Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Breaking! Shameless! MASSEY mines cited for more than 60 safety violations SINCE the blast.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 01:19 PM
Original message
Breaking! Shameless! MASSEY mines cited for more than 60 safety violations SINCE the blast.
Edited on Fri Apr-16-10 01:20 PM by elehhhhna
No link yet, on MSNBC now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. IIFC, they's had several -
the day of the blast itself. Just shows to go you how utterly usless much of our regulations and enforement are. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
4lbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. The problem is that there is no real enforcement of the violations in a non-union mine.
Other than paying a small fine, that's it.

Massey (and Blankenship) have determined it's cheaper just to pay the fines (after a long period of contesting them) than to enact the safety fixes required.

What's needed is a huge, severe fine, for each miner that is killed. For example, a $4 million fine for each miner killed. The family would receive $3 million of that, tax-free, and the other $1 million used to make fixes to the mine involved. This fine would not be able to be contested like the others.

If that was in place, Massey would have faced a $116 million fine for those 29 dead miners.
By comparison, Massey has only paid several million in fines over the last 8 years, and is contesting another several million or so.








Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justanaverageguy Donating Member (123 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
3. What sort of violations?
I will withhold judgment until that becomes available.

I got written up recently because the inspector didn't like the location of the first aid kit. Not exactly a major violation. If it is 60 of those sort of violations then no big deal.

Also keep in mind a company can get cited for violations that are completely the fault of the employee. I've seen companies cited for employees not wearing the proper safety gear and the gear was in the employee's truck. Not exactly the fault of the company.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hutzpa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. .
:freak:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Yeah, that must be it
Edited on Fri Apr-16-10 01:43 PM by dflprincess
Massey was written up because 60 workers didn't put their hardhats on.

Jesus.... :banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justanaverageguy Donating Member (123 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. ok
Really? Then what were they written up for on these 60 violations?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. oh. kay. nice anecdotal info, but come on. how many people died
at your job this year?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justanaverageguy Donating Member (123 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. None. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Webster Green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. The company has a long history of violations like inadequate ventilation.
Google is your friend. Sorry I don't feel like looking for links right now.

If you do sniff it out a little, you'll discover what a fucking asshole this guy is.

I would think he would have to be locked up for his own protection.

If any of my kin died in one of his hellholes, I would be gunning for him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justanaverageguy Donating Member (123 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. I'm sure the guy is an asshole
I don't know squat about him except what I've seen on this board. I know even less about the mining industry. My point was that just because a company, particularly a very large company, was cited with 60 violations doesn't necessarily raise my ire until such time I know what the violations are. Any picky OSHA inspector can go onto any decent size construction site anywhere in America and walk away with 60 safety violations (yes even the ones that are all union sites). That doesn't in and of itself make the jobsite a deathtrap, it depends on what the violations are. Some are very serious, some are very minor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Webster Green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. True enough.
These were real serious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justanaverageguy Donating Member (123 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. Then yes...He's an asshole. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. all true. minng happens to be very dangerous.
underground and all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. Here's some more information. Looks like the
Edited on Fri Apr-16-10 01:51 PM by sabrina 1
violations are pretty serious according to the headline:

Serious Problems Found At Massey Mines Since Blast

"We're just going about our regular business," Stricklin said. "I didn't give any instructions to go and look at Massey mines."

Still, Stricklin sharply criticized the company for violations found in the last 10 days.

The violations include conveyer belt problems at Massey's Aracoma Alma No. 1 mine in West Virginia, where a belt fire killed two men in 2006.

"I'm very disappointed," Stricklin said. "You would think that personnnel associated with Massey would be really more careful."

The company's Solid Energy No. 1 mine in Kentucky was cited for allowing coal dust to pile up on three occasions since the explosion.

"That's very troubling," Stricklin said. "Pitiful."

Mines are required to keep methane well below explosive levels with sophisticated ventilation systems and control coal dust by keeping it from piling up and covering it with noncombustible material.

Massey had no immediate response Friday.


I'd say those two violations are pretty serious considering the 2006 fire that killed two miners, and the latest blast.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ikonoklast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #3
13. Those are still violations.
The employee needs to be told, BY MANAGEMENT, to either get his safety gear on, or go home.

Any employee ignoring safety rules is a danger to ALL, and it is the responsibility of management to see that it doesn't happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justanaverageguy Donating Member (123 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. As the owner and therefore "MANAGEMENT" I have told them,
They have signed their signature to safety books, they have gone through safety training, they are well aware of the rules. Still, and I know you'll find this hard to believe, the employee still does what he wants to do despite all of the above. I have crews working anywhere in about a 250 mile radius. I can't be everywhere at once. Don't get me wrong, I'm good, but I ain't that good!!!

And of course I'm pretty sure that if I came on this board and posted that I fired a guy for not wearing his hard hat, or his steel toe work boots (because that's my safety policy) I'd pretty much be deemed an asshole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ikonoklast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. I've fired people for violating safety rules.
They put others in danger; were written up, disciplined, and still didn't get with the program.

Terminated.

Too bad for them. They knew the rules, and still broke them.


I won't apologize for that. I was management at one time, and sometimes that means firing people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #15
20. we're talking deathtrap type violations
your goober subs mostly fall off low buildings, correct?

& welcome to du
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hutzpa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
4. Would like to see him mouthing off now
dressed in the American flag.

Challenging the Feds, he must have thought GW was still in power.

Regulate him to eternity.

Dumb prick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 01:46 PM
Response to Original message
9. Why aren't those unions doing their jobs!!
:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-16-10 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
16. k and r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 07:40 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC