Pinto Fires Case - Summary Article Review

PAGES
2
WORDS
462
Cite

Ford's tests also determined that the gas tanks could be protected by the installation of a simple part that would have cost the company $11 per vehicle. To make matters even worse, Ford was also aware that rear-end collisions typically caused the Pinto's doors to malfunction and become inoperable, sealing occupants inside the vehicles to burn to death when their cars caught fire. Because the applicable government safety tests had been changed to include rear-end crashes only after the Pinto was already in production, the company was not under any statutory obligation to meet the new government standards. The company calculated the price of recalling the Pinto and of installing the $11 part on all...

...

It also calculated the total monetary cost of paying out the damage awards to the owners of 2,100 Pintos statistically likely to be involved in burns from crashes (including approximately 180 injuries from burns and 180 deaths from burns) and determined that the total cost of compensating the victims of the design defect would be less than $50 million. As a result of the decision to value corporate profits over human lives and welfare, hundreds of people died horrific deaths and hundreds more suffered painful and debilitating injuries and disabilities. Today, the decision by the company to value corporate profits over human lives and welfare stands as a…

Sources Used in Documents:

In the early 1970s, Ford was rushing to design its Pinto model automobile to capture the entry-level car market. Whereas the typical development cycle for new automobiles was then nearly four years, Ford had condensed that time to approximately one half as long, partly by omitting various safety tests or by executing them contemporaneously with other production and design steps to safe time and capture the 1971 market. The Pinto was purposely designed as a very small vehicle to comply with directions and design specifications issued by the top level of management to produce a vehicle that weighed less than 2,000 pounds and that cost less than $2,000, the approximate equivalent of $11,000 in today's dollar value.

By the time the model was ready for rollout, Ford engineers had already identified a serious and potentially deadly problem with the Pinto's design. Specifically, because of its very compact size and the positioning of the gas tank to maximize trunk space, there was insufficient space to protect the gas tank from being ruptured in rear-end crashes of 30 miles per hour or greater. Ford's tests proved that the gas tank was extremely vulnerable and that it would likely result in deadly fires in many ordinary rear-end collisions in situations where the collisions themselves would not necessarily have caused significant bodily injury or deaths to occupants of the vehicle. Ford's tests also determined that the gas tanks could be protected by the installation of a simple part that would have cost the company $11 per vehicle. To make matters even worse, Ford was also aware that rear-end collisions typically caused the Pinto's doors to malfunction and become inoperable, sealing occupants inside the vehicles to burn to death when their cars caught fire.

Because the applicable government safety tests had been changed to include rear-end crashes only after the Pinto was already in production, the company was not under any statutory obligation to meet the new government standards. The company calculated the price of recalling the Pinto and of installing the $11 part on all 12.5 million affected vehicles at $137 million. It also calculated the total monetary cost of paying out the damage awards to the owners of 2,100 Pintos statistically likely to be involved in burns from crashes (including approximately 180 injuries from burns and 180 deaths from burns) and determined that the total cost of compensating the victims of the design defect would be less than $50 million. As a result of the decision to value corporate profits over human lives and welfare, hundreds of people died horrific deaths and hundreds more suffered painful and debilitating injuries and disabilities. Today, the decision by the company to value corporate profits over human lives and welfare stands as a model of bad corporate ethics and ethical decision making in business organizations.


Cite this Document:

"Pinto Fires Case - Summary" (2012, October 28) Retrieved April 26, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/pinto-fires-case-summary-76169

"Pinto Fires Case - Summary" 28 October 2012. Web.26 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/pinto-fires-case-summary-76169>

"Pinto Fires Case - Summary", 28 October 2012, Accessed.26 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/pinto-fires-case-summary-76169

Related Documents

These costs are far greater than what Ford originally anticipated. In addition, the improvements to the gas tank gave Ford a valuable opportunity. They could use this improvement as a means of differentiating themselves from the competition. Although safety may not have been a primary concern in the 1970s, the proper marketing campaign could have made Ford a leader in safety, like Volvo, which could still be serving the

Unfortunately, many companies and industries have not learned from the mistakes of the Ford company; as this is an issue that continues to happen with a number of large companies. A prime example of an industry that continues to use a cost benefit analysis even when it involves human life is the airline industry. Many companies within the industry have known in the past that some parts of the

Decision or Action of Moral Gravity There was a recent situation in which my internet service provider egregiously overstepped its boundaries and transgressed upon my service. In doing so, a specific member of this organization made a decision of moral gravity that resulted in action that is likely illegal as well as unethical. The crux of the situation is that while getting technical support for the installation of a new modem

Ford Pinto
PAGES 8 WORDS 2857

Ford Pinto What happened to the Ford Pinto? Ford Motor Company had intended to compete with other automobiles on the market that were smaller and used less gas. But something went terribly wrong along the way. This paper explores the details that led ultimately to the demise of the Ford Pinto -- and to the deaths and injuries of innocent consumers. Why was the Pinto developed in the first place? Ford Motor

Ethics and Ford Pinto Crashes For any organization, the ethics that are embraced will have a dramatic impact on their long-term profit margins and ability to quickly troubleshoot critical challenges. Those who are supporting the highest practices will receive better favorability ratings for the firm, management and brands. These factors will play a critical role in determining if customers will do business with them and the potential litigation from missing critical

Business Ethics and Positive Social Change: The Ford Pinto Fiasco How much is a human life worth? Most people would likely agree that human lives are priceless, but the executives at Ford Motor Company made this type of grisly calculation when they were confronted with the alarming facts about the dangers posed by flaws in the gas tanks of their Pinto automobiles in 1970. Although Ford Motor Company would ultimately recall