Given this description of the Pinto's design problem, some comments can be offered on the decision-making process within Ford that resulted in the Pinto. Thus, to be competitive with foreign manufacturers, Ford felt it could not spend any money on improving the gas tank. Putting unsafe vehicles onto the roads was immoral and unethical.
The seam separation was occasioned by the lack of reinforcement in the rear structure and insufficient welds of the wheel wells to the floor pan. Environmental Agency of putting manipulative software that could sense if their car is being tested for emission standard compliance which would give a rating of 10 to 40 times above the EPA compliance levels.
Harvard Business School Press. Ford Motor Company believed the need to answer the call and presented the first North American compact car. Besides, during the late s and early s, American consumers demonstrated little concern for safety, so it was not considered good business sense to promote it.
The Grays had trouble with the car from the outset. It exhibited a conscious and callous disregard of public safety in order to maximize corporate profits Moral issues in business 11th ed. To give the correct specification and capabilities of the car sold.
The issue with Ford was that it was a combination of the vehicle and the tires. Grimshaw argues that 1 the punitive damages awarded by the jury where not excessive as a matter of law; 2 the specification of reasons was inadequate; and 3 the court abused its discretion in cutting the award so drastically.
You must decide whether to recall the automobile. Identify your relevant community standards that should guide you as a person of integrity. They were merely the latest in a long list of people to burn to death in accidents involving the Pinto, which Ford had begun selling in There was an enormous amount of evidence at trial supporting each of the parties' factual claims as to the Galaxie's closing speed.
Superior Court, the California Superior Court held that a conscious disregard of the safety of others is sufficient to meet the animus malus required for punitive damages awards, adding: Certain product objectives that were then manifested in order to stay within the ground rule.
The Pinto was fairly popular, selling more than 3 million units during its production span. Therefore, at the time of the tests, the Pinto met the required standards. To further complicate this matter, the Ford dealer network is powerful and independent and there are long standing ongoing relationship issues with them.
The reputation of the Ford Pinto suffered over time because of the controversy centered on the Ford Pinto Case - words words - 14 pages. View Full Essay Words: He has undergone numerous and extensive surgeries and skin grafts, and must undergo additional surgeries over the next 10 years.
Of course the companies should be morally responsible for the deaths of those in their products but there are a number of contributing factors that would make pursuit of a legal responsibility difficult. Some people shop based on looks or performance while others shop based on safety records.
The typical time span from conception to production of a new car was more than three and a half years; Iacocca, however, wanted to launch the Pinto in just over 2 years. Driving a Ford Pinto to their church volleyball practice in Goshen, Indiana, they were struck from behind by a Chevrolet van.
The Cost to Remedy Design Deficiencies: Because the NHTSA regulation was merely in development stages, Ford elected to produce the Pinto without improvement to the structural integrity of the gas tank and its components.
When faced with competition in an unstable, changing market, the company leaders chose profits over safety. Academy of Management Journal It seems as though the manufacturer has cut corners on more than one model to increase its profits.
Because the Ford Mord Motor Company made an immoral decision Kant would consider it to be irrational because no one who is immoral is rational.
Three people were killed when the un-reinforced gas tank of the Pinto exploded with the car was struck from behind. Had Ford responded to the field reports in a proper, ethical manner by taking the time to recall and repair the gas tanks already on the road and those about to be released, multiple deaths, and injuries could have been avoided.
Rather than a Utilitarian approach, Ford took an Egoist approach and only looked toward the profit margin for affirmation of their decision. What follows is my effort to explicate the elements of that myth. As for additional design proposals brought forward by the plaintiffs, several of them-for example, a bladder within the gas tank, and a "tank within the tank"-concerned somewhat innovative technology that had never been utilized in actual auto production.
This was a very egoist approach in which Ford looked only after its own interests. By earlyFord's recall coordinator received field reports suggesting that Pintos were susceptible to "exploding" in rear-end collisions at very low speeds under 25 miles per hour.
At that time of automobile production, it was customary to place the gas tank between the rear axle and the bumper, which would give the vehicle more trunk space. 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.
Pinto automobile, the Ford Motor Company today announced the recall of In order to justify the rear gas tank location, Ford first argued, when Standard was proposed inthat fire was a minor problem in auto groups to study auto fires.
Robert Nathan and Associates found thatautos were burning each year, burning to death. Ford Motor Company, in competition with the foreign market, decided to introduce the Ford Pinto.
The Ford Pinto was going to be the new wave for the Ford Company, but it was soon discovered that numerous problems existed. The Ford Pinto was an American subcompact car produced from to It was developed as Ford's entry into the small car marketplace.
Pressures from foreign competition and the looming rise in gas prices incentivized Ford’s upper management to cut the Pinto’s delivery time in half. The main controversy surrounding the Ford Pinto case was The Ford Motor Company's choices made during development to compromise safety for efficiency and profit maximization.
More specifically, it was Ford's decision to use the cost/benefit analysis detailed in section 11 to make production decisions that translated into lost lives. $ Million – Fuel System Fire. Posted in on January 30, A thirteen-year-old boy who suffered severe burns when the Pinto in which he was a passenger burst into flames in a rear-end collision‚ filed an action against Ford Motor company alleging that defects in the design of the vehicle caused his injuries.
In what was the largest verdict ever in a personal injury case‚ an.The ford motor company and the pinto gas tank a case study in corporate ethics