The case of the Chilean miners -

The case of the Chilean miners


In my column for the print version of the mag this week I raise some philosophicalish questions about the legal status of the Chilean miners. Take a quote from Wigan Pier, add a chunk of Lon Fuller and some speculation about what might go wrong, and half-bake it for a bit, and presto.

Meanwhile, over on his Business Ethics blog, Chris MacDonald raises the question of whether the Chilean miners deserve to be paid during their confinement, and, if so, who should do the paying. There’s a decent discussion started there, so go ahead and chime in.

UPDATE: The animated version of the story explains what they should and shouldn’t do down there, and generally illustrates life 700 meters underground:

Filed under:

The case of the Chilean miners

  1. Thanks for the article—this is a fascinating ongoing story and should be talked about.
    As for fair compensation to the miners, I think the mining company have declared bankruptcy. However, If I`m stuck in a dark hole 700 metres in the ground for 4 months, then I`m keeping a Time Book and every evening I`m putting in my 8 hours of straight time and 6 hours time and a half and when I get out that time sheet will be part of the settlement.
    I don`t care where the money comes from—these guys should be told now they will be well compensated. If there was a fund to contribute to I`m sure there would be money pouring in for these poor guys.

  2. Is anyone out there in the enlightened west of Professor Hawking praying for these miners?

    • Why?

  3. Haha, I forgot how much of a hardass Justice Keen is.

    Choice quote: "I am personally so familiar with the process that in the event of my brother's incapacity I am sure I could write a satisfactory opinion for him without any prompting whatever, beyond being informed whether he liked the effect of the terms of the statute as applied to the case before him."

    • I always liked this one:

      "My brother Foster's penchant for finding holes in statutes reminds one of the story told by an ancient author about the man who ate a pair of shoes. Asked how he liked them, he replied that the part he liked best was the holes. That is the way my brother feels about statutes; the more holes they have in them the better he likes them. In short, he doesn't like statutes."

      • Do these types of discussions about judicial philosophies ever take place in Canada anymore? It seems like every judge and law professor in the country is at this point either an audacious Fosterite or a full blown Handian.

        • I'm not sure how useful such a discussion would be, especially when Macleans writes articles about Khadr talking about a "showdown" between Beverley MacLachlan and Stephen Harper (I mean, I know you have to sell papers and try to dress things up, but…)

  4. on the 'what is journalism?', front. US is working on a shield law to protect journalist sources. wikileaks not included. I personally don't know if this shield law is necessary.