That was a different arrangement altogether to NZOG's directors and shareholders refusing to compensate the families of the dead miners.
Printable View
nzo did reduce their share on this drill and did warn that it had different resonance making it doubt the presence of hydrocarbons.
They hopefully will be gaining more knowledge on the migratory paths of the hydrocarbons.
Also don't forget a precedent has been sent with the gas royalties from kupe-should about cover nzo cost of the oi drilling .plus significant ongoing extra income.
so good news "balances" bad news
Let try an analogy.
Say you are a doting parent with a couple of somewhat demanding children, Benjamin and James keep banging on “Daddy, we want a puppy”. You’ve got a few dollars aside and figure “why not – it will enhance our family”.
Now, you think you are a bit of a canny investor so you have a couple of choices. You can go down to Animates and get a vaccinated purebred Spoodle which is guaranteed to be a beautiful animal – but its going to cost you a grand. Alternatively you can head down to the local pound and for a very small investment pick up something that no one else wants. But it does have potential!
You take option two. The nice and clearly enthusiastic (if not a bit dim) volunteer tells you about this lovely wee puppy. It’s a mongrel cross breed of uncertain origins. The suspicion is there is a bit of Rottweiler but clearly likely to have the possibility of some Retriever. You reckon with a bit of work this cute if somewhat raggedy animal will make a fine pet.
You’re a busy person so you make a deal with Benjamin – “I’ll buy the puppy but you have to be responsible for walking it and training it”. Young Ben has played with the neighbours animals so reckons he’s up for the job and the deal is sealed.
Anyway you get the puppy home (lets call him Fido – sounds nice and innocuous) and a few weeks later your newspaper is chewed to shreds. No big deal you didn’t really need the paper and anyway its all part of the learning. A few weeks after that your favourite slippers are torn to pieces. A bit of a trend perhaps but what’s a bit of harm on the merry path to a trained animal and a happy family.
Time goes on and your lawn ends up with all these dead spots and piles of sh$t everywhere. The kids have only been nipped once or twice – but really that was quite unforeseen and no-ones fault. It seems the dog has more Pit Bull than Retriever but you keep putting your hand in your pocket and buying food and telling Ben he’s doing a good job.
A couple of years later Ben decides to get a paper round out of the local dairy so James steps up as chief care giver and trainer of what is now quite a large and hungry animal. You keep spending more on its food but your family is content with the idea that this clearly Pit Bull mongrel will, one day be a beautiful pet.
Shortly after Ben has some mates around and Fido mauls the kids leaving one dead and the others irreversibly damaged.
Seems to me you just stand back and say “its not my fault – Its Ben and James.”
But you aren’t totally heartless. You visit the injured kids in hospital and give all the kids on the ward a bag of lollies. Of course you put Fido down – not much can be done with him now. But you sell his dog bowl and kennel. After all you may as well retrieve some of the cash you have spent on the animal and your family is looking forward to the holiday exploring Sumatra.
So now you sit on your front porch, watching these maimed kids ride by on their scooters. Part of your mind thinks “those naughty children must have been teasing Fido” but another part says “move on, I’m not to blame. I must have words with Ben about responsibility one day”
THE END
So where do NZO fit into your story? Certainly not the dad and/or his sons.
Perhaps NZO helped with the costs for the annual inoculation at the vets and provided worm and flea treatments every 6 weeks. Stupid!!!
so what your saying is..... the experienced miners who worked in the mine and knew the dangers and what was happening in the environment they worked in,
and grasped the $10,000 bonus per person to get the coal out on time are nothing but dogs?
Im a simple man, but I know enough to know when my life is in danger.........
oh! the gas sensors a switched off.... I want the money.
No reasonable escape route....... I want the money.
That other guy over there smoking in the mine....... oh well I want the money.
mmmmm ....... things dont seem right here....... I want the money.
My boss will fire me if I complain...... I want the money.
Im an experienced miner on a huge salary with big bonuses ...... I love the money.........
shell be right....... I want the money.
the "suits" up top know what their doing and they are paying bonuses.......
I'll just ignore the problems and get the money.
how many experienced miners were working at PRC with their god fearing union reps backing them up to get super high salaries????
and no one said squat....... because.........
oh yeah..... I want the money, and am happy with any and all shortcuts...... cause I want the money.
BOOM
so who's fault is it?
IMHO..... its ALL those folks at the mine, from the boardroom to the coal cutter.
the coal cutter has an obligation to firstly conduct his job in a safe manor, to himself and those around him.
as an experienced coal cutter he is also responsible for the safety of himself and those around him.
if the coal cutter is unsure of his safety he is obliged to make that known to management to protect himself and the mine.
the coal cutter SELLS his services to the company via an employment contract...... ie HE signs up to be an employee to the company.
if you read any employment contract..... safety issues to the employee, the employer and the company are always on the front page.
the employer pays the employee to conduct the work that he is employed for in the interests of making the employer a profit.
but before the profit....... the employee must conduct the work in a safe manor ..... ordered by NEW ZEALAND employment law.
If there is a hazard or suspected problem or issue the employee...... being on the literal coalface..... has a legal obligation to report the issue.
if nothing is done to fix the issue the employee has many avenues to address this issue......
ie the union, the employment court, the media, etc.etc.
yet just before the explosion........ $10,000 bonuses were paid.
Personally, i have no respect for the management........ yet the experienced guys on the coalface didnt put tools down either.
And while the mine is still closed, there is still no definitive answer as to what happened.
And why is the tunnel still closed after all this time?
they could of cut two tunnels in this time span.
a very sad story of how things work in kiwi land in the last 30 or so years.
money money money....... from top to bottom.
During the AGM in 2009, NZO stated that their future was not with coal and were only focused on oil and gas exploration. Perhaps as major "SHAREHOLDERS" their biggest mistake was not getting out sooner and making way for another company to come in and have more punch with the Greenies and push for a number of vents to be drilled through the mountain and down into the mine shaft to avoid the build up of methane inside the mine and also other safety measures that were not allowed to take place due to the Greenies.
NZO not only put money up front to keep going...what seemed to be a rescue at the time but continued on with contributions for some time after, when it was clear it was now a recovery operation.
When the first lump some of compensation was made available, NZO stepped aside whilst the BNZ had both hands out...and this allowed smaller creditors, both secured and unsecured to get some of their money back.
THE END
NZOG's biggest mistake was to close one eye to all the mishaps, costs over-runs, delays, equipment malfunction etc - pretending all was fine and money would fix.
One hundred alarm bells were ringing, many of them at the same time but the directors of NZOG were not listening.
That's also how I recall it. IIRC about $10m was injected by NZO after it was clear they were talking about a recovery operation and there was no reasonable commercial prospect of the mine recommencing operations. This money was advanced to an associate company and I emphasise that there was absolutely no commercial obligation whatsoever to do so. In my view this was extremely generous of NZO and showed genuine kindness to PRC miners families in a very difficult time as it allowed work to continue to try and recover the men's bodies. We also have the $10.5m that Balance was kind enough to remind us about, even though in my opinion it undermines his own argument, where NZO as a secured creditor stood aside and allowed unsecured creditors including some employees wages and contractors to have preference.
So that's about $20.5 million that I can recall from memory of money paid on a goodwill basis by NZO when there was no commercial or legal obligation to do so, or more than $700,000 per man lost. Whilst I acknowledge that its impossible to put a monetary value on a human life but by N.Z. standards that's a fulsome effort for a company to bring to the table of an associated entity, (not a majority owned subsidiary).
People who try and argue that NZO acted immorally or unethically could do well to consider that this terrible incident was caused by a failure of many parties to exercise due care and skill and that miners and contractors were extremely well paid for their skills and recognised the job wasn't without risk. In my opinion NZO stepped up to the plate in a more than fair and reasonable manner in the circumstances.
I'm moving on. There has to be better ways to spend my time, if some are determined to continue to take an unbalanced approach that's their prerogative.
Only God can be the Ultimate judge of where blame lies and to what extent each person / each entity has culpable or criminal liability. Its time to move on...
I will respond too that as I'm a dog lover. Firstly I have 3 dogs, all pedigree and ironically enough they did cost $1,000 each and I love dogs which is the reason I read your full novel. Essentially your argument / analogy boils down too should owners of dangerous breeds pay serious reparation to injured parties ? Perhaps the question should be, should we allow dangerous dog breeds in the first place ? Do you see my analogy ?
Was it really wise to allow the greenies to compromise the venting ability of the underground mine just so whatever snails, weta's or cockroaches or whatever the heck they were trying to protect could be protected ?
Who allowed the dangerous dog too be bred in the first place ? Perhaps that's the real nub of the issue.
Now I really am done as this is getting silly. Its become clear some people have no idea about balancing moral obligations with the companies prima facie legal obligation too its shareholders to maximise shareholder value. to those people I say, welcome to the real world.