Exxon Valdez disaster case

0 comments

  • Only in the U.S. could such a problem occur. Following the Exxon
    Valdez disaster in Prince William sound caused by a Drunken Ship
    Captain that lead to $4.5 Billion in penalties and payments, Exxon
    initiated a company policy that required company employees with alcohol
    problems to step-forward and identify themselves. In return, Exxon
    provided rehabilitation and other assistance. However, they also put
    these people on a list prohibiting them from getting certain high-risk
    jobs, i.e. Ship’s Captain, helicopter pilots, refinery unit operators,
    etc.
  • 60 such employees filed complaints with the EEOC, claiming
    discrimination against the disabled. Alcoholism is a recognized
    disability under the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), so
    Exxon’s attempt to address the problem of alcoholic employees
    (particularly drunken ship’s captains), turned into another disaster:
    EXXON v. EEOC in federal court. (See Case 7.1 from the Week 1 reading.)

    • What other actions could Exxon have taken to deal with this corporate problem?
    • Is this an over-reach in enforcing the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act?
    • Were there other options available to the EEOC in trying to discipline Exxon, besides filing suit in federal court?

About the Author

Follow me


{"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}