working in a coal mine was not hazardous? It is a little dishonest to now act as if the environment is supposed to be safe when that job is considered one of the five most hazardous jobs in the United States. Guys who fly crop-duster airplanes are actually the first on that list of most dangerous jobs.

I don’t know the details here and perhaps everything is on the up and up. If so, I hope the lawsuits are simply dismissed at the appropriate point in time.

On the other hand, if one or more dickheads were skimping on safety procedures because it took too much time or money to implement, then I agree, the lottery numbers just came up.

Sometimes middle managers try to look good by shaving a few percentage points off their budget or adding a few percentage points to their productivity so they can be more efficient, impress management, get promotions or whatnot. Who knows.

When you are in charge of shit, don’t check your ethics at the door.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Guys who fly crop-duster airplanes are actually the first on that list of most dangerous jobs.[/quote]

I actually have two clients that have crop dusting businesses. They are the only two clients I have that I require payment up front because…well…you just never know.

All of this happened because of George W. Bush. If Gore had been rightfully been elected, instead of Bush being ‘appointed’, there would have been no 9/11, no Katrina, no NSA wiretaps and no mine disasters anymore! And if a crop duster dies, the family should sue George W. Bush because he is obviously guilty and stupid.

[quote]vroom wrote:
I think the grief lawsuit issue is silly, but people in grief don’t have to think clearly.

However, if it turns out the the company didn’t bother taking timely corrective action when they were cited for safety violations, that would be more worthy of a lawsuit.

There is a reason for safety standards, and adhering to them is the responsibilty of management, whether they like it or not.[/quote]

Well said, I agree completely.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
All of this happened because of George W. Bush. If Gore had been rightfully been elected, instead of Bush being ‘appointed’, there would have been no 9/11, no Katrina, no NSA wiretaps and no mine disasters anymore! And if a crop duster dies, the family should sue George W. Bush because he is obviously guilty and stupid. [/quote]

I’m sure you are trying to be funny, but this is just plain stupid.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
All of this happened because of George W. Bush. If Gore had been rightfully been elected, instead of Bush being ‘appointed’, there would have been no 9/11, no Katrina, no NSA wiretaps and no mine disasters anymore! And if a crop duster dies, the family should sue George W. Bush because he is obviously guilty and stupid. [/quote]

Well said, I agree completely.

Suing for misinformation is just asinine. Any lawyer that takes that case needs their ass kicked. Suing the mining company for gross negligence, if that is the case, is warranted. You can only make that job but so safe, but it is that company’s responsibility to make it as safe as possible. That should mean going beyond the minimum safety standard, not just meeting them. Unfortunately, that isn’t always the case. It is a terrible tragedy and I feel for the families that lost loved ones.

[quote]vroom wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
All of this happened because of George W. Bush. If Gore had been rightfully been elected, instead of Bush being ‘appointed’, there would have been no 9/11, no Katrina, no NSA wiretaps and no mine disasters anymore! And if a crop duster dies, the family should sue George W. Bush because he is obviously guilty and stupid.

I’m sure you are trying to be funny, but this is just plain stupid.[/quote]

It wasn’t even funny. It was just pointless and bording on trolldom.

[quote]mark57 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
All of this happened because of George W. Bush. If Gore had been rightfully been elected, instead of Bush being ‘appointed’, there would have been no 9/11, no Katrina, no NSA wiretaps and no mine disasters anymore! And if a crop duster dies, the family should sue George W. Bush because he is obviously guilty and stupid.

Well said, I agree completely.
[/quote]

Dumb and dumber!!

I couldn’t imagine the roller coaster of emotions these people went through. but, as stated, they accepted that possibility everytime they went to work.

I don’t feel anyone of management did anything wrong IF what has been reported so far is in fact true. MISinformation was obtained and then leaked. How in the world could this be a sueable action?

The delay in then notifying anyone of the ‘new’ information seemed to be a reasonable action. According to the statements, they did in fact try to get word to the church that maybe they should temper their enthusiasm, but this did not go as planned either. But imagine the mass confusion and activity that must have been going on at the time.

If safety issues come to light, then by all means the company should be held responsible.

More exploitation.

From the NYT via a blog.

from Sister Toldjah blog:

In an editorial piece today that should surprise no one, the New York Times chose to play the blame game with the horrible miner tragedy in West Virginia where 12 of 13 miners were killed were killed in a coal mine blast accident.

The NYT:

Political figures from both parties have long defended and profited from ties to the coal industry. Whether or not that was a factor in the Sago mine?s history, the Bush administration?s cramming of important posts in the Department of the Interior with biased operatives from the coal, oil and gas industry is not reassuring about general safety in the mines. Steven Griles, a mining lobbyist before being appointed deputy secretary of the interior, devoted four years to rolling back mine regulations and then went back to lobbying for the industry.

But what the NYT does not tell you is that, since 2001, fatalities from mine accidents have dropped almost 50%. BizzyBlog has the lowdown. Make sure to check out the chart he created from the data that he found here on the Labor Dept?s website. Good detective work, Tom. He writes:

Contrary to what The Times would have you believe, the trend has been favorable (?reassuring,? if you will) for many years, especially the past four, where there has been a near-50% drop in fatalities. In fact, these results support the contention that staffing Interior with people who actually know their industry has led to greater safety.

What is also needs to be addressed is that the mine was just acquired by the now present company less than a month.Why was the mine for sale in the first place because of failing infrastructure.who is at fault the miners themselfs, the previous owner for selling a lemon or the new owners.