Pinto Fires
The Ford Pinto Fires Case
The Pinto fires case is about a series of accidents involving the Ford Pinto’s fuel tank bursting into flames if struck from the rear. A 1978 suit against Ford Motor Co. for the murder of 3 teenagers brought the incidents to the public attention as it was the first time a major corporation was charged in a criminal case beyond negligence (Trevino, 2011).
Background
The Ford Pinto was rushed to production by Lee Iacocca to directly compete in the small car market with countries such as Germany and Japan in a two-year time frame, as opposed to the normal three and a half years it normally took (Trevino, 2011, p. 80). Because of this rush, safety was not a top priority during production. Despite Ford’s knowledge of fuel tanks rupturing at low speeds, and failing safety tests, the cost was decided to be too high to change the design at that time.
A cost-benefit analysis was used by Ford to determine if the company saw it fit …show more content…
to change the design of the fuel tank. They compared the cost of lives lost, people injured, and vehicles lost, $49.5 million, versus how much it would cost to make an $11 upgrade to the fuel system, $137.5 million (Trevion, 2011, p. 82) and determined no change was needed to improve safety. Because of this, and reports that did not reaise red flags as recall worthy, the recall coordinator, Gioia, voted to not recall the Pinto. The end results were more accidents, and the eventual recall of the Ford Pinto due to “pressure from the media, the government, pending court cases, and the potential loss of future sales” (Trevino, 2011, p. 67).
Ethical Issue One ethical issue in the Pinto fire case is whether or not to install an $11 upgrade to the fuel tank that would save lives in the event of an accident.
If the upgrade is made it will cost the company millions, but save lives. If the upgrade is not made it could result in more lives lost. Another ethical issue in this case is rushing to get the Pinto in production and ignoring the failed crash-tests. They had prior knowledge that the fuel tank could rupture and continued production anyway. Once production was completed, and vehicles were on the road, a third related ethical issue started; the attention the recall coordinator was paying (or not paying) to reports of fuel tanks exploding from collisions.
Stakeholders
The top direct stakeholders in this case include: The Ford Motor Company, their customers (including accident victims), their employees, the families of accident victims, and the shareholders. Some indirect stakeholders might include the media, the government, and suppliers of Ford
parts.
The Pinto fires case is about a series of accidents involving the Ford Pinto’s fuel tank bursting into flames if struck from the rear. A 1978 suit against Ford Motor Co. for the murder of 3 teenagers brought the incidents to the public attention as it was the first time a major corporation was charged in a criminal case beyond negligence (Trevino, 2011).
Background
The Ford Pinto was rushed to production by Lee Iacocca to directly compete in the small car market with countries such as Germany and Japan in a two-year time frame, as opposed to the normal three and a half years it normally took (Trevino, 2011, p. 80). Because of this rush, safety was not a top priority during production. Despite Ford’s knowledge of fuel tanks rupturing at low speeds, and failing safety tests, the cost was decided to be too high to change the design at that time.
A cost-benefit analysis was used by Ford to determine if the company saw it fit …show more content…
to change the design of the fuel tank. They compared the cost of lives lost, people injured, and vehicles lost, $49.5 million, versus how much it would cost to make an $11 upgrade to the fuel system, $137.5 million (Trevion, 2011, p. 82) and determined no change was needed to improve safety. Because of this, and reports that did not reaise red flags as recall worthy, the recall coordinator, Gioia, voted to not recall the Pinto. The end results were more accidents, and the eventual recall of the Ford Pinto due to “pressure from the media, the government, pending court cases, and the potential loss of future sales” (Trevino, 2011, p. 67).
Ethical Issue One ethical issue in the Pinto fire case is whether or not to install an $11 upgrade to the fuel tank that would save lives in the event of an accident.
If the upgrade is made it will cost the company millions, but save lives. If the upgrade is not made it could result in more lives lost. Another ethical issue in this case is rushing to get the Pinto in production and ignoring the failed crash-tests. They had prior knowledge that the fuel tank could rupture and continued production anyway. Once production was completed, and vehicles were on the road, a third related ethical issue started; the attention the recall coordinator was paying (or not paying) to reports of fuel tanks exploding from collisions.
Stakeholders
The top direct stakeholders in this case include: The Ford Motor Company, their customers (including accident victims), their employees, the families of accident victims, and the shareholders. Some indirect stakeholders might include the media, the government, and suppliers of Ford
parts.