It is also said that there is a moving standard of negligence that vary on situations, Ford should have taken some kind of preventive measure in advance that could have foreseeable prevented the harm. Introduction and situational analysis: If this legislation passed, it would have necessitated a change in the Pinto design.
The bottom line is that Ford used an economic theory to value and manages their corporate social responsibilities. Pinto fires case proves ethical foundations must be set, strong before a crisis Ethics professor speaks at BYU about exploding-car problem Published: During that time the car represented 1.
The general misunderstanding of the document, as presented by Mother Jones, gave it an operational significance it never had.
Ford publicly announced it supported the standard. If the corporation continued to manufacture the Pinto they knew there was a risk of many lawsuits class action and litigation on the horizon. It is not for common but controversial issue of economic assumptions.
A large "bullet car" was used instead of a standard moving barrier. This placement was not a viable option for the hatchback and station wagon body styles. Ford did evaluate well the cost of precautions but did not consider the social implications, and it is the response of public whether they are consumer or directly and indirectly involve in the process.
The administration was pressured by safety advocates Center for Auto Safety as well as the public response. These works also reviewed misunderstandings related to the actual number of fire related deaths related to the fuel system design, "wild and unsupported claims asserted in Pinto Madness and elsewhere",  the facts of the related legal cases, Grimshaw vs Ford Motor Company and State of Indiana vs Ford Motor Company, the applicable safety standards at the time of design, and the nature of the NHTSA investigations and subsequent vehicle recalls.
The Ford Motor company was looking at a cheaply made vehicle for the American people to buy. What went wrong with the Pinto, then. The same approach mentioned above could have been used back then as well. In the team discussion about the pinto case was unanimous.
While not totally immune from the hazards of rear-end collisions, station wagons -- with their 10 extra inches of rear-end sheetmetal and different configuration for the fuel filler -- were deemed far safer, and were not a part of the recall notice.
The passenger, Richard Grimshaw, was seriously burned. In total,Bobcats were produced from to From a human rights perspective, Ford disregarded the injured individual's rights and therefore, in making the decision not to make changes or recall, Ford acted unethically.
Recall Asked of a Million Ford Autos: Many believe that ethics still lives and breathes in our corporate world, but until there are morals and honesty, the American people are simply done buying what they are selling.
Life as it applies to the Negligence-Efficiency. Accident investigations in many of the cases revealed that victims had few, if any, trauma injuries as a result of the impacts, but had burned to death when the cars exploded into flames.
Most notably, ethical problems arose concerning what the engineers' responsibilities were once it became clear from the crash tests that the Pinto had severe design flaws. It creates a chain of negative reaction that eventually leads to debate if the decision of Ford to recall is the right approach or there are other ways to deal with the problem.
The placement of the car's fuel tank was the result of both conservative industry practice of the time as well the uncertain regulatory environment during the development and early sales periods of the car.
Ford should have decided to not produce additional cars with the issue. Winning in court was our top priority; nothing else mattered. Immediately after the accident, federal safety officials pledged to take steps to prevent future construction accidents.
In Augusthaving been provided with a copy of the memo by Grimshaw v. Here is where you pull together the different threads of your analysis and determine whether or not the company did the right thing.
Only when considering the narrow subset of rear-impact, fire fatalities is the car somewhat worse than the average for subcompact cars. The Ford Pinto Example. The fuel tank was completely filled with gasoline rather than partially filled with non-flammable Stoddard fluid as was the normal test procedure.
Initially, the NHTSA did not feel there was sufficient evidence to demand a recall due to incidents of fire. She can say that confidently because Ford's recall coordinator at the time, Dennis Gioia, is now her department chair at Penn State and has talked about his experiences with her classes, as well as on a DVD, which she shared at BYU.
The fixed-barrier standard was seen by the auto industry as a significant increase in test severity.
Although the Pinto was initially hugely popular in USA, its sales fell dramatically due to a controversy surrounding the safety of its gas tank. Are some lives worth more than others. The Hand Rule and United States v. The Ford Pinto Case: A Study in Applied Ethics, Business and Technology by Douglas Birsch and John H.
Fielder, Eds.,State University of New York Press, Albany, p., softcover. The Pinto was a small car that Ford manufactured during Utilitarianism and The Ford Pinto Case Introduction Business is concerned primarily with profit. To earn a profit, a business produces goods or provides services and engages in buying and selling.
PROVO — In hindsight, the late recall of the exploding Ford Pinto in the s seems like a gross ethical oversight. Yet while the delay was a fatal mistake, those involved didn't even see the. Apr 15, · background information background information.
In Ford Motor Company launched a brand new automobile: the Ford Pinto. Although the Pinto was initially hugely popular in USA, its sales fell dramatically due to a controversy surrounding the safety of its gas tank.
"The Ford Pinto case is mentioned in most Business Ethics texts as an example of Cost-Benefit analysis, yet in those formats any appreciation of the complexity surrounding the issues of such decisions is overly simplified.
The Ford Pinto has been cited and debated in numerous business ethics as well as tort reform case studies. The placement of the car's fuel tank was the result of both conservative industry practice of the time as well the uncertain regulatory environment during the development and early sales periods of .Ford pinto case study analysis