Who are the stakeholders in this case? The stakeholders in this case are the passengers, crew and their families, aboard the Amtrak train that derailed. They are also the corporate investors who hold stock in Amtrak and all Amtrak employees who have invested their time in employment with the organization. They could easily lose their jobs if a major layoff occurred or the organization filed for bankruptcy due to the millions they would be required to pay in damages. Stakeholders are the members of the Mobile, Alabama community who either witnessed or heard about the disaster and who may have lost trust in this railway system.
The crew and captain of the tug boat which ran its barges into the framework of the bridge are also stakeholders, along with the owners and investors of the transport company in which they were employed. The emergency workers, the agencies such as NTSB, the Alabama Emergency Response Network and the U. S. Coast Guard are stakeholders as well. What are the interests of the stakeholders? Investors in the transport company, CSX and Amtrak stand to lose money as such disasters can lead to public distrust and subsequent falling stock prices.
They must answer to the public as to why emergency signals were not designed on the bridge. Families have lost loved ones as passengers or crew members that they cannot bring back. Crew members that lived must deal with feelings of guilt for not being able to do more and not being aware of exactly what had happened. They will also have to face many questions from agencies investigating the disaster and will face stressful situations, possibly for years to come. Their careers and way of earning a living may also be in jeopardy due to the effects of this disaster.
Crew and families of the tug boat crews must face feelings of guilt and shame. What is this corporation’s social corporate responsibility in this case for the four areas of corporate social responsibility? •Legal Social Responsibility With respect to the legal responsibility, both CSX who failed to provide a signal on the bridge and WGN, whose crew ran into and damaged the bridge, while displacing the track have a financial responsibility toward families whose loved ones made a living, whether crew or passengers.
Amtrak also shares in this responsibility for not taking greater precautions, such as reduced speed, knowing that some bridges are not installed with emergency signals. There is also a financial burden to repair the damages to the bridge and CSX track by WGN, who initially caused the event that led to the derailment. According to Mallen Baker (2009), “CSR is about building relationships with customers, about attracting and retaining talented staff, about managing risk, and about assuring reputation. ” In this instance, both CSX and WGN did a poor job of managing risk.
WGN is responsible for not having staff with better training and navigation skills and CSX for ignoring recommendations to install emergency signals on the bridge. •Economic Social Responsibility CSX, Amtrak and NTSB have economic social responsibility in reducing the risk of injury or loss of life due to such incidents, which has a huge financial impact on the families of passengers and crew. WGN shares in this responsibility as well. Though CSX did not install emergency signals, the NTSB should provide greater oversight to ensure such precautions are taken.
WGN should be aware of the problems that can occur when a large vessel runs into various structures and should help in repairing the emotional and financial lives of the victims of the accident. Both CSX/Amtrak and WGN have an economic responsibility to the
All agencies and companies involved have an ethical responsibility to make sure that various forms of travel or transport they oversee or are involved in are as safe as possible for their crews and passengers. Ignoring recommendations such as CSX did, in not installing the emergency signal due to cost is an example of social irresponsibility (Eisenbeis, et al, nd). Amtrak could have better communications and emergency systems aboard the trains and passenger cars, to alert the entire crew of emergencies. Though this may not be an issue of irresponsibility, it has implications for future rail travel.
WGN has an ethical responsibility to ensure that vessel crews are trained and updated on navigation techniques, so that injury to innocent bystanders does not occur. They also have an ethical responsibility to have proper navigation systems on board the vessels. •Philanthropic Social Responsibility Travel and transport organizations do not have a specific responsibility to become involved in philanthropic activities, though they should at least insure that the communities in which they travel through are not adversely affected either economically or environmentally, as a result of their travels.
They could take measures to provide incentives for jobs and training for jobs of those in the communities in which they travel through, as taxpayers of those communities share the burden of building bridges and roads. Because the organizations also contribute to introducing carbon emissions into the environment, they should work with and offer some financial support to organizations that help monitor and provide solutions for carbon emissions. Conclusion and Recommendation I believe better communication by all parties involved would have reduced injuries.
Amtrak should have had regulations in place for speed during weather conditions and safety devices for the rail in front of them could have avoided a lot of the accident. Having markers in place for emergency response units, would have allowed them to give a more specific place of the wreck. When people’s lives are at stake all ethical issues and laws should be put in full swing. Common sense would have prevented all of this. Large corporations such as Amtrak should have trained employees and safety standards in place.