The Ford Pinto Ethical Dilemma

1442 Words6 Pages
The Ford Pinto Ethical Dilemma Written by Learning Team B; C. Riley, F. Foster, K. Jankoski, M. Riner, & R. Price Organizational Ethics and Social Responsibility 16 Aug 2010 Paul A. Kramer The Ford Pinto Ethical Dilemma In this presentation, a very important case that transpired from 1971 to 1978 with the Ford Motor Company, under the leadership of Mr. Lee Iacocca, CEO will be explored. During that time the CEO of Ford wanted to manufacture a vehicle to keep up with the competition that was going on with other manufactures. The Ford Company experienced many tragic issues with this vehicle having to pay millions of dollars in lawsuits. This was due to their negligence in not following the proper inspection procedures. It…show more content…
The engineers had a moral obligation to blow the whistle on Ford. They let Ford continue to produce the Pinto. It appears that the external pressures on possibly losing their job or having a negative impact at work were strong enough for them to take an immoral stance on the safety of the vehicle. The final external pressure that affected this decision was the lobbying of congress. Ford acted as the external influence in this side of the case. Ford sent their lobbyist to stop the bad publicity and the future damages that Ford would have to pay. The lobbyists were to convince Congress that Ford was not at fault when they knew that they had made a dangerous car. Ford again acted unethically by sending the lobbyists. A lot of things have change over the years, but has the value of human life. This is the one item about this case that is the most troublesome. As Lisa Newton (2007) explains “[i]t was a cost-benefit analysis that placed a dollar value on a human life, estimated the probability of fatal accident, estimated the amount of money needed to settle a lawsuit for loss of life, estimated the amount of money needed to do the refitting so that there would not be that loss of life-and concluded that it was more economical to let the people die and settle the suits afterward” (pg. 292). There is no justification for this act even though it was thirty years ago. A company no matter the year
Open Document