Whistleblower Irina Woodhead warned Shell months before the Prelude fire that its emergency protocols were about as effective as a soggy matchstick

Whistleblower Irina Woodhead warned Shell months before the Prelude fire that its emergency protocols were about as effective as a soggy matchstick.

In today’s episode of Corporate Hypocrisy: Shell Edition, let’s dive into the latest spectacle from the world’s favourite sin stock, Shell—championed by investors like Vanguard and BlackRock, who clearly love a good oil-slicked controversy. This time, it’s whistleblowing safety engineer Irina Woodhead versus the profit-worshipping oil titan, and the results are about as surprising as discovering Shell spilt oil somewhere (again).

Irina Woodhead, a former Shell safety advisor and Technical Authority Level 2, claims she was dismissed after raising alarms about terrifyingly inadequate safety protocols aboard the Prelude FLNG vessel. You know, the floating gas factory that nearly turned into a floating gas fireball in December 2021 when a fire erupted and emergency systems decided to sit this one out. The 293 people on board? Let’s just say their evacuation options were as robust as Shell’s commitment to ethics.

*Shell: Safety First…Except Not Really!

Woodhead warned Shell months before the Prelude fire that its emergency protocols were about as effective as a soggy matchstick. The incident, she said, validated her concerns about the vessel’s technical integrity. Shell’s response? Pretend nothing happened, deny her allegations, and—of course—fire her. Not for whistleblowing, they insist, but for failing to grovel through a “performance improvement plan” designed to look impartial but smelling suspiciously like retaliation.

Shell’s lawyers didn’t stop there. They argued, with a straight face, that Woodhead’s claims lacked merit because being upset about a literal fire hazard isn’t enough to warrant protection under the Employment Rights Act. Who needs whistleblower protection when you’ve got PR teams spinning the narrative, right?

The Tribunal Fiasco: Justice or Just Delays?

The UK Employment Tribunal, meanwhile, did its best impression of a bureaucratic hamster wheel. Woodhead faced procedural hurdles galore, with Shell’s legal team dropping key documents less than 24 hours before hearings—a move straight out of the corporate litigator’s playbook.

Judge Fowell, embodying the perfect mix of neutrality and oblivion, asked whether Woodhead was officially a “health and safety representative,” as if her job title wasn’t already screaming it. Let’s be real: if a fire onboard a floating gas facility doesn’t qualify as a public safety concern, what does?

Investors: Complicit, Much?

Meanwhile, major shareholders like Vanguard and BlackRock pour billions into Shell, no doubt thrilled by the returns on exploitation, environmental destruction, and whistleblower suppression. Vanguard’s slogan might as well be, “We invest in the future—just not one with breathable air.”

What’s Next?

Woodhead’s claims continue to crawl through the Tribunal’s labyrinthine processes, with hearings now punted into 2027. Why rush when corporate giants like Shell rely on time, money, and a mountain of legalese to crush dissent?

The real question isn’t whether Woodhead will see justice  but how many disasters Shell can brush under the carpet before it all combusts. Literally.

For now, Shell will keep smiling for its ESG reports, thanking investors for their undying support, and doing what it does best: profiting off pollution and silencing the people who dare call them out. Clap it up, everyone—the world’s most ruthless oil baron has outdone itself again

Shell’s History of court room controversy: “Oops, We Did It Again!”

Lest we forget, Shell is no stranger to courtroon controversy or, let’s say, “creative litigation.” Just ask John Donovan, who exposed Shell’s use of undercover agents,  evidence tampering, financial clout, shady settlements and undeclared connections between Shell and the trial judge. In Donovan’s case the judge (now deceased) admitted to losing control of the trial before resigning and cosying up with Shell post-judiciary. Who knew impartiality had a corporate sponsorship tier? Shell’s legal director later admitted that Shell deliberately witheld crucial information from the judge.

*Shell’s North Sea Death Trap: Lifeboats of Doom 

In the glittering world of offshore oil, Shell has long held the crown for squeezing profits from beneath the sea—ethics, safety, and basic humanity be damned. Case in point: the North Sea platform scandal, where Shell’s dedication to cutting corners transformed lifeboats (you know, the last hope in a disaster) into unseaworthy death pods. Combine that with their infamous “Touch F*** All” approach to safety, and you’ve got a recipe for preventable tragedy. Spoiler: people died, and Shell walked away richer.

Safety is Our Priority” (But Only for PR)

The scandal centered around Shell’s cost-saving genius of deploying lifeboats that couldn’t withstand basic operational tests, let alone the violent realities of a North Sea evacuation. Offshore workers—already risking their lives daily—had to rely on escape vessels that might as well have been made of wet cardboard.

It wasn’t just bad engineering; it was a systemic disregard for safety culture. Workers who flagged the hazards were dismissed as alarmists, while Shell executives doubled down on profits. After all, why waste money on seaworthy lifeboats when you can pump out another barrel of crude?

The Avoidable Deaths

Tragedy struck when a disaster proved just how inadequate Shell’s preparations were.  The result? Avoidable deaths and devastated families. But to Shell, it was just another day at the office.

Accountability? What’s That?

You’d think such blatant negligence would lead to reckoning—maybe even criminal charges. Nope. Shell’s legal army and PR machine were ready to spin, deny, and deflect. Executives continued to rake in bonuses, and major shareholders like Vanguard and BlackRock stayed silent, their coffers filled with blood-stained dividends.

“Touch F** All”: The Shell Philosophy*

Shell’s alleged safety mantra, “Touch F*** All,” encapsulated their cavalier attitude. Safety protocols existed on paper but were ignored in practice. Workers’ lives were secondary to corporate targets, and whistleblowers faced silencing or dismissal.

A Legacy of Greed

The North Sea platform scandal is yet another page in Shell’s sordid history—a tale of greed, environmental destruction, and human cost. For every life lost, Shell gained another million. It’s not just a story of corporate failure; it’s a stark reminder of what happens when profit trumps everything.

While Shell churns out glossy sustainability reports and ESG promises, the ghosts of their negligence remain—a grim testament to a company that values hydrocarbons over human life.

This website and sisters royaldutchshellgroup.com, shellnazihistory.com, royaldutchshell.website, johndonovan.website, and shellnews.net, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.