Ford pinto ethics case study
First, it is well developed through existing case law. Questionable Design The controversy surrounding the Ford Pinto concerned the placement of the automobile's fuel tank.
Shortly thereafter, a van weighing over pounds and modified with a rigid plank for a front bumper was traveling at fifty five miles an hour and stuck the stopped Pinto.
It is apparent why Ford chose no to go ahead with the fuel tank adjustment.
Ford pinto memo
Related Papers. Kendall 18 in The most important stakeholder in any company is the customer, as they are the blood that runs through the veins and gives life to an idea. Second, the analysis does not take into all the consequences, such as the negative publicity that Ford received and the judgments and settlements resulting from the lawsuits. Judge Hand felt the expected harm the probability of the accident, multiplied by the cost of the accident was greater than the justification for a one and a half day absence of a bargee. In the early s the courts evolved from just determining if an accident were unavoidable as most at this point were considered to be to what the costs were to avoid this accident in some fashion. New York University Law Review, However, with the courts finding fewer and fewer harms "unavoidable", another level had to be found between unavoidable accidents and strict liability.
It is true that profit allows the existence of companies that bring forth innovations and luxuries, improving the quality of lives for many; however, if our only concern is profit then we perceive the consumers that fuel the economy as mere cash cows meant to be exploited rather than served.
As technology progressed, courts began to find less and less accidents "unavoidable.
Ford pinto case study questions
The most important stakeholder in any company is the customer, as they are the blood that runs through the veins and gives life to an idea. With this evolution, the courts were faced with a new problem. The only three that survived had their gas tanks modified prior to testing. By stating that absent a "gift of prophecy the defendant could not have predicted the point upon the route where such an accident would occur," Judge Cardozo indicated that giving every possibility the ultimate amount of protection would be too costly compared to the risk of injury. Where is the middle ground between the earlier standard and absolute liability and how is it defined? Under admiralty law, if the defendants could prove that plaintiff's negligence contributed to the loss, they would be excused from paying a portion of the damage. Mounted in this position, the tank was punctured during tests by projecting bolts when hit from the rear at 20 NIPH. It could also be argued as morally permissible based on an economical argument that shows how more people benefit than the number of people who are harmed. Shortly thereafter, a van weighing over pounds and modified with a rigid plank for a front bumper was traveling at fifty five miles an hour and stuck the stopped Pinto. This area was "not one governed by the law of contract warranties but by the law of strict liability in tort
The company realized this was not a primary factor in car sales; 2 the bad publicity involved with a recall would be too much negative publicity to overcome.
These design problems were first brought to the public's attention in an August article in Mother Jones magazine.
The memo estimated that by waiting until the Company could save Fortune, 13 First, it seems unethical to determine that people should be allowed to die or be seriously injured because it would cost too much to prevent it. Trying to retrieve the cap, the girls stopped in the right lane of the highway shoulder since there was no space on the highway for cars to safely pull off the roadway.
based on 18 review