Deepwater Horizon Ethical Analysis

1670 Words 7 Pages
In 2010, an oil rig by the name of Deepwater Horizon, located 41 miles off the coast of Louisiana experienced a malfunction and exploded. BP hired Transocean, who owned and operated the rig, to cement the bottom of the well and put a cap on it. The crew, led by Jim “Mr. Jimmy” Harrell, suffered 11 deaths. The well pumped 5 million barrels of oil in the Gulf of Mexico, creating an environmental catastrophe unlike anything North America had seen in decades. The 2016 film, Deepwater Horizon, tells the story of the Transocean crew and BP supervisors aboard the oil rig. The movie encapsulates the tensions between the businessmen and blue collar workers, as both are frustrated that they are 43 days behind schedule due to several complications. It …show more content…
Jimmy into ordering a test that causes the well to burst and kills 11 crew members. Without confirming that the concrete job was done properly, due to not running the cement bond log, Vidrine assumed the well’s integrity was stable. Running a negative pressure test could speed the process of confirming the job was complete. Because they were already so far behind schedule, over budget, and losing money every day, it was in BP’s best interests to do so. However, it also puts the rig and crew in harm’s way. Instead of erring on the side of caution, the BP rig supervisor ramrods his plans that solely took into consideration his company’s financial gain and avoids any other possible alternatives during the discussion with Mr. Jimmy. Lull (1995) says, “Social consent is a necessary part of the process [of hegemony]… For hegemony to work, people must believe in their system of governance and in their dominant culture.” Therefore, Vidrine never would have had the power to make such an important decision if the crew and its leader did not give their consent to the expected hierarchy. So although Mr. Jimmy may not like that Vidrine thinks his crew is just there to build the well and sail away, he accepts that Vidrine has more power and decides to submit to his authority. However, Vidrine abused his power and compromised the safety of employees with the hopes of saving money, which shows selfishness and greed.
The analysis
…show more content…
After his university faux pas and a vacation, Will returns to work to find his staff gone. During a meeting with his boss, he learns that while he laid on a beach, Will’s executive producer asked to leave his service and the rest of the employees followed him. The replacement executive producer that Will’s boss hired is Will’s old flame with whom he has bad blood with, Mackenzie McHale. When he discovers he does not have contractual approval over Mackenzie working for him, he storms out of a meeting and walks down the street to his agent’s office to renegotiate his contract. However, just before he leaves, he boasts, “I generate an annual profit of $210 million dollars on my own and... that may be tipping money for this company, but that’s not nothing.” Will McAvoy elects to give back $1 million annually from his salary for the duration of his new executive producer, Mackenzie’s, contract, so he has the right to fire her at the end of every week if he chooses to. Lull (1995) states, “Hegemony is the power or dominance that one social group holds over another.” As an upper-class wealthy man, McAvoy uses his affluence to expand his power, so that he can regain control over his job. As an upper-class wealthy man, McAvoy uses his affluence to expand his power, so that he can regain control over his job, instead of accepting his boss’s decision. Will’s reacts without giving a second thought to his new staff and

Related Documents