Workers angry over decision to subtract "cleanup pay" from claims

Workers angry over decision to subtract "cleanup pay" from claims

www.wsws.org

Gulf fishermen have reacted in anger to a decision made Friday by Obama’s appointee to oversee the “independent” claims escrow account funded by BP. Millionaire lawyer Kenneth Feinberg announced that he would subtract from any damage award the fishermen ultimately receive from BP money they have been paid for participating in the Vessels of Opportunity (VoO) cleanup program...

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
Obama cuts deal to shield BP assets
Who is Kenneth Feinberg?
Gulf economy in ruins
BP cuts benefits to victims of Gulf oil disaster

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Hundreds Of Fishermen Missing Checks From BP
BP Cuts Payments to 40,000, La. Official Says

[edit on 7/22/2010 by Megiddodiddo]

The news of the new policy of subtracting cleanup pay from damage awards has heightened anger among fishermen who have encountered numerous hurdles in recovering anything approaching their lost income.

Now the Obama Administration is seeking a way to rob the victims of the BP Oil spill! How much further is this Criminal in the White house willing to go?

HOW MUCH MORE ARE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE GOING TO ACCEPT, IN THE NAME OF COUNTRY VS. LOSS OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, FREEDOMS, CHECKS, AND BALANCES?!

www.wsws.org
(visit the link for the full news article)

I don't see the problem with this. They're being compensated for lost income, why would BP pay them during this period and NOT deduct it from their claims for lost income? That would be double dipping.

Off topic (not really since it's in huge bold letters in the original post), but what constitutional rights, freedoms and checks and balances have been lost recently?

Click here for more information.

Ease up with the troll accusations. You've been here a month, I've been here over 5 years. Nobody's ever accused me a of being a troll before, so let's get real.

You can't answer my question I see, unless that gobbledygook was supposed to be an answer. Why should BP pay these workers twice? They are being payed now but you think they should be able to claim they had no income in this period?

Relax Megiddo
while probe is reading this:
www.historycommons.org...
and the patriot act...
You could just carry on with your thread without being side tracked from making your points.



Now back to the OP.

[edit on 22-7-2010 by Danbones]

[edit on 22-7-2010 by Danbones]

These fishermen are basing claims against what they think they would catch and earn. These numbers are too high given the current economy.

The Government pay czar is above reproach. He has a track record of fairness and is held in very high regard by most parties involved with 9/11.

I see no problem with what he is doing. I just hope the State's are doing the same thing with unemployment payments to these people.

reply to post by Danbones


He claimed the current administration was cutting civil liberties. Patriot act was Bush, and the website you sent made it hard to tell, but I couldn't find an example for the Obama administration. I am curious, could you provide a clear example for the Obama administration? Thanks.

reply to post by Danbones


roger that - thanks Danbones - you're absolutely right.

in rhetrospect to a fellow username mythatsabigprobe who has attested to the fact of being a member for over 5 years...lmao, You should already know the answers to your ignorant questions. I think in all reality you are another user with multiple accounts, and use this one to troll with - thus the user name borderlining on the perverse.

you know the unfairness involved in what BP is doing here - and it is not considered "Double Dipping" - an absurdity in understanding if I've ever heard of such.

claims are against loss of businesses, Livelihoods, Environments, lifestyles, health, and freedom of mobility. It's to compensate people who have bee adversely assaulted by BP's stupidity. It's to compensate the children who's lives are going to be turned upside down.

Do you have any compassion within you to fathom anything like this?

Originally posted by Megiddodiddo
claims are against loss of businesses, Livelihoods, Environments, lifestyles, health, and freedom of mobility. It's to compensate people who have bee adversely assaulted by BP's stupidity. It's to compensate the children who's lives are going to be turned upside down.

Do you have any compassion within you to fathom anything like this?

Those claims aren't affected by this decision. The fishermen are being employed right now by BP and those wages will be deducted from their eventual claims for lost income. What's wrong with that decision? It seems fair to me and many other posters.

For those who dont understand why this is unfair, this is how I see it-

Fisher Joe - Is owed $20,000 in claims. He works for BP to clean up and earns $5,000. The 5k is subtracted from the 20k and he gets 15k in claims.

Fisher Joe received $20,000 total from BP.

Fisher Bob - Also is owed $20,000 in claims. He does not work in the clean up.

Fisher Bod received $20,000 total from BP.

Now Fisher Joe is pissed he worked for BP for no reason! He could have relaxed like Bob and still received the same amount of money from BP.

Am I on the right track here? If so, BP is obviously out of line.



[edit on 22-7-2010 by CREAM]

reply to post by C09JayLT


You are asking me to repeat my self..
why waste my time?
The post I made is still there for you to read too.

I wanted to read what the OP has to to say.

edit to add:

Obama Signs One Year Extension of Patriot Act (which he used to oppose)

seminal.firedoglake.com...

now back to the OP




[edit on 22-7-2010 by Danbones]

[edit on 22-7-2010 by Danbones]

reply to post by Megiddodiddo


Sorry, but I also don't see a problem with this. I live between Gulfport and Biloxi, and while it doesn't seem fair to you, at least these people are working.

They can all quit, if they don't want to have wages withheld from cleanup pay, and sit at home. I'm sure there are plenty of other out of work Americans from other states who would be happy to step in, and just get paid for work done.

Many of these workers are getting paid a lot more than they would be otherwise, as they don't just get wages, they get meals supplied, per diems, and a host of other benefits their normal occupations never would have received. I have relatives in the area that have occupations that include being fishermen, and oil platform workers, among other Gulf based industries.

And no, I am not a multiple account of the person you are accusing of trolling.

Not everyone has to agree with you, and to make suppositions of other members to bolster your own thread, is something I highly take offense to.

You have chosen to practically kill your own thread with accusations, therefore leaving out the possibility of any meaningful discussion because you only want to see this issue they way you see it.

So this thread is to defend Fisher Bob who chooses not to work when offered a job and just waits for a payout from BP?

I think that BP should be squeezed for every single cent the gulf fishermen and other gulf businesses or individuals have lost because of this disaster, but here the company is offering them an income when they need it and people are screaming that it's not fair.

reply to post by mythatsabigprobe


"Gulf fishermen have reacted in anger to a decision made Friday by Obama’s appointee to oversee the “independent” claims escrow account funded by BP. "- from the OP

The fisherman feel that way and they are there, and you are here...
That is their livelyhood that they have lost a right to

reply to post by Danbones


I will give you the patriot act, though he cut it down to only three of the origional points and they look like they need a judge's approval. It looks more like returning civil/liberties while keeping a few tools with judicial oversight.

I still say the website has a bunch of old stuff, and I could not see an example from 2009 or 2010, which is why I asked for your assistance; you posted the link. Thanks for your underwhelming help there.

-duplicate-

[edit on 22-7-2010 by C09JayLT]

That Sucks all those people need that money

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
So this thread is to defend Fisher Bob who chooses not to work when offered a job and just waits for a payout from BP?

I think that BP should be squeezed for every single cent the gulf fishermen and other gulf businesses or individuals have lost because of this disaster, but here the company is offering them an income when they need it and people are screaming that it's not fair.

Obviously this thread is defending Joe, the guy who did work for BP thinking he wasnt wasting his time and earning some extra money(when in reality he wasn't earning any additional money at all.) Joe put his health at risk for nothing, Joe wouldn't have done that if he realized he wasn't going to get any money from his work. Joe might as well have been a volunteer since his BP salary was deducted from his claims, at least as a non-bp volunteer he could have gotten proper safety equipment(you know gas masks arent good for pr!).

[edit on 22-7-2010 by CREAM]

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
So this thread is to defend Fisher Bob who chooses not to work when offered a job and just waits for a payout from BP?

I think that BP should be squeezed for every single cent the gulf fishermen and other gulf businesses or individuals have lost because of this disaster, but here the company is offering them an income when they need it and people are screaming that it's not fair.

It could be argued that BP owed them that money anyway and that they ended up working for free. Its like they are being fined for working out of money that was to compensate then in another are. That oil spill is BPs mess...they cant act like its owned them back now.

This might be hard to see at first so dont paint yourself into a corner. The point that some got and didnt work for BP afterwords is a good point. The money given them for the compensation cannot be subtracted or they are in effect working for nothing.