attallaman wrote:I was watching Countdown with Keith Olbermann on MSNBC last night and he was conducting an interview with a reporter from "The Daily Beast" website discussing the oil slick in the GOM. It was a good interview. The link to the article posted on "The Daily Beast" website is listed below and it's a very good read. It gets into the subject of BP wanting to hire local area fishermen to help out with the oil slick cleanup.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and- ... riginalsL1
My take on this, from the article, is that the $5,000 contract has nothing to do with volunteer work. It is a waiver - basically a settlement amount - similar to what many insurance companies will do if you get into an accident and say your neck hurts. They present a check for $(x-dollars) to you - a settlement - and you sign a waiver that you will not sue them for more damages in the future. That's what this sounds like this is. If that's the case, all I can say is "wow" and stupid move on their part too. The bad PR from that may eventually outweigh any potential losses from the spill itself...and deservedly so.
Later in the article they say they were not seeking public volonteers as they had those contracted out (from Maryland?).
Anyway I have mixed emotions on this. I am, of course, angered that this happened. I will be really angry at BP if some of the allegations in the article are true, such as digging deeper than what was approved and not having the emergency backup equipment/shutoff valves in place, etc. Taken into context with other 'safety issues' that have been publicized with BP before, I think on the surface they deserve all the anger and bad press that is directed towards them.
That said -- I do know some people who work at BP here in Houston. They are good people and by-and-large, BP is a good company. It's a tough situation when the bad decisions of a few people can leave a black mark on the reputation of the entire company. I know they are working tirelessly, 24/7, to make good on this (as best they can). And FWIW it's not all in the interest of "saving face" to limit lawsuits and prevent massive losses. Most of the employees there hate to see oil wash-up on beaches, destroy wildlife, etc., just as much as the next guy. They actually do care that oil is leaking into a natural habitat. That may shock some people but the company isn't out to just rape and scorch the earth to make a dime.
I'm not defending BP per se...I guess what I'm saying is that even though this is a terrible, terrible environmental disaster, we should still take a step back and evaluate this with our minds and not our emotions. There are caring, "real people" with families to support on the BP side of this thing too, as ugly as it may be.
I just hope this isn't true about the waivers and whatnot. I don't like it at all if that's the case.
