Public Justice of Erin Brockovich, Essay Example

Introduction

Director Steven Soderbergh’s 2000 film, Erin Brockovich, was both a critically acclaimed and highly successful treatment of a true story. Relating how, in the 1990s, one woman pursued a major energy supplier charged with dangerously polluting the groundwater of a region in California, the story was and is compelling in a “David and Goliath” sense. Brockovich, a single mother, had no legal training or formal education, and was working as a file clerk in attorney Ed Masry’s office when she began to piece together unsettling information; namely, the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) was paying the medical expenses for a number of residents of Hinkley, California, all of whom were suffering from a variety of severe conditions, ranging from cancerous tumors to Hodgkins’ Disease. Brockovich’s independent investigation led her to discover that PG&E was releasing hexavalent chromium in the groundwater. The company was aware of the enormous health risk, and was seeking to maintain existing operations through compensating the affected people without acknowledging or addressing its culpability. Despite various setbacks, Brockovich’s diligent attention and interactions with the victims led to an unprecedented settlement, as a binding arbitration compelled PG&E to pay over $333 million in damages to those harmed by its actions.

In examining the film with regard to how it reflects organizational theory and issue of public justice administration, it must be acknowledged that the movie likely takes certain liberties with the reality of the case, if only for dramatic effect and to serve the constraints of the medium. Nonetheless, the basic facts of the PE&G case are valid, as is Brockovich’s own impact. Glamorized or not, the film does present an authentic circumstance of one individual generating vast response, and through a consistent opposition to an organization of immense proportions and assets. Moreover, Erin Brockovich demonstrates an admittedly extreme scenario in which public justice administration may be triggered on a large scale through such a single course of action, which in turn emphasizes the reactive nature of the administration. On multiple levels, and despite excesses of treatment, Erin Brockovich powerfully illustrates how even the most vast organizational practice may be ultimately self-defeating, and generate public justice response.

Discussion

While Erin Brockovich as a film seeks to maintain a relatively simple storyline, it nonetheless relies on several key elements which, in colliding, say a great deal about how public justice may be created when certain realities are brought to light. Not unexpectedly, the central element is Brockovich herself, and her character in the film reveals aspects of organization theory and practice apart from her ultimate confrontations with PE&G. She is, as noted, a single mother, and one undergoing financial difficulties. Having lost her traffic injury lawsuit, she persuades her attorney, Masry, to give her a job. Masry is by no means a high-profile lawyer, and he conducts what may only be termed a modest practice. The offices are small and unprepossessing, as Masry’s staff in minimal. It is also somewhat patriarchal; he himself is the sole attorney, so the employees essentially consist of women in place to conduct research and/or serve as secretaries and clerks. The unassuming nature of this organization, then, makes it all the more interesting that it reflects rational system theory, at least as far as so simple an organization may. Put another way, Masry’s practice appears so modest, efficiency is both demanded and generated by the levels of work conducted. The system here is admittedly “primal,” as the division of labor is essentially limited to Masry as manager/boss and the workers as assistants.

That the office does indeed reflect rational system theory, however, is reinforced by the advent of Brockovich. Hired to perform basically rote tasks, she is nonetheless a disruption to the organization, and this is chiefly due to her nonconforming presence. As small as Masry’s office is, the bureaucratic element of it is seen by the way in which the others react to Brockovich. These are workers accustomed to observing only similarities in behavior and conduct, which is typically a consequence of any bureaucratic organization maintained within a specific arena. This in turn translates to expectations of a decorum; work is done, cooperation occurs, and all is conducted in a way serving the organization’s purpose and character as perceived by the workers. Brockovich is, in plain terms, a wild card. She dresses in ways seen as inappropriate by the others, as she behaves in too independent a fashion. Consequently, and even within the small space of the Masry organization, Erin Brockovich represents a challenge to the organizational order. She creates conflict merely by behaving differently, and the film makes it clear that the others strongly resent this perceived intrusion, or violation of the working system. All that ensures her presence, in fact, is Masry’s discretionary authority as the leader to permit such deviations.

Standing in stark contrast to Masry’s organization is the monolithic presence of PE&G. This is clearly a vast and powerful concern, and the story powerfully illustrates how, when such an organization operates in a flawed manner, public justice may be drawn into action in unprecedented ways. To gain a true understanding of how PE&G exists in the film, it is first necessary to perceive that some dramatic license may be in play here. More exactly, as Brockovich slowly begins to unravel the connections between the company and the illnesses affecting the citizens, the viewer must accept that this is an organization so determined to persevere in structure and practice, it would ignore likely threats to its own survival. The film demands, in fact, that PE&G be seen as something of a soulless, mercenary machine, and this is perhaps an unrealistically biased view. At the same time, such organizations do indeed exist, seemingly oblivious to the ethical concerns that may well harm or destroy them. As presented here, virtually everything about PE&G reflects a consistent adherence to Weberian bureaucracy, with an emphasis on efficiency and impersonality. This is classical theory in action, and this example of it potently reveals how the mere size of an organization may undermine its own guiding principles and contradict public justice concerns. Put another way, efficiency itself may be lost or diffused within an immense and complex framework of conduct and hierarchy.

How efficiency is diminished and public justice is denied in such an organization may be traced to the trajectory of PE&G’s actions in regard to the Hinkley situation. As Brockovich discovers, the company has a definite awareness that the chromium is causing severe illness, an awareness clearly in place for some time. In terms of genuine efficiency, and even removed from ethics, any such organization would be advised to address the dangerous circumstance and thus remove the potential threat to its own existence. Simple reason dictates that, in time, the link between the company’s actions and the diseases would be uncovered, as the same reason asserts that the consequences would be devastating to the organization’s life. PE&G, however, opts to apply intermediate measures in the form of paying for medical bills. Moreover, as Brockovich moves forward in her investigation, the company all the more adamantly denies culpability, ignores public justice, and engages barrages of protection in the form of counsel. The viewer must accept that the film relies on the facts, so the disturbing scenario seems valid. In this case, desperate adherence to perceived organizational priorities serves only to damage the organization itself, and dismissing public responsibilities brings on the reaction of public justice.

Pursuing this course, Erin Brockovich raises two important issues specifically regarding public justice administration. The first is oblique; once the true scope of Brockovich’s investigation is perceived, Masry determines that a larger, more professional legal team would be
the best means of dealing with PE&G, so the public justice efforts are to be redirected. When Brockovich reveals to the new counsel the extraordinary depth of her knowledge regarding all the Hinkley cases, however, the film’s underlying theme is expressed: public justice does not rely on skills or organizational attributes, but on genuine commitment. It may be said, in fact, that Masry’s attempt here reflects the mistakes made by PE&G, in that he is mistaking structure for content. Public justice, it is asserted, can only occur when public injustice is fully comprehended, and not treated as a breach in policy or statute.

Lastly, public justice administration is presented in the interesting way of Masry’s determination to circumvent systems that impede justice. As an attorney, and knowing the extent of PE&G’s resources, he understands that court cases here would likely go on indefinitely, and that only an arbitration process will provide justice. This strategy of appearing before a single judge relies on Brockovich’s own methodology; success depends on the actual presence of the victims of the injustices, and Brockovich secures the cooperation of those victims who have come to trust her. If the arbitration scenario is presented in a streamlined way not necessarily in keeping with the reality of such events, it is nonetheless an accurate presentation of an administration empowered to arrive at a solution fairly and expeditiously. There is, of course, the dramatic element of the victims stressed, but this does not eviscerate the realism, as a judge may be enabled to so assess the evidence and give a final disposition. Moreover, as the film depicts the actual process of the case, it can be safely taken that, in this case, public justice administration is a reactive measure equipped to discharge the responsibility.

Conclusion

As noted, it is tempting to view Erin Brockovich almost as a modern fairy tale. A brash young woman with no education triumphs over an immense company, and brings justice to its victims. Nonetheless, and dramatic embellishment aside, the story is true, and this indicates how public justice may be drawn into action when organizations fail. A massive organization may well become so entangled in its efforts to succeed that it endangers its own foundations, violates ethics, and actually brings about the public justice it so desperately tries to circumvent. On various levels, and despite a few excesses of treatment, Erin Brockovich powerfully demonstrates how even the most vast organizational practice may be ultimately self-defeating, and thus generate the public justice response it seeks to avoid.