Blankenship on Trial: Massey's Supposed Whistleblower Bill Ross

The sixth full week of the trial of former Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship has been almost exclusively focused on Bill Ross, a key witness for the prosecution.

In this week’s episode of the podcast “Blankenship on Trial,” host Scott Finn discusses Ross’s testimony with West Virginia Public Broadcasting’s Ashton Marra and former Assistant U.S. Attorney Mike Hissam. 

Ross began the week with emotional testimony about his hopes for a change in the way Massey “did business.” His testimony focused on a 2009 memo from Massey attorney Stephanie Ojeda that contained Ross’s concerns with safety practices, a lack of training and the need for more miners underground. Prosecutors continually pointed out that Ross’s concerns were deemed confidential and kept secret at the company, calling him a “whistleblower that was silenced.”

In his cross examination, Ross testified he was not silenced for his criticisms of Massey. Instead, Ross said he openly discussed his ideas with Blankenship and continued working on plans, trying miner supervisors and expressing his opinions, even recommending ways to address the problems he saw.

Ross Safety Recommendations Kept Confidential at Massey

Jurors heard emotional testimony from former Massey Energy safety official Bill Ross who broke down on the stand Wednesday morning as he discussed his 2009 recommendations to improve safety at the mining company.

Ross began his second day of testimony Wednesday in the trial of ex-Massey CEO Don Blankenship.

After sharing many concerns over safety practices and training in the Massey mine system during a June 2009 meeting with a company attorney and member of the Board of Directors, Ross testified Massey COO Chris Adkins directed him to write out recommendations Ross thought could fix the problems he saw.

In an email soon after, Ross wrote he was “thrilled about a new Massey Energy Company.”

“This company will be pleased with the results and I’ll be relieved,” he wrote in the July 2009 email to Massey attorney Stephanie Ojeda. 

Ross broke down on the stand when he was asked how he felt about sharing those recommendations.

“I thought good things were going to happen,” Ross said between deep breaths and long pauses. 

“I thought they would take steps to change so I was happy. It would be better for the miners and the company.”

Ross had recommended a re-emphasis on training inexperienced mine managers, increasing staffing levels, a change in company attitude toward the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration, and beefing up safety procedures to help reduce the number of violations Massey was receiving. 

But some 9 months after his recommendations were shared, Massey’s Upper Big Branch mine exploded, killing 29 men.

“Were you aware if your concerns were ever shared with Massey’s Board of Directors? With investors? With the public at large?” Assistant U.S. Attorney Steve Ruby questioned Ross. 

“No one ever talked to me about any of these things,” Ross said.

Ross’s recommendations were marked “confidential- attorney client privilege,” presumably by Ojeda, who Ross sent his recommendations to. 

Ross testified he did not know why his concerns or recommendations were kept secret. 

“I thought it would be shared with everyone at Massey so we could get a handle on this,” he testified.

Safety Specialist: Massey Defied Safety Laws

A 32-year Mine Safety and Health Administration official turned Massey Energy mine planning and safety specialist testified the company had a reputation of defiance when it came to following mine safety regulations. 

Bill Ross, who began working for Massey in 2008 after retiring from MSHA, took the witness stand Tuesday in the trial of former Massey CEO Don Blankenship

Much of Ross’s testimony centered on a 2009 memo penned by former Massey attorney Stephanie Ojeda. In the confidential memo, sent to Blankenship and other top Massey officials, Ross detailed many of the problems he saw within the company’s safety compliance after conducting training courses with Massey facilities. 

In the memo, Ross said Massey needed to “change the way we do business,” referring to the high number of violations the company was receiving, some of the most of any company in the country. 

“Normally a mine that gets a lot of violations, judging by the past, there are more injuries or even fatalities there,” Ross testified. “We needed to change the way things were done.”

But MSHA officials viewed Massey as an arrogant even defiant company, Ross said. 

“All MSHA wanted was for the operator to comply,” he testified, “and it seemed like with all the violations we received, [the mine foremen] either didn’t know how to comply [with safety regulations] or didn’t want to.”

That was another problem Ross pointed out in the 2009 memo, too many inexperienced miners in managerial positions who lacked proper training and often directed their miners to do things that were not in line with federal and state regulations.

The biggest problem at Massey though, according to Ross, was he lack of man power. 

During his training courses, Ross said mine foremen would often complain they were working with “skeleton crews” and were assigned more work than they could reasonably complete in their 10 to 12 hour shifts. Those complaints paired with the high volume of safety violations led Ross to recommend the company hire more miners, a recommendation he said was never taken.

Ross’s testimony about the 2009 memo came after objections to its use from Blankenship’s attorneys. Lead defense attorney Bill Taylor argued, among other things, Ross’s testimony was based on third party statements from unnamed sources that could not be verified. Taylor wanted portions of the memo to be redacted before Ross took the stand.

Federal District Judge Irene Berger had previously admitted the memo into evidence and, therefore, did not permit the redaction. 

In earlier evidence entered by the government, jurors heard audio recordings between Blankenship and other Massey officials in which he called the memo “worse than a Charleston Gazette article” and a terrible document to be in discovery, or the process of recovering documents in a legal proceeding. 

Ross’s testimony, which began at 1:30 p.m. Tuesday, will continue Wednesday morning.

Exit mobile version