Hilcorp’s secrecy threatens Alaska workers

I learned about workplace safety from my father, who is a member of a crane operator’s union. I know firsthand that operating heavy machinery can have serious consequences, especially in a workplace that doesn’t allow you to report unsafe behavior without fear of being fired.

I’m concerned that Hilcorp’s acquisition of BP will put more workers in harm’s way. A Hilcorp contractor died in 2018 while on the job, and in 2015 three workers almost died — the only thing that saved them was that they happened to faint in fresh air, instead of a nitrogen-filled chamber. The Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission wrote, in 2015, that “The disregard for regulatory compliance is endemic to Hilcorp’s approach to its Alaska operations and virtually assured the occurrence of the incident ... Hilcorp’s conduct is inexcusable.”

Hilcorp claimed at a legislative hearing on Feb. 26 that it is able to cut costs without cutting corners because of reduced bureaucratic costs and, crucially, because of the quality of workers it employs. The problem with that is: Hilcorp is hiring former BP employees. Unless Hilcorp is accusing BP of not allowing its employees to function to the highest standards possible, it is unclear how a position at Hilcorp doing the same work with a fraction of the workforce would create great cost-savings without a proportional increased risk. Hilcorp’s math doesn’t add up here. From their record, it seems clear that they make their greatest profits through reducing costs by pressuring workers to produce more (leading to an unsafe work environment), employing non-union workers, and cutting corners when it comes to maintenance and environmental regulations.

On Feb. 4, Su Christiansen testified to the Regulatory Commission of Alaska, or RCA, about her time as a physician assistant in Cook Inlet. From the RCA transcript: “I spent quite a few years working at the Beluga site across Cook Inlet, and I was there as a physician assistant when Hilcorp first came into that area. And unlike ConocoPhillips, who has the kind of policy that no work is so important that it can’t be done safely and environmentally sound, Hilcorp was just — I’ve never been around a company that was so reckless with so many accidents. You know, trauma to their employees and oil spills and just reckless like I had never seen on the oilfields in Alaska.”

I would not want my dad working under the conditions that Ms. Christiansen described. I would not want anyone working in those circumstances. Currently, Hilcorp does not have a history of employing union labor. When asked if Hilcorp would honor the union contracts they’re inheriting from BP, Hilcorp’s Vice President David Wilkins stated he is “Pro-work, pro-project, pro-up and to the right.” Pro “up and to the right” signals that Hilcorp is for profit, first and foremost. That’s fine if you’re in the business of operating a lemonade stand. That’s absolutely not fine if prioritizing profit comes at the cost of Alaskans’ lives.

One way that Hilcorp can address the concerns of Alaskans is to tangibly demonstrate its investment in worker safety. The RCA is considering whether to require public access to Hilcorp’s financial filings. Those filings would show us how they are currently allocating costs to protect our workers, not just writing some nice words on a website. Without those filings, we are left in the dark and unable to make informed decisions about our futures.

Transparent companies have better safety records and a more accountable workplace safety culture. Transparency enables organized labor to best protect its workers. Transparency enables the public to ensure our workers are being treated properly as they develop the state’s public resources. Without knowing if Hilcorp is fit to operate as the most important new major energy player in Alaska, there is no way to determine what appropriate measures need to be taken to ensure that Alaskans are safe and that our land will be safe for generations to come. I urge the RCA to deny Hilcorp’s petition of confidentiality, and the Legislature and the governor to ensure that Alaskans are protected in the long run.

Ultimately, this deal represents what we as Alaskans value — corporate profit, or Alaskans’ lives? Unfortunately, right now we simply don’t have the information to decide.

My dad always tells me, it just takes one mistake for someone to die. Just one. Alaskan lives are valuable beyond measure, and we can’t afford mistakes. I don’t want our state to partner with Hilcorp without knowing what appropriate measures need to be taken to ensure that Alaskans are safe, above all else.

Veri di Suvero is the Executive Director of the Alaska Public Interest Research Group, or AKPIRG. Founded in 1974, AKPIRG is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization advocating on behalf of consumers and the public.

The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.