An organization could only permit such actions, omissions, mistakes, incompetence, apathy, cynicism, stupidity and neglect to occur if the organization main reason of opening the mine is for their own benefit. From the case, we learn that the organization main mandate in opening the mine was to get the coal and sell it out quickly without proper ethics in place. The source of the tragedy at Westray Mine was lack of proper plan and assessment of the way to operate the mine because of the greed on the side of the mine owners and government inspectors.
We will write a custom Case Study on Business and Economics: The case of Nova Scotia`s Westray Mine Tragedy specifically for you
301 certified writers online
From the case, we learn that Westray mine made mistakes and neglected safety precautions by allowing miner to use unauthorized mine layout in order to get coal out faster through risky tunnels. There was incompetence and apathy on the side of the mine management who after various reports and recommendation about the mine being unsafe they still allowed mining to continue. There is also an element stupidity from the miners, who accepted to work under such dangerous condition for the sake of money.
In conclusion, the tragedy at the mine came from the hurriedness in which the mine was opened, granted operation approval by the government inspectors without inspection and lack of safety precautions in place. The collaboration, corruption and greed of the mine owners, government officials and laxity of the inspectorate permitted all the omissions, mistakes, incompetence, apathy, cynicism, stupidity and neglect to allow such a risky mine to operate.
The government should make all the responsible parties in tragedy accountable. Curragh Resources Inc.who was the owners of the mine should bear the greatest responsibility. Curragh Resources Inc. should have ensured the working conditions provided by the Westray management in the mine was safe.
Because of the disaster the government should ensure the victims, families and anyone affected by the explosion is fully compensated by Curragh Resources Inc. The province of Nova Scotia should be made accountable of the disaster for allowing the operation of unsafe mine in the province. The province of Nova Scotia was responsible for the approval of operation of the mine and allowing its people to work there hence, they should have ensured all the safety measures are in place.
The province of Nova Scotia should be accountable to all the affected parties in the tragedy. The management of Westray mine was supposed to ensure compliance with safety regulation. Thus, management of Westray should be held accountable for failure to ensure safety of the workers. Lastly, the inspectorate of the mine should be held accountable for the tragedy. The inspectorate failed to perform their duty.
The lessons we learn from Westray case regarding holding organizations accountable for their actions is that most organizations know what they are accountable for in case of a tragedy and have mechanism in place to run away from taking responsibility. In this case, Curragh Resources Inc. was supposed to compensate the victims of the tragedy by the company become bankrupt suddenly just after the tragedy.
Another lesson we learn from Westray case is that holding organizations accountable for their actions is not easy because most organizations have connections with government official. This is evident in the way the charges against Curragh Resources Inc. are charges dropped. The Westray case reveals that it is not easy to hold organizations fully accountable for their actions. This is evident from the little money the victims were compensated with by the province of Nova Scotia.
Another lesson we learn from Westray case is that organizations are protected from lawsuits under the Workers Compensation Acts thus holding them accountable for their action is not easy. Lastly, we learn from the Westray case that holding organizations accountable for their actions is a challenge because most organizations are ran by people who are protected by certain powers. This is the case of Marvin Pelley, the former president of Westray who inquiry towards him had no federal powers and could not be enforced.
In this case, the province of Nova Scotia should be punished for licensing the operation of Westray mine under unsafe condition. The province should compensate the victims and families affected in the province. The province of Nova Scotia should provide another source of livelihood for the survivors of the tragedy.
Curragh Resources Inc. the owners of the mine should be punished for allowing Westray management to operate such unsafe mine.Curragh Resources Inc.should provide financial compensations to the victims and families of the affected. The government should terminate the companies mining licence for non-compliance with safety measures.
The management of Westray mine should be convicted for allowing people to work in such unsafe conditions. The management of Westray being on ground could have ensured safety measures are adhered. Lastly, the inspectorate in charge of the mine should be punished for incompetence and neglect. The inspectorate should be convicted for not doing his work by allowing such unsafe mine to operate.
A general overview of the Westray mine reveals a number of strengths and opportunities in the project. First, there were enough workforces in the province to be employed in the mine. The area had enough reserve of coal estimated at forty five million tonnes thus providing a good opportunity.
The funding received for the project in terms of loan from the government is strength in this case. Lastly, the project was viable because there was ready market for the coal. In conclusion, a number of strength and opportunity are evident in this case from the fact that; coal was in abundance, enough labour force, ready market for coal and guaranteed government funding. The Westray case provides a number of weakness and threats in its operation.
Get your first paper with 15% OFF
First, the company only interest was to mine coal without putting proper safety measures in place. Another weakness evident from the case is in the hurry in which the mine was started without conducting any environmental impact assessment. Curragh Resources Inc. announced the intention to start the mine in September 1988 and by September 1991 the mine was operational; an indicator that no assessment was done.
Another threat in the case was the ignoring of various findings carried on the safety state of the mine by the management and government inspectors. The victims in this case were not adequately compensated because the organization was protected from lawsuit under the Workers Compensation Act.
Another weakness on this case is on the part of workers accepting to work in such risky mine without complaining to the management. Lastly, weakness and threat are evident in the Westray case by the failure of all responsible to take accountability.