Exxon Valdez Questions

1. Utilitarian: (a) What utilitarian arguments (as stated in the case study) justified Alyeskas decision to cut back on oil-spill response staff? Can this decision be justified on utilitarian grounds in light of Alyeskas agreement with the state of Alaska to provide levels of staff and equipment proportionate to the risk? (Hint: Oil loading operations started in 1972. The Exxon Valdez spill occurred in 1989.) (b) What utilitarian arguments might be used to justify the way Exxon staffed its tankers and operated them as shown in this case? (c) What utilitarian arguments can be used to argue that Alyeska made the wrong decisions? (d) That Exxon made the wrong decisions?

1. Deontological: Given the facts in the case, (a) What moral rules or laws were violated by Alyeskas operations in terms of its agreements with Alaska? In terms of due diligence? Employee training? Maintenance of equipment? (b) Similarly, what rules were violated by Exxon in terms the operations of its tankers? Staffing the ship? Crew training? Coordination with the Coast Guard and Alyeska regarding spills?

1. Stakeholder/Stockholder: (a) identify the stakeholders involved in this case (try not to leave any oute.g., do the orcas count?) (b) what conflicts among stakeholders do you see might have arisen? Alyeska management vs. the state of Alaska, Exxon management vs. Alyeska vs, local population. Governments at both the state and Federal levels appear to be both victims and perpetrators herework in their perspectives. (c) How might stakeholder management by both Alyeska and Exxon have avoided or mitigated the spills effects?