Bp's Oil Ethical Conduct

BP Oil’s Ethical Conduct

BP Oil Spill of 2010

BP is one of the largest oil companies in the world, and they possess the drilling rights off the Gulf of Mexico. Deepwater drilling in this area is particularly dangerous because one does not know what they can come across. High pressures of oil and natural gas are often trapped in pockets and can come up to the surface with “volcanic force” (Halbert, 2012). Because of this known fact, BP should have taken safety measures against this. BP, however, took no such measure, because of the costly price. In 2010, there was an explosion in the Deepwater Horizon that resulted in oil being spilled in the Gulf for 87 days.  We ask the question of whether the decisions made by BP were ethical towards their stakeholders. We analyze their decisions based on the following ethical perspectives: Free Market, Utilitarian, Deontological, Communitarianism, Virtue Ethics, and Ethic of Care.

Free Market

Free market ethics believes that a company’s primary responsibility should be to improve the value of their shareholder’s investment. In other words, the company has a duty to try and make as much money as possible to increase the value of the shareholders. If we analyze BP’s decision to not install an acoustic back up switch (a safety device that could have helped prevent the oil spill), under the free market ethics belief, we see that BP was looking out for the best interest of the stakeholders. Installing the acoustic back up switch, would be about $500,000. This would have been a burden of a cost, for preventing an event that was not likely to happen. Under free market, the switch would only be needed if it enhanced profits. BP’s decision to not install the safety device was legal, because there was no legal requirement to do so. The U.S. did not have such regulations. BP’s conduct before, during, and after the spill is deemed to be ethical under the free market approach because their concern was to increase the shareholder’s value.

Utilitarian

Under the utilitarian approach, an action is deemed ethical if it brings benefit to the majority of people. This means that we must take into consideration all those who will be affected by a decision or action. If the benefits of an action outweigh the harms of that action, then we can see that decision as ethical. BP’s decision to not install the safety mechanism did not take into consideration all those who would be affected if an accident occurred. They did not take into consideration the safety of the employees, the well-being of their families, and the well-being of the environment. Because of the oil spill, 11 people were killed and 17 were injured. The oil spill also killed hundreds of animals including, birds, dolphins, sea turtles, fish, etc. Their decision was a significant risk to human and environmental life. This outweighed any financial benefit. If we take all those who were negatively affected by the event into consideration, then BP’s actions were not ethical.

Deontological

Deontological ethics is an approach that uses rules and universal principles such as right and wrong to deem an action as ethical. This approach does not take into consideration the consequences of actions. For example, lying is a principle that is wrong no matter if the reason for that lie is good or bad. After the incident, BP withheld important information about the flow rate of the oil spill. This violates the categorical imperative where it prevented people from making decisions about important aspects of their life, such as the rescue of the Gulf. Under this approach, it is believed that “certain fundamental rights should not be violated under any circumstances” (Halbert, 2012). Among these fundamental rights are the right to life and health. BP violated these rights by putting the lives and health of workers at risk. BP’s actions are not ethical when analyzed through Kantian (deontological) approach. They did not consider universal principles and they deprived people of their fundamental rights.