Ford Pinto

Ford Pinto
Principles of Responsible Commerce (COMM 101)
Case 2.3 (The Ford Pinto)
Week 4 1. What moral issues does the Pinto case raise?
Moral issues that Ford Pinto case raises included producing dangerous products which are not safe
to use it without informing the dangerous of the products to the public. In addition, lobbying the
NHTSA to delay the safety measure of the products is also one of the moral issues that Ford Pinto
case raises. (53 words)
2. Suppose Ford officials were asked to justify their decision. What moral principles do you think
they would invoke? Assess Ford's handling of the Pinto from the perspective of each of the moral
theories discussed in this chapter.
The theory of egoism is most ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Is doing so ever morally legitimate?
No. Kant's 2nd categorical imperatives stated that we need to treat humanity always an end and
never as a means. (Shaw, Barry & Sansbury, 2009, pg77) According to the case, Ford did not
put a human's life as the first priority; in fact, they placed a monetary value on a human's life. They
are using the human life to determine whether their decision is profitable in the cost–benefit analysis
which is against Kantianism. (67 words)
6. What responsibilities to its customers do you think Ford had? What are the most important moral
rights, if any, operating in the Pinto case?
Ford should produce the products that are safe to be used. Besides that, Ford should also be honest
to the customer by providing the truth information to the customer. In this case, the most important
moral rights is every human being has the inherent right to live. Thus, Ford should disclose the
dangerous of their products to the customer. (59 words)
7. Would it have made a moral difference if the savings resulting from not improving the Pinto gas
tank had been passed on to Ford's customer? Could a rational customer have chosen to save a few
dollars and risk having the more dangerous gas tank? What if Ford had told potential customers
about its decision?
No. There would not have made a moral difference since the products are dangerous which might
risk the human's life.

... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

The Ford Production Of Ford Pinto
The Ford automobile company began producing the Ford Pinto line up in 1968. The Chief Executive
Officer (CEO) at the time of the pinto production was Lee Iacocca. The reason for the decision to
mass produce the pinto in a short amount of time is because American automobiles were losing
market share to smaller Japanese imports. Lee Iacocca wanted his engineers to design and
manufacture a compact car that weighed less than 2,000 pounds and cost less than 2,000 dollars.
Because of this monumental task from Lee Iacocca, that meant the ford pinto automobile would
have to be built within 25 months instead of the typical 43 months. There are many safety test that is
mandated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration before a vehicle ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
The savings from not installing the baffle was $20.9 million dollars. The Ford Motor Company's
reputation also suffered. From a utilitarian theory, the Ford Motor Company focus on damage
arising from this decision of money and nothing else. Money is seen as value by the Ford Motor
Company, so by losing money by law suites and protecting the Ford Motor Company employees
outweigh the collateral damage the Ford Pintos line up imposes. Jeremy Bentham brings to light the
pleasure and pain aspect of what the decision would bring. In this case the Ford Motor Company
expresses that the money saved from the recall brings more pleasure to the most amount of people.
The money being saved is obviously from not installing the baffle between the gas tank and rear
bumper. The consumer will also save money by the Ford Motor Company not issuing a recall. If the
Ford Motor Company issued a recall, then the price of the Ford Pinto would be more than what was
stated thus maybe making it not comparable to other cars in its class. You must also consider the
pain that this decision creates. Because the Ford Motor Company refused to issue a recall to install
the baffle between the gas tank and the bumper, it has created pain and suffering to those who were
affected by rear–end collision injuries. You have to consider the Ford Motor Company's reputation
after they made the decision to not recall the Ford Pinto to

Ford Pinto Case Study
1) In October 1971, Ford mass–produced a new 1972 Pinto hatchback.
2) In November, the Grays purchased the new 1972 Pinto hatchback.
3) On May 28, 1972, Mrs. Gray was driving from Anaheim to Barstow to see Mr. Gray and was
accompanied by 13–year–old Richard Grimshaw.
4) Route 30 off–ramp was getting congested, Mrs. Gray moved from the outer fast lane into the
middle lane.
5) After she changed lanes, the Pinto hatchback suddenly stalled and came to a stop.
6) A car traveling behind the Pinto was able to swerve around the Pinto but the driver of a 1962 Ford
Galaxie was unable to avoid the collusion with the Ford Pinto.
7) The Ford Pinto busted into flames when it collided with the Ford Galaxie
8) Mr. Grimshaw had suffered severe injury ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
15) The cost to plan a single flak suit would cost approximately $4.00 per car. If two flak suits or a
bladder was required, it would cost approximately $8.00 per vehicle.
16) It was recommended that the addition of the flak and bladder would be postponed until 1976 on
all cars; however, offering should be included when other changes are made to incorporate going 30
mph.
17) The total purchase and installation cost of the bladder would have been $5.08.
18) If Ford motor company would add improvements to the gas tank adding $5.08 per car, they
would not have a risk/ benefit argument as with the $11.00 figure provided.
19) Ford Motor Company knew about the Pinto hatchback defect in the car throughout the time of
design nonetheless decided that it was too expensive to resolve the problem noted by the Ford
engineer Harley Copp.
20) The judge accounted of the in–camera analysis of the plaintiff's.
21) The court rejected the actions for Mr. Copp's as inconvenient.
22) Ford was compelled to cross–examine Mr. Copp.
23) Ford protests since the court ruling was based on evidence taken at the in–camera proceeding.
24) The first example concerned the Grays' guidance to a highway patrol officer who examined the
accident, if he had seen the Pinto involved in an

Essay about Ford Pinto
Ford Pinto Case
The humankind history has probably never known one completely successful product – a product
that would never break down or malfunction. "The ideal product is a myth because in reality, there
has been and always will be mistakes and flaws in the technology and production. When there are
only a small percentage of defective pieces, it is easy to blame the individual product. It is when
there is repetitive malfunction of the same system under the same conditions that people begin to
ask the question." (Birch, et. al. 21) Who is at fault? Is it the production line error? Is it the engineer
who designed it, or the person who developed the process? Ford Pinto is one of the examples of
such repeated malfunction of a product, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Because of such a rush in development, as well as such a strict limitation in weigh and cost, the
technology was substantially modified and the sequence of the events in the development cycle was
altered as well.
As per Dowie, in the normal development cycle of 43 months, the tooling which takes longest time
to accomplish of about 18 months, takes place when all other processes like design, styling, product
planning, advanced engineering, etc. have been finalized and approved. (3) Since there were only 25
month allocated to come with a model of Ford Pinto, tooling was going in parallel with the product
development. Another important aspect, as Dowie points out, was competition over trunk space
which dictated engineers to avoid designing a gas tank that would substantially reduce the trunk
space. Therefore, the designers decided not to use the Ford's patented safe saddle–type tank which
would be positioned over the rear axle, but place the gas tank between a weak bumper and a rear
axle. (4)
When crush tests revealed that the weakest part of Ford Pinto was the gas tank that would be
punctured by the bolts on the rear axle during the rear impact crash, there was no time to change the
tooling. Another obstacle for Ford Pinto's safety was negative position of the General Manager, Lee
Iacocca, on importance of the safety. He was known for saying ."..safety doesn't sell" (Dowie, 5) and
that only meaning of that phrase was that he did not

Ford Pinto Essay
Utilitarian Analysis of the Ford Pinto Case In the 1970's, Ford was forced to come up with a strategy
in order to remain relative in the competitive auto manufacturers market that was being overrun with
Japanese imports. The Pinto was Ford's answer to this impending problem and allowed Ford to bring
an affordable product to consumers that was not only easy to produce, but cost effective as well. The
Ford Pinto case lead to a very controversial moment is Ford's history that left quite a scar on its
reputation. Ford's future as a significant member of the auto manufacturer market depended on the
success of the Ford Pinto. In order to meet the demands of Lee Iacocca, Ford CEO, to produce a car
that was cost and gas efficient, the time spent on the design and production of the Pinto would be
reduced to "25 months rather than the usual 43 months for a new car line (DeGeorge 298). Time
constraints impacted the overall decision–making process surrounding the Pinto. Decisions were
made without having all the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The prototype undergoes a range of testing to ensure that the vehicle meets or exceeds all required
motor safety guidelines prior to its final market release. The Pinto was never subjected to rear–end
impact testing until after the vehicle was already in production. Rear impact testing concluded that
there could be potential problems with the placement of the fuel tank. If the Pinto was "hit from the
rear at a speed above 20 miles per hour, it would be punctured by a bolt from the bumper and could
possibly burst into flame[s]" (DeGeorge 298). As a result of the findings, Ford determined that a
baffle costing less than $11 would reduce the possibility of rear impact fuel tank rupture and
subsequent fire (DeGeorge 298). The addition of the baffle was considered to be less profitable
based on an internal "cost–benefit analysis" (Dowie) conducted by

Essay on Ford Pinto Trial
Ford Pinto Trial
The objective of this paper is to investigate what led to the Ford pinto criminal trial and the impact
that it had. What led up to the criminal indictment of Ford, the trial itself, the verdict of the trial will
be discussed. The Impact that this trial has had on the Automobile industry will also be investigated.
In the late 1960's there was strong competition from VW and several Japanese companies in the
small car market. Due to this competition Ford hurried the design of their small car, the Pinto, to
market. Since the car was rushed into market and the specifications for the car were that it weigh
under 2000 pounds and cost less than $2000, safety was not a major concern in the design of the
pinto.1 In ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In the 1977 September/October issue of Mother Jones there was an article written by Mark Dowie
named "Pinto Madness". This article told of Ford's decision to sell a car in which they knew
hundreds of people would be burnt to death. To make sure that this information did not just stay in
the pages of Mother Jones, Dowie called a press conference on August 10, 1977 in Washington D.C.
in order to get national exposure.3 That day as a result of this announcement the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced a preliminary evaluation of the Pinto's Dangers.
One month later NHTSA announced that they had initiated a formal defect investigation to
determine whether the problem constitutes a safety related defect within the meaning of the National
Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966.2 Mid–February of the next year the Pinto's problems were in the
media's headlines again. In a landmark case a jury awarded Richard Grimshaw, a Pinto burn victim,
$125 million in punitive damages and another $2.8 million in compensatory damages, "The largest
award ever made by a jury in a personal injury case".2 About the same time $666,280 was awarded
to the family of Lily Grey, who had died in an accident. These amounts were much more than the
$200,000 for a human life and the

Ford Pinto Ethics
1. The message that the author gives in this article is that Ford completely disregards safety and
ethics when making the Ford Pinto. Not only does Ford disregard safety, but they also try to cover
up the fact that they are killing many people in the process. The author, gives many examples, and
puts emphasis on the fact that Ford took seven years to fix the Pinto problem. The author says that
Ford was a case of corporate malpractice in the auto industry.
2. I agree with the author in saying that Ford is a case of corporate malpractice in the auto industry. I
also agree with the author in saying that Ford was unethical. In the case of, State of Indiana v. Ford
Motor Co., Ford was found not guilty, but only because the other driver was actually at fault in the
accident. In this particular case, they went after Ford because the cars were a deathtrap due ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This article relates to chapter 5 with the evolving idea of corporate social responsibility. Corporate
social responsibility is the duty of a corporation to create wealth in ways that avoid harm to, protect,
or enhance societal assets. This is exactly what Ford did not do. Ford, on the other hand, did the
exact opposite, and found a way around social responsibility. Ford avoided the society's safety, just
so that they could make a profit. Ethics were thrown out the window, as was safety, and all it did
was bring harm to the people buying these cars. Ford should have tried not only to make a profit, but
to also a better model to offer better safety for society. In chapter 5, it also states that advocates of
social responsibility justify it with three basic arguments. First, it is an ethical duty to promote social
justice. A timeless principle is that power should be used fairly. If it harms or fails society, it is badly
used. Second, social responsibility is practical. It has concrete benefits, which include loyal
customers. Ford abused these because they abused their power and used poor ethics in doing

Ford Pinto Research Paper
Ford Motor Company created a subcompact that will always be remembered in the car industry. In
this essay, I will describe the Ford Pinto and the events that lead up to the Ford Pinto crisis and the
lack of ethics Ford Motor Company had.
The Ford Pinto was a subcompact car that Ford Motor Company manufactured from 1971 to 1980 in
North America. Ford Motor Company came up with the idea of producing a subcompact car with
the goal of weighing 2000 pounds and keeping the price under $2000 to produce (Palmiter). Vice
President, of Ford Motor Company, Lee Lacocca had the belief that safety doesn't sale and who will
notice, which later came back to haunt him and Ford Motor Company. With over 3 million Ford
Pinto produced in its manufactured time, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This shows that they had the mindset of the utilitarian approach which deals with producing a
product that was great to the company and dealing with the consequences at a later date. Ford was
basing their decisions all on numbers. The risk and benefit analysis should not been used.
Utilitarianism was introduced by author Jeremy Bentham in his book An Introduction to the
Principles of Moral and Legislation in 1789 (ckienzle). It is also known as consequentialism. This
automobile company had a policy that allowed a certain set of injuries and deaths to happen before
they were required any design. They were putting a price on life. All of our lives are controlled by
regulations that are set by the government. Ford's ethic should have been geared for the people and
not numbers. It was very unethical for the Ford Motor Company to give the image to customers that
life doesn't matter. Their risk and benefit analysis that they were using to determine the reason for
their action of not wanting to change the design doesn't account for consequences nor give an full
image of what was actually going on (Haider). Ford Motor Company thinking was that it was
cheaper to payout in settlement in death and injury than to change the Ford Pinto gas tank design.
Ford should have done the ethical thing of doing the right thing for the customers and this was not
used.

Ford Motor Company is one of the top automakers in the world; they even invented the first mass
production automobile, the Model–T, over 100 years ago. Naturally when a company has been
around this long they are bound to have skeletons in their closet and Ford is no exception. The Ford
Pinto was introduced to the American public on September 11th, 1970 to compete with the Japanese
dominated small–car market (Popular Mechanics 2011). Little did they know this car would set off a
chain of events that would give Ford a black eye for years to come. Poor engineering mixed with
pressure from upper management ended up producing one of the most dangerous fuel tanks of all
time along with many deaths. To fully understand why the Ford Pinto is considered one ... Show
Option one was to use the Ford Capri's tank design that sat above the rear axle in a safe location that
was also utilized in Ford's experimental safety vehicle that could withstand 60 mph rear end
collisions (Class Handout). Option two called for reinforcement around the filler to prevent tearing,
along with a tank shield that stopped punctures. Due to the Pinto's short conception to production
window the engineers were reluctant to go and tell Lee about the setback. One engineers response to
being ask about telling Lee was, "Hell no. That person would have been fired. Safety wasn't a
popular subject around Ford in those days. Whenever a problem was raised that meant a delay on
the pinto, Lee would chomp on his cigar, look out the window and say 'Read the project objectives
and get back to work" (Class Handout). The project objectives are a step–by–step plan for the model
and in the Pinto's case; safety was not mentioned once (Class Handout). This put the engineers in a
very tough position because one of the main ethical responsibilities of an engineer is to protect the
welfare of the

Ford Pinto
In 1968 Ford made a decision to compete in the small car segment in the United States with a new
car, the Pinto. This segment was currently filled with foreign competitors, but a lead engineer, Lee
Lacocca believed that Ford could make money in this segment. Lee Lacocca's appetite to dominate
the small car segment led to numerous ethical dilemmas that left Ford's reputation in shambles. The
decision to move forward with the Pinto forced their employees to face unreasonable timelines, a
strict budget, enormous pressure from leadership, an obvious failed design, and the employees were
expected to ignore crash test results. The Pinto madness case study done on the Ford Pinto
highlighted numerous ethical predicaments faced by the employees at Ford. ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
The shareholders were focused on lining their pockets with the profits; they did not concern
themselves with how the product was made or performed but rather how it sold. Shareholders were
absorbed with the cost–benefit analysis and not the design flaw that result in injury or loss of life. As
mention in the article The Top Automotive Engineering Failures: The Ford Pinto Fuel Tanks "To fix
the problems would cost an additional $11 per vehicle, and Ford weighed that $11 against the
projected injury claims for severe burns, repair–costs claim rate and mortality." The fix would cost
too much according to Ford's math and therefore the decision was made that the damage payout for
injury, repair, and a person's life would be more cost efficient than produce a safer vehicle. Ford
employees were faced with having to work with a design flaw in the placement of the fuel tanks, be
ignored or get fired for speaking up. "His boss gave him the go–ahead, scheduled a date for the
presentation and invited all company engineers and key production planning personnel. When time
came for the meeting, a grand total of two people showed up –Lou Tubben and his boss." (Dowers,
para 9). As a result, to the above mentioned atmosphere at Ford, the consumer was left with
purchasing an affordable car that was poorly built. "According to Ford's estimates, the unsafe tanks
would cause 180 burn deaths, 180 serious burn injuries, and 2,100 burned vehicles each year."

Pinto Case Analysis Essay
Calculate the total cost if all the "fixes" for the Pinto gas tank problem had been performed.
$2.40+1.80+4+((5.08+5.79)/2)+((5.25+8)/2)+9.59+2.35+2.6+6.4+15.30 = $56.50 per car What was
management's position on the fixes? Most of Ford's management was unconcerned about the fixes to
the Pinto if it cost extra money. Instead, the chain of command "signed off" to their superiors all the
way until the decision reached Iacocca. Using the decision models you have learned, list some of the
analysis questions and issues management missed in making its decision to go forward with
production without any design changes. What is your intention with this decision? – To product a
subcompact car that is light and cheap Whom could your decision injure? – Consumers who
purchase the Pinto ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
– No; cost savings aren't worth as much as a human life, even if human lives are valued at $200,000
What is the symbolic potential of your action? – Ford doesn't care about the safety of their
customers Did the Pinto design violate any laws? Yes; there is a federal regulation in place requiring
all automobiles manufactured in 1972 to be able to withstand a 21 mph fixed–barrier impact without
significant fuel spillage. Those cars made after 1973 have to withstand a 30 mph fixed–barrier
impact. The Pinto failed to meet both of these standards before release and upon release. Was Ford
simply answering a public demand for a small, fuel–efficient, and inexpensive auto? They were yes,
however doing so while knowingly endangering lives, is not the correct or ethical way to provide a
product that is demanded by the market. I believe that if Ford had spent the money in developing the
Pinto correctly, then the company could have saved face as well as millions of dollars in litigation
and

Pinto Safety Essay
In 1969, Ford had to make an affordable car for the public and 2 years later amidst competition from
other car manufacturers, Ford rushed production of the Pinto to get it on the road quicker. The car
cost two thousand dollars and over 12.5 million were massed produced by Ford over the span of 9
years. Facing the need to make the car cost efficient, corners were cut by Ford and certain standards
of safety for the car weren't met and the area where the bumper and the fuel tank were missing key
components imperative to safety this meant "rear–end collisions would rupture the Pinto's fuel
system extremely easily. "(motherjones.com/politics/1977/09/pinto–madness) "One prominent
instance of these explosive accidents occurred in 1972 when a woman ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Safety wasn't a popular subject around Ford in those days. With Lee it was taboo. Whenever a
problem was raised that meant a delay on the Pinto, Lee would chomp on his cigar, look out the
window and say 'Read the product objectives and get back to work." Safety was not a popular
subject because safety would cost for eleven dollars for each cars to be implemented with a redesign
to make sure that it does not set on fire when struck by another car. Ford tallied up the cost of these
implemented safety measures to be around 137 million dollars, on the other hand did the math for
the amount of people that would be affected meaning set on fire or severely injured, and worse die
due to the car going into production without the safety implementations which the company
estimated to be around 49 million dollars with that number came the estimation that there would be
"180 buyers who would die by burning, serious burns injuries for 180 more buyers and 2100
vehicles burn beyond all

Ford Vs Pinto Case
Profits are the ultimate result for any business that is in search of remaining viable in a market. Ford
Motor has had a challenge with the new car model Pinto. They had a choice in spending more
money with the Pinto car. The math done by the NHTSA was a total of $11 per auto. 11Millions cars
were supposed to be launched at the cost of $12.5 million, at $11 based on the percentage car that
will produce a result of $137.5 million. The cost is more than what they were willing to pay (, Shaw
& Barry). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration came up with the approximation of 180
burn deaths, 180 serious burns, and 2100 burned vehicle. It seemed no one really did any soul
searching on the cost of life and the economic lost of life in ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has established guidelines for all automakers
to fallow. The guidelines were made to reduce fire during automobile collision. In 1972 and 1973 ,
the standard was 20mph and 30 mph of a rear end accident without any spillage of fuel (, Shaw &
Barry). On the other hand, Pinto could not withstand such impact spilling fuel on passengers inside
the car. Between 1971–1978, Ford statistics on death by Pinto to 13 lives while critic put it at 500 (,
Shaw & Barry). Several lawsuits were initiated by the victims and fines were paid by Ford motor.
Even though, the organization claimed they were following established rules, but the ethical and
moral position would have been to acknowledge the fault of the car and apologized for the fatality.
Nevertheless, the executives stood by their product and never waiver the fact that the product was
not safe to be on the road. Several families sued Ford Motor and received compensation for their
lost, but it is not like having the alive and well. Through the years, the company survive all those
obstacle and remained in business. An apology to the families who have lost love one would have
been seen as repentant to one action. The situation would not bring back those individuals, but
earned a bit of respect from

Pinto
Ford had the right idea when they created the Pinto. Give consumers a vehicle that had the Ford
name people trusted but also helped save the consumer money. This new vehicle would help give
Ford a leg up on foreign auto makers and stay competitive in the subcompact auto market. The
downside to this was, even before producing the Pinto, crash tests were conducted on various
prototypes to learn whether they met the safety standards set by the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) to reduce fires from traffic collisions. (Shaw, 2011) All prototypes failed
the 20–mph test. Knowing the serious fire hazard this vehicle could encounter in rear–end collisions,
Ford officials were faced with a decision; move forward with the existing design to meet the
production ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Ford reasoned that the increased cost outweighed the benefits of a new gas tank design. Based on
this analysis, Ford legally chose not to make the design change, which would have made the Pinto
safer. However, just because it was legal doesn't mean necessarily that it was ethical. How can a
price be put on saving a human life? 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. The analysis did not take
all the consequences into account; negative publicity Ford received, judgements and settlements
resulting from lawsuits, not to mention some things just cannot be measured in terms of dollars
when talking about human life. Ford has been treating its customers as a means to an end by putting
a value on human lives. Kant's ethics proves that the Ford Pinto decision immoral, in that the act of
releasing unsafe cars, just to get into the market and generate profits when applied universally would
not make any sense. The ethical issue in the Ford Pinto case was whether they had a moral
responsibility to see to the welfare of their consumers, outside of the legal responsibilities of

Ford And The Government Of The Pinto Case
Was Ford to blame in the Pinto case? Christeen Olsen Business Ethics & Social Issues 1122 Anoka
Ramsey Community College April 26, 2015 Abstract This paper explores several published articles
and an overview of the court cases, that bring up the question of ethics and the responsibilities of
Ford and the government in the Pinto gas–tank issues of the 1970's. This paper is intended to ask
questions of ethics regarding manufacturers responsibilities when there might be a potential safety
hazard, what the governmental duties might be in helping to keep the public safe, and whether or not
they should be held responsible for not taking measureable steps in protecting the public. Also
highlighted is what Ford did and didn't do when the problem of the gas–tank explosions happened
prior to their launch as well as what steps were taken as accidents started to occur and how a newer
practice of cost–benefit analysis was used to help them make their controversial decisions to sell this
product to the public. Was Ford to blame in the Pinto case? Most people have heard of the huge
disaster regarding Ford's economical Pinto automobile that was introduced and went on sale on
September 11, 1970. (Wikipedia, April 20, 2014) Back in the 70's, Ford was given a firm directive
from Lee Iacocca, the pinto was not to weigh an ounce over 2000 pounds and not to cost a cent over
$2000." (Dowie 1977). A lofty goal that was given due to the pressure of the public wanting a

Ethical Cases Of The Ford Pinto
In 1978 a tragic automobile accident occurred on U.S. Highway 33 in Elkhart county, Indiana
involving a 1973 Ford Pinto that killed three teenagers. The Pinto they were driving was hit from
behind by a van which ruptured the vehicle's gas tank engulfing the car in flames. This provoked the
Elkhart County prosecutor to push for a criminal homicide charge against Ford Motor Company.
This trial was big and would affect many American businesses in concerns of corporate
responsibility and product liability.
Even though this was the first criminal case against Ford Motor Company it doesn't mean these
were the first people to lose their lives. There had been hundreds of people who either burned to
death or were left scared and disfigured in similar accidents involving the Pinto. Ford Motor
Company knowingly sold an unsafe car to their customers and paid out millions to settle law suits
for damages out of court. They also spent many more millions lobbying against Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard 301. They fought against this standard until they felt it was profitable to
make the change to the Pinto design which was determined by their cost–benefit analysis. This to
me was not a wise ethical decision as it would eventually ruin the company's reputation as well as
the lives of people involved.
During this 20–week trial Judge Staffeldt advised the jury that Ford Motor Company should only be
found guilty if it could be proven the company had committed "plain, conscious

Pinto Recall Case Study
Why the Pinto should not be recalled.
Introduction
In this paper the reader will be presented with arguments for to stop the recall of all Ford Motor
Company Pintos created up to this point. I am going to talk about a few different topics ranging
from why it is going to save the company money over recalling the vehicles in question. The reader
will be presented with the ethics that are behind my decision to prevent the recall from going
through. The math can look complicated but when you break it down it is simple here is a quote
from the movie "Fight Club" .
A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks
up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
There is an Ethical side to this coin as well.
The Competition
For many years the automotive industry was seen as a corner stone of the American economy with
The Big Three (Us, General Motors and, Chrysler) running the show, but starting in the 1960's it
was starting to face more and more competition from around the world. This was action by the
foreign auto makers is starting to take a chunk out of Fords profits. This was making it so coroners
needed to be cut in order to jump in front of the competition. The Profit needed to be protected
ground cannot be lost in any aspect of the automotive industry.
Pinto Production
Under current Ford leadership the production cycle was cut down from 43 months to 25 months.
This would be the gap closer needed in order to keep up profits. This led to some design oversights
in placement of components like the gas tank. In the 1971 Ford Pinto the gas tank was located
directly behind the bumper of the car . By the time Ford had discovered the flaw in the gas tank
placement the equipment was already created and now they were stuck with what was originally set
up. The Pinto was designed around the 2000 pounds and under $2000

Ford Pinto Ethics
Ford Pinto Case Study and Engineering Ethics The first Fundamental Canon of the NSPE code of
ethics demands engineers to advocate the welfare of the public and avert transgressions of safety
and health. In the 1970's, the engineers who tested the rear–end crash tests of Pinto prototype
models realized that the vehicle's safety standard was only acceptable to the more lenient current
regulations for safety requirements in rear–end collisions. But, the vehicle could not pass the higher
and upcoming 20–miles–perhour crash standards. Since Ford was too eager to sell Pinto cars, lack
of future up to date safety regulations were overlooked, leading to the action of falsifying EPA
emission data. This was dishonest to patrons which definitely was ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Reflecting on Applegate's situation, poor inspection and delay of relaying vital safety information
can cause catastrophic damage. In today's airline industry, official warnings are not often overlooked
by superiors, handling issues without putting passengers at risk, practicing preventative ethics and
strict inspections are a norm (Saber, 2015). Human live cannot possibly be valued. Living beings
with consciousness', experiences, relationships and unlimited potential to do anything can't have a
price tag. The value of human life overrides other considerations; however, this is often not the
choice we could

Ford Pinto Ethics
The Ford Pinto, a compact car produced during the 1970s by ford, it was well known for its
tendency to cause an explosion when rear ended from another car because it would leak fumes. this
cause multiple deaths and people wanted justice for the damages and deaths this caused, and why
there was not more actions taken by ford.
In the late 1960, s people wanted to start buying small cars and they were becoming more and more
popular, people wanted better gas mileage so that's when different car dealerships began making
small cars and competing with one another as this began to be in demand. Fords ethical position was
heavily based on becoming the head of small cars, as ford entered the small car market the company
began to make the cars in a very short period about half the time of the current industry standard.
The engineers who worked for Ford discovered when they were doing crash tests that any pinto that
was rear ended from begin would rupture the fuel tank very easily this would cause all the events
that are going to take place in which it because a part of history for the ford industry. ... Show more
They had no doubt that the car would sale, especially with previous customers who are big ford
fans. After the Ford Pinto came out the (NHTSA) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
came out with more hard regulations for post–crash survivability as well as strengthened
requirement as well as being able to withstand a 20mph rear end impact without releasing fuel and
causing major rollovers. Because these regulations happed after the ford Pinto was released they
were not required to observe the new standards (NHTSA) had come out

Ford Pinto Fire
The Ford Pinto Fires Case A corporation's social responsibility and ethical actions have long been a
discussion for consumers, suppliers and the government throughout the years. "The corporations'
sole responsibility was to provide a maximum financial return to shareholders" (Carroll, 1991). This
paper discusses the ethical decision process in regards to the Ford Motor Companies Pinto Case.
Discussion of the different methods of ethical decision making and how Ford executives and
employees might have applied them and if they had or had not if there might have been a different
outcome.
Background.
In 1971 Ford Motor Company introduced the American consumer to the new Ford Pinto. The car
was developed to compete with the smaller foreign vehicles. CEO Henry Ford II promoted Lee
Iacocca to President of the company for his innovation to enter this market. Ford rushed the Pinto
into production even after it failed several crash tests (Trevino & Nelson, 2014). The vehicles were
found to have a faulty fuel tank that exploded with a low speed impact. Engineers of Ford tried
several ways to remedy this but due to the short productions schedule it was determined it would be
too costly and delaying production was not an option. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It is unclear as to exactly how many were actually killed by the Ford Pinto explosive fuel tank but in
1980 the State of Indiana versus Ford Motor Company case made history (Becker, Jipson, & Bruce,
2012). The methods Ford used in deciding to put the Pinto into circulation were unorthodox to
anything from historical reference. The most controversial was the cost benefit analysis done by
Ford where the company basically put a price tag on a life in comparison to fixing the fuel tank
issue in the Pinto (Trevino & Nelson,

Ford Pinto
With a growing competitive market in fuel efficient compact automobiles, Ford undaunted desire to
compete with major automobile manufactures like Volkswagen and Japanese Imports. Released the
compact and fuel efficient Ford Pinto in 1971, determined to be the most competitive and desirable
subcompact model. Ford's president had the vehicle designed to weigh only 2,000LBS and cost the
consumer roughly $2,000. And with these strict guidelines the Ford Pinto passed federal safety
standards. Unfortunately the vehicle had one major design fault, the vehicle fuel tank when hit by a
moderate rear collision would rupture and incinerate the persons trapped inside which led to injury
and death. After reviewing this case study, my assumption of the Ford Company acknowledges that
they did not make the right business ethics decision of allowing the Pinto to be sold, the vehicle
passed federal safety standards minimally. Although while other manufactures models underwent
the same crash assessments and performed roughly the same which one can argue that this status
quo is the norm. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Gioia used a relativity patterns script that only calculated the frequency and not the severity of these
accidents. From my standpoint I believe Gioia made the wrong decision of not voting for the recall
of the vehicles. He should of been conscious of the severity of these accidents and voted to recall
these vehicles sooner. His organization standard policy making procedures and loyalty to his
organization blinded and influenced his ethical judgment. It's a very tough decision many individual
lives are in stake and there is a high monetary stake as well for the business organization. However
if placed in that same predicament I would have voted for the recall of the

Ford Pinto Failure
Introduction
This memo is a failure analysis report on the Ford Pinto automobile accidents. On 28th May, 1972 a
1972 Ford Pinto car (manufactured by Ford Motors) burst into flames after a 30 Miles Per Hour
(mph) collision caused an immediate fire burning down the car killing the driver, Lily Gray
(Leggett, Christopher 1999). According to public record, more than 500 people have been killed
from Ford Pinto crash burnings (Dowie, Mark 1977). The ensuing sections of this report outline the
events leading up to the design and production of faulty Ford Pintos, the rationale behind the failure,
and the lessons that can be grasped from this failure. Description
The Ford Pinto began being designed in 1968. The fuel system was designed such that ... Show
(Dowie, Mark 1977).
On the other hand, the failure was caused by a questionable cost–benefit analysis which gave little
importance to the safety of drivers and passengers. By putting a monetary value to car burnings and
deaths, Ford concluded that they would make larger revenue by producing a car that did not need
adequate safety designs. Lessons to be Learned
The designers and engineers working on the Ford Pinto were aware of the results of the crash tests
and the possibility of the gas tank rupturing. However, they did not redesign the fuel system or add
any protection between the bumper and the gas tank in the final design. Management pressure can
be used to suppress concerns, however, as engineers, the code of ethics requires that all engineers
must be dedicated towards safety, protection and welfare of people, and should not give consent to
any design with potentially dangerous consequences. Moreover, it is apparent the rupturing of gas
tanks was caused by the failure of a small part of a large mechanism. It is important to make sure
that no design feature is ignored or treated as trivial in an engineering project; every part and every
design must work efficiently and safely in order to be used by society. Lastly, no factor should be
placed above safety in our

The Ford Pinto Case
THE FORD PINTO CASE:
THE VALUATION OF LIFE AS IT APPLIES
TO THE NEGLIGENCE–EFFICIENCY ARGUMENT
Christopher Leggett
Law & Valuation
Professor Palmiter
Spring, 1999
Abstract
Text of Paper
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Abstract
The cases involving the explosion of Ford Pinto's due to a defective fuel system design led to the
debate of many issues, most centering around the use by Ford of a cost–benefit analysis and the
ethics surrounding its decision not to upgrade the fuel system based on this analysis.
ISSUE
Should a risk/benefit analysis be used in situations where a defect in design or manufacturing could
lead to death or seriously bodily harm, such ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
A judgment was rendered against Ford and the jury awarded the Gray family $560,000 and Matthew
Grimshaw $2.5 million in compensatory damages. The surprise came when the jury awarded $125
million in punitive damages as well. This was subsequently reduced to $3.5 million.2
B. The Criminal Case3

Six month following the controversial Grirnshaw verdict, Ford was involved in yet another
controversial case involving the Pinto. The automobile's fuel system design contributed (whether or
not it was the sole cause is arguable) to the death of three women on August 10, 1918 when their car
was hit by another vehicle traveling at a relatively low speed by a man driving with open beer
bottles, marijuana, caffeine pills and capsules of "speed."4 The fact that Ford had chosen earlier not
to upgrade the fuel system design became an issue of public debate as a result of this case. The
debate was heightened because the prosecutor of Elkart County, Indiana chose to prosecute Ford for
reckless homicide and criminal recklessness.
Some felt the issues raised in the Ford Pinto cases were an example of the "deep pocket" company
disregarding consumer safety in pursuit of the almighty dollar. Others feel they are an example of
runaway media coverage blowing a story out of proportion.5 Regardless of opinion, the Ford Pinto
case is a tangled web of many complex legal and

Ford Pinto Essay
In the late 1960's Ford Motor Company, losing ground to the Japanese imports, Ford needed to
design a vehicle that could compete against Japanese imports in sales. Wanting to release the vehicle
in 1971, Ford decided to design and produce the Ford Pinto in twenty–five months instead of the
normal forty–three. In doing so, Ford was unable to complete a crash safety test on the rear of the
vehicle until the vehicle was produced. When the test was finally completed, it was found that the
rear collision did not meet expectations as compared to other vehicles of the same class and of the
same era. It was discovered that the vehicle had a high probability of catching fire when struck in
the rear at speeds exceeding twenty miles per hour due to a rear bumper bolt rupturing the fuel tank
at impact. Ford engineers researched a solution to the issue that would have cost the company
approximately eighteen dollars per vehicle by installing a baffle that would reduce the chance of fire
significantly. However, before implementing the measure, Ford decided to perform a cost analysis
that weighed the cost of installing the baffle on all of the vehicles through recall or during
production, versus the estimated cost in lawsuit ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The first was to fix the issue at a cost of approximately eighteen dollars in parts per vehicle. In doing
the repair, Ford would have significantly increased the safety of the vehicle. The second option was
for Ford to ignore the problem based on a cost analysis, finding that it would be cheaper to leave
Pinto as is and pay out lawsuit settlements in the event the vehicles caught fire due to collision. It is
clear that the parties involved in these actions were Ford Motor Company and the consumers that
purchased the Ford Pinto. The next step is to determine how these actions affect the happiness of
those

Case Study Pinto
1. What moral issues does the Pinto case raise?
I think Pinto case raised some serious issue of abusing human rights and not behaving ethically in
the world of business. Any business/service should never ever put a value on human life and not
take consideration of a known deadly danger. Ford had an option as well as the solution to design
the car in a way that prevented cars from exploding; however they refused to implement it. They
thought that it was cost effective not to fix dangerous condition than to spend the money to save
people in spite of the fact that the only added cost was $ 11 per vehicle.
2. Suppose Ford officials were asked to justify their decision. What moral principles do you think
they would invoke? Assess Ford's ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Is there anything unsatisfactory about it? Could it have been improved upon in some way?
Cost–benefit analysis is a legitimate tool, by using the lowest cost to obtain the biggest profit out of
it. However, it is unacceptable to sacrifice human life in exchange of paying a lower production
costs. Before they made any decision, they should hold an ethical meeting about the improvement of
fuel tank, if they would change their mind by paying more then people would not have to die. In this
case, I think Cost–benefit analysis should not be use in this case, because it is very unethical and
inhumanity to determine a number of life that have to sacrifice, just because the unwillingness of
Ford to pay more for the adjustments of fuel systems.
When applying cost benefit analysis in this case study, Ford will either improve the fuel tank or
chosen not to go ahead with the fuel tank adjustment, then at least 180 will burn to death, 180 will
be injuries, and 2100 vehicles will be burned. Ford was making a decision based on numbers that
seems to be right, but it is allowing a certain number of people to die or be injured even though they
could have prevented it with paying more for the alteration of fuel tank. This seems to be a disregard
for human life. From a human rights perspective, Ford disregarded the injured individual's rights
and therefore, in making the decision not to make adjustments to the fuel system, acted

The Ford Pinto
The Ford Pinto
Question 1
What moral issues does the Pinto case raise?
ANS: The Pinto case raise the moral issues of what is the dollar value of the human life. That the
businesses should not be putting a value on human life and disregard a known deadly danger. In
order to perform a risk/benefit analysis, all costs and benefits must be expressed in some common
measure. This measure is typically in dollars, as the Ford Motor Company used in its analysis. This
can prove difficult for things that are not commonly bought and sold on the open market. Therefore,
totell someone that there is a certain price for their life is a preposterous notion. There are numerous
things which individuals consider priceless. Ford thought they could get ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
As Friedman has argued, the role of business is to make money and a cost benefit analysis is a very
useful tool in figuring out how to do so. When it comes to morals, however, cost–benefit analysis is
much less useful unless one believes in utilitarianism. For other understanding of morality, a person
should not be asking "what do I gain and lose" when trying to figure out what to do. People should
be asking "what's the right thing to do". Cost–benefit analysis can't really help with that. An
examination of the Ford Pinto Case, the cost–benefit analysis, will help raise the awareness and
understanding of the diminishing value of ethics in the business world. When Ford conducted the
cost–benefit analysis, it analyzed what the potential benefit would be if they fixed every Pinto by
installing the baffle piece. The result produced from the cost–benefit analysis may be interpreted to
say that it would have cost Ford $137 million to fix the Pintos by installing the baffle piece when it
would have cost $49.5 million to leave the cars alone and deal with the expenses of injuries and
deaths from the crashes. Ford decided that, because it would be cheaper, it would not install the
baffle piece. According to De George, Ford did not tell the consumer that the car was not as safe as
others, nor did it inform consumers that they had the option of purchasing the baffle piece (De
George, 1995). In Ford contention is that these decision are moral ones, and that cost–benefit
analysis is

Why Is The Ford Pinto Unethical
The Ford Pinto Xing Liu Jul–9–2015 When putting top priority on the pursuit of interest, people are
inclined to make unethical decisions and take unethical actions, because they treat other people
merely as a means to their goals by dehumanizing other people. They choose to ignore the fact that
all human beings have names, families, soul (they are not property) and independent thinking as we
do, deprive innocent people of freedom and well–being that these people deserve as human beings,
and attach price tags to them for cost–benefit analysis. In Pinto case, Ford was accused of "callous
indifference to human life" for not to spend on adding safety improvements to correct the faults they
made in the competition with German and ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
After the infamous cost/benefit analysis, they decided to sacrifice other's well–being to maximize
profits. But there were several miscalculations. Ford not only underestimated the death toll and
injuries, but also overestimated the costs of adding safety improvements by including all Ford
vehicles. In fact, the number of deaths the Pinto was responsible for is closer to 500, according to its
critics, rather than 23, at which Ford put. The court cases nationwide have also increased the costs to
Ford. If Ford added the safety shield in the production page, the only loss would be a portion of the
expected profits. It is possible for Ford to dominate the compact car market and customers get what
they want. However, with the cost/benefit analysis, Ford set them into the worst scenario that no one
benefits from the action of not modifying the duel tank: Ford suffered from both financial and
reputational loss, with the increased costs on installing the safety shields and lawsuits against the
company, potential loss of future sales, and the decreased shareholder's value; customers who
involved in the accidents suffered both physically and emotionally with the loss of life and property;
other customers decreased trust in the brand; Iacocca was fired by Henry Ford

The Ford Company and Pinto Case
1. What moral issues does the Pinto case raise?
The moral issues raised by Pinto case are the life of a man can be paid off with the money. Ford
Company should not only concern about their benefits and disregard the human life. In order to
perform cost–benefit analysis, all costs and benefits must be expressed in the common measure.
This measure is typically in money, as Ford Company used it in its analysis. Ford Company believes
that everyone has certain price in their life. Therefore, they believe that they are able to compensate
for a human life if any accident happens. But, Ford Company has forgotten that there are numerous
things which are priceless in the world just like the life of a man.
We can never measure the man's life with price since a human life is priceless. Ford thought they
could get away with a dangerous automobile by paying off those lawsuits from people who were
injured and the families of dead. Ford thought that it was more cost effective to compensate the
people who get injury and dead in accidents rather than improve the gas tank of the car. Ford
seemed to follow the calculation blindly without giving any extra consideration for quantifying
human life. Everyone has the rights to have a safe product to be consumed. Ford should not focus on
their own profit and jeopardize the wellbeing of other people.
Besides that, the moral issues are raised due to the ignorance of the Ford employee for not coming
out to reveal the actual problem faced by the

Ford Pinto Ethics Essay
Ford Pinto Case: The Invisible Corporate Human Pricetag
In this essay, I will argue that Ford Motor Company's business behavior was unethical as
demonstrated in the Ford Pinto Case. Ford did not reveal all the facts to consumers about a harmful
gas tank design in the Ford Pinto. They tried to justify their decision to sell an unsafe car by using a
Cost–Benefit Analysis which determined it was cheaper to sell the cars without changing to a safer
gas tank. The price of not fixing the gas tanks is human injuries and fatalities. By choosing not to
make the Pinto a safer vehicle Ford placed a price on the head of every consumer. Ford's primary
concern was to maximize profits. Ford had a duty and ethical responsibility to customers to ... Show
The Pinto was not to weigh an ounce over 2,000 pounds and not to cost a cent over 2,000. Iacocca
enforced these limits with an iron hand," Lee Iacocca was known for saying "Safety doesn't sell".
The Pinto was released for sale with the flawed design. There are a few concerns about harmful
behavior of the FMC that should be discussed. A behavior is harmful when it wrongfully sets back
the interest of others and has a high risk of harm. Obviously, the gravity of harm in this case is very
high being that it is life threatening. Once a consumer has purchased the Pinto and drives it off the
lot he is at risk to getting rear ended, and burned to death by a car fire or explosion. Since the weight
of this harm is very severe, the low probability of the consumer having an accident doesn't discount
Ford's unethical behavior. Indeed, driving a Ford Pinto would place a consumer's life at risk. Also at
stake are the interests of Pinto passengers and drivers of other vehicles who certainly are not willing
to risk their lives so Ford can make an extra buck. Everyone has an interest in not getting injured or
killed. Setting back the interest of consumers isn't the only thing Ford Motor Company was
responsible for.
Indubitably, the company wronged the consumers and passengers by violating their rights to not be
killed in a car fire and their right to minimal health

Case Study Of Ford Pinto
Abstract:
This case is about the design of Ford Pinto specifically the gas tank that was in a dangerous place
that would ignite the car in a rear–end collision. The problem is that Ford used a cost–benefit
analysis not to upgrade the fuel system even if it lead to more deaths. This decision by Ford led to
many controversial issuses that relates to safety, risk, and conflict of interest decisions.
Introduction:
The Ford Motor Company (commonly referred to simply as Ford) is an American multinational
automaker headquartered in Dearborn, Michigan, a suburb of Detroit. It was founded by Henry Ford
and incorporated on June 16, 1903. The company sells automobiles and commercial vehicles under
the Ford brand and most luxury cars under the Lincoln ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
We have chosen the cumulative (collective information comparisons) type. The cumulative type of
case studies serve to aggregate information from several sites collected at different times. The idea
behind these studies is the collection of past studies will allow for greater generalization. We choose
this type since the Ford Pinto case is old, so our information will be concentrated on previous
studies. The other types of writing use illustrative examples that typically utilize one or two
instances of an event to show the existing situation which is not possible in our

Ethical Pintos
Sukhsharn Kaur Johal Phil 4401 Dr. Nagel 2 September 2015 The article "Ethical Responsibilities
of Engineers in Large Organizations: The Pinto Case" by Richard T. De George was an intriguing
one to read. It all started on August 1978 when three girls died of burns that were caused when their
1973 Pinto was hit by a van and as a result was rammed violently onto traffic. Ford, who produces
Pintos, was charged with three counts of reckless homicide by the State prosecutor. The jury came
up with the verdict of not guilty. After the trial, it was discovered that Ford needed an additional part
that costed $6.65 and this part would make the vehicle safer. Ford was presented with this
information from the engineers but made an administrative decision

Ford Pinto Essay
The Ford Motor Company faced a number of ethical dilemmas during the production of the Ford
Pinto. There was a time when the "made in Japan" label brought a predictable smirk of superiority to
the face of most Americans. Most Japanese products were not only low in quality but also in price.
By the late 1960's, an invasion of foreign–made goods had distressed the U.S industry. Detroit was
beginning to panic because the Japanese and the German's were starting to devour more of the
subcompact auto market. Ford Motor Company chose to meet what they considered "a threat" from
abroad, head on. The executives of Ford decided to produce the Pinto in 1968. The Pinto weighing
no more than 2,000 pounds and costing no more than $2,000, was known inside ... Show more
In the first 11 carefully coordinated crashes that were conducted, in all but three of them, gas tanks
ruptured and often burst into flames. The three that did not result in fires had prototype safety
devices developed by engineers while working with suppliers. The most sufficient was the use of a
self–sealing fuel tank produced by Goodyear. Even though the exterior of the tank would rupture,
there was no fuel spilled preventing a fire. The estimated cost of self–sealing fuel tanks would have
cost $5.08 per car. Another method that had been used was an extra steel plate attached to the rear of
the car just behind the bumper. This would help to isolate the gas tank from direct contact during
impact. The steel could successfully ward off a blow at 30 mph, and helped to keep the tank intact.
Experts felt that the part could have costed up to $11 per car to install. Engineers discovered that the
bulk of ruptures were caused by two factors: 1) the filler neck breaking off and allowing fuel to pour
out and 2) the tank being penetrated by contact with the differential mounting bolts and right shock

A ball of fires comes from the small compact car called the Ford Pinto. Just a touch of the bumper
will cause injury and death to happen in this car. This car has been known through time to be a very
dangerous car. The history of the car, the way the car was designed and made, and the aftermath and
problems it caused prove why this car is such a dangerous car. The car itself was the start of an era
for small compact cars.
The idea for the Ford Pinto started in about 1968 when car companies were trying to create small
compact cars for little money. Ford's President at the time, Lee Iaccoca, did not want his company to
sit back and let the Japanese control the small car industry( ). After years of modeling and designing,
the Ford Pinto ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
There were three basic types of the Pinto; the wagon, sedan, and runabout which ranged from 170.8
inches to 180.6 inches in length, 50.6 inches to 52.1 inches in height, and 69.4 inches to 69.7 inches
in width( ). The PInto was a simple car but had one minor flaw in its design; the fuel tank. The Fuel
tank that was installed on the Ford Pinto was arguably the most dangerous fuel tank system known
to man( ). The reason it's the most dangerous fuel system is because it's vulnerable to rear end
collisions. Once a collision has happened the fuel tanks filler neck on the tank would tear off and
pour gasoline on the ground( ). The placement of the tank on the car also cause problems. Once the
car was hit braces, bolts and other sharp metals would puncture the tank and cause spillage there( ).
Ford had tested this problem in crash test to diagnose the car. 8/11 Pintos had a ruptures in the tank
and would cause serious injuries( ). After the test had been analyzed and reviewed Ford saw that
there was a problem with the tank design but to fix the problem they would have to increase the cost
of the car for the public. To fix the problem it would cost 11 dollars more per car to sell and that
would put the cost of the car past there requirment ( ). To determine whether it was a worthy change
to fix the car, a cost– benefit analysis was made( ). A cost–benefit analysis is a comparison of all

Ford Pinto Essay
Amy Bruney
Marketing Ethics
I. Introduction
II. Literature Review
III. Recommendations & Implications for Marketing Managers
IV. Conclusion
V. Sources
INTRODUCTION
"For seven years the Ford Motor Company sold cars in which it knew hundreds of people would
needlessly burn to death." Mark Dowie, Author of Pinto Madness (8)
One of the biggest automotive news stories in the latter part of the 1970's dealt with tales of
exploding Ford Pintos and the considerable awards civil court juries were presenting to victims of
accidents involving the cars. Ford produced the Pinto automobile from 1971 to 1980. Initially the
car sold well, but a defect in the early models made Pintos prone to leaking ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
The gas tank was positioned according to industry standard at the time, between the rear bumper and
the rear axle, but studs protruding from the rear axle would puncture the gas tank. Upon impact, the
fuel filler pipe would break, resulting in spilled gasoline. The Pinto basically turned into a death
trap. Ford crash tested a total of eleven automobiles and eight resulted in potentially catastrophic
situations. The only three that survived had their gas tanks modified prior to testing. (2) Ford was
not in violation of the law in any way and had to make the decision whether to incur a cost to fix the
obvious problem internally. There were several options for the fuel system redesign. The option
most seriously considered would have cost Ford an additional $11 per vehicle. Under the strict
$2000 budget restriction, even this nominal cost seemed large. In addition, Ford had earlier based an
advertising campaign on safety, which failed miserably. Therefore, there was a corporate belief,
attributed to Lee Iacocca himself, of "safety doesn't sell". (2) Taking an ethical approach to the Ford
Pinto case makes accepting the risk/benefit analysis performed by the Ford Motor Company
difficult. In making what seems to be the correct decision based on numbers, Ford in essence

adopted a policy of allowing a certain number of people to die or be injured even though they could
have prevented it. Ford's decision

Essay on The Ford Pinto Case
Business Case (The Ford Pinto)
There was strong competition for Ford in the American small–car market from Volkswagen and
several Japanese companies in the 1960's. To fight the competition, Ford rushed its newest car the
Pinto into production in much less time than is usually required to develop a car. The regular time to
produce an automobile is 43 months but Ford took 25 months only (Satchi, L., 2005). Although Ford
had access to a new design which would decrease the possibility of the Ford Pinto from exploding,
the company chose not to implement the design, which would have cost $11 per car, even though it
had done an analysis showing that the new design would result in 180 less deaths. The company
defended itself on the grounds that ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Ford did not approach the question of redesigning the gas tank to make the car safer versus waiting
another year allowing the foreign market to dominate subcompact vehicles. Their goal was only to
maximize profits. They did not into account the interests of their share holders and when they did
come into consideration, they were analyzed against profits. One has nothing to do with the other.
Their goal should not have been a race to make the most affordable subcompact car. Their focus
should have been to make a subcompact car that was not only most affordable but also the safest
subcompact. They were aware of the dangers associated with the rush production. It would have
made a difference if the $11 savings had been passed on to the customers because they would've
kept their reputation and integrity in tact and possibly gain customers who were not considering the
vehicle. Any rational customer would not have chosen to save $11 to drive a car at the risk of dying.
It is never appropriate to knowingly jeopardize people's lives. That is a criminal act. Their actions
were socially irresponsible, ethically and morally wrong. They did not consider their own reputation
nor did they consider that they represented America in the industry.
As a financial manager at Ford, I am obligated to protect, enhance and promote the profits of the
organization and the decisions I make will reflect my social responsibility. First, I would

Ford Pinto Essay
In regards to the Ford Pinto case, I believe that the decision to stick to the original design was a
selfish and morally wrong decision. Ford chose to endanger the lives of all their customers who
bought the Ford Pinto out of greed. Though Ford was in danger of being beaten by foreign imports,
it is much more important to keep the customers who buy your vehicles safe. Without loyal
customer's, Ford would not be the successful car company that it is, which should call for them to
respect those who have helped them earn their success, their customers. It is also a better option to
take on redesigns and alterations of vehicles if it means that the costumer's can be assured that their
vehicle is safe. Also, the fact that Ford compared human worth to the worth of money, in my
opinion, is disgraceful. I do not believe that you can compare what a living being is worth compared
to paper that is printed daily. Being that Ford took the time to calculate their potential earnings
compared to the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
If Ford would have chosen to move forward with redesigns and alterations of the Pinto, they could
have added safety as a key feature of the vehicle. Though Ford may have lost initial profits, they
may also have sold an increased amount of cars after the fixes were made. However, even if Ford
were to lose profits, it is better to lose money than to lose human lives. By taking lives away from
innocent people, you are riding the world of what could have been the next scientist to make a
breakthrough discovery, the next writer to influence millions of people, or the next President to help
fix foreign relations. Ford should have had more consideration for the people that could potentially
be harmed and killed, and also the families of those victims. The car company should have reasoned
using morals, instead of just thinking about

Gioia Pinto Fire Case
1. Evaluate Gioia's decisions in the Pinto fires case and his later reflections of his decisions form the
standpoint of Hooker's three tests and Rawls' liberty and difference principles. It is difficult to
evaluate Mr. Gioia's decision in the Pinto fire cases because of how he presents himself in his book.
He reminds me of kids who are trying to find their identity. I interpret the way he wrote his book as
a way to separate himself from one of the horrendous practice in the automotive industries, because
he plays no part in allowing the issue to continue. I don't believe he actually admit that he made a
mistake. This is great beginning of this paper. From the Hooker's generalization test standpoint,
Gioia (1992) failed the test,

The Ethics Of Ford Pinto
PINTO FIRES CASE
The assumption that 'it's easy to be ethical' assumes that individuals automatically know that they
are facing an ethical dilemma and that they should simply choose to do the right thing. But decision
makers may not always recognize that they are facing a moral issue. Rarely do decisions come with
waving red flags. Dennis Gioia was recall coordinator at Ford Motor
Company in the early 1970s when the company decided not to recall the Pinto despite dangerous
fires that were killing the occupants of vehicles involved in low–impact rear–end collisions. In his
information and overloaded recall coordinator role, Gioia saw thousands of accident reports, and he
followed a cognitive "script" that helped him decide which ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The means were limited design time and reducing costs. By cutting costs, Ford knowingly created a
product which could prove dangerous and fatal to its consumers. Does Ford's ends justify its means?
Ford did create a sub–compact that sold extremely well and competed fiercely with foreign imports.
The goal of the Ford Pinto was met. The costs of this win were substantial however. The money that
Ford tried to save by not recalling the vehicle was spent when Ford recalled the Pinto, and extra was
spent in compensatory and punitive damages in lawsuits. So the costs that Ford tried to avoid were
incurred anyway along with extra. A similar ethical concept to Utilitarianism is that of Rawl's
Theory of Justice. Within his theories he states that for something to be both ethical and just it must
not infringe on the basic rights and liberties of a person, nor give advantage to any one group but to
all with positions and offers available to all equally. In reference to the Ford Pinto, the second
statement is upheld. The Pinto being a relatively cheap car which was often a starter vehicle, and as
long as a person had the funds and a driver's license, they could own the vehicle. So the design
process general design itself was both fair and ethical to Rawls when regarding the second of his
two theories of justice. The first theory can be up to interpretation. The only rights or liberties that
might have been infringed upon are those of safety

Puritans Ethics And The Pinto Disaster
It is important to note, however, that Puritans' ethics have been the catalyst that accelerated the
growth of capitalism (Weber 107). At the same time, Puritans' ethics initiated a formal and
instrumental approach to life (115). In the case of the Pinto Disaster, Weber would claim that Ford's
decision to settle in lawsuits, instead of installing the safety gadget, is a mathematical approach to
life. Firstly, Weber would argue that bureaucracies' structure has created a hierarchy system where
workers are powerless and have fewer obligations. According to Dowie, the Pinto engineer did
notify his superior about the defected product with a solution (16). However, the powerless engineer
did not have the approval of his superior make the necessary

Ford Pinto

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Kendra Cote

More from Kendra Cote (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Ford Pinto