Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Factors that influence ethical decision making
Parameters of ethical decision making approaches
Parameters of ethical decision making approaches
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Factors that influence ethical decision making
The Ford Pinto was first introduced in 1971 and built through 1980, by the Ford Motor Company. The little carefree car became a focus of a major scandal when it was alleged that the car's design permitted its fuel tank to be undoubtedly damaged in the event of a rear-end collision. (Ford Pinto) This flaw resulted in deadly fires and explosions through early production of the model. A number of critics have claimed that the Ford Motor Company acted unethically in producing the Ford Pinto; knowing that it could have been made safer by adding an inexpensive part. The decision from Ford not to recall any of its cars before the design flaw was discovered and taking the chance with their consumer’s life can be proven unethical by using the Hedonistic
Purity goes to pain, 50 lawsuits were brought against Ford, and Forbes lists it on “Worst Cars of All Time” in 2004. (Linert) Propinquity goes to Ford and pleasure, Ford felt pleasure as soon as the first Pinto sold, whereas, lawsuits and deaths took place over years; the car was recalled in 1978, seven years after the release date. (DeGeorge 299) Fecundity is in pains favor, because if automakers keep cutting corners to save a few dollars, the welfare of ever driver, passenger and pedestrian is at risk. Extent also benefits pain, because cutting corners on safety wouldn’t just affect a few executives, but anyone in or
After weighing out all the factors, pain wins with five categorizes compared to pleasures two, this makes Fords decision to release the Pinto early, without the proper safety features, unethical. On the other hand, some people would lobby that Ford did nothing wrong releasing the Pinto early and knowing it had a major safety flaw. There was no National Highway Traffic Safety Administration rear-end impact standards at the time,(DeGeorge 298) so Ford did not break any safety laws. Also, Ford was found innocent of criminal homicide in the Ulrich case.(Waters) Even though both of these statements are true, before the release of the Pinto, Ford was an active lobbyist against new safety standards; this is a big red flag. (Trevion, 66) Ford may have won in the Ulrich case, but they lost many other cases including Grimshaw vs. Ford Motor Co. (Ford Pinto) Putting it all together, the Ford Pinto was the biggest mistake Ford Motor Company has ever made. Lives were lost and Ford will forever have a blemish on their reputation. Even though there were some pleasure points through the Hedonistic Calculus, there were more pain points. This equation determined that Ford was unethical when it came to the production and
Belanger v. Swift Transportation, Inc. is a case concerning the qualified privilege of employers. In this case, Belanger, a former employee of Swift Transportation, sued the company for libel in regard to posting the reason for his termination on a government data website accessible to other potential employers. Swift has a policy of automatic termination if a driver is in an accident, unless it can be proved that it was unpreventable. When Belanger rear ended another vehicle while driving for Swift, the company determined the accident was preventable, while Belanger maintained it was not. Upon his termination, Swift posted on a database website for promoting highway safety that he was fired because he “did not meet the company’s safety standards,” (Melvin, 2015, p. 265), causing Belanger to sue the company.
Simms believes that the SUV’s we’ve grown to love are dangerous and polluting. Simms describes just how damaging he believes SUV’s to be with a quote, set to become, “one of the world’s most common causes of death and disability-ahead of TB, HIV, and war” (qtd. in Simms 542). This is a very strong statement; so strong that it causes the reader to question the source. It also promotes an emotional appeal to the reader. Death, war, and HIV are very serious issues; comparing them to SUV’s causes a need for attention.
This trend began to ebb with MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., and the ruling by an appellate court that favored MacPherson, the plaintiff. This case, however, was more a result of political expediency than a reasoned verdict based on fact. In this case, the plaintiff argued that his 1911 Baby Buick had a defective wheel that collapsed while traveling at a low rate of speed, hitting a telephone pole, and pinning him under, breaking his wrist and cracking several ribs; however, the facts of the trial revealed that the accident as it was recounted by the plaintiff was a physical impossibility, but due to the increasing pressures to dispense with privity rulings, the court imposed on the defendant the responsibility of inspecting and discarding defective wheels, implying causal negligence even though the plaintiff had driven the vehicle for more than a year in less than perfect road conditions without a mishap. (MacPherson Tort Story; MacPherson v. Buick Motor Company: Simplifying the Facts While Reshaping the Law, Pg.
Ask any ten enthusiasts what two cars epitomize the concept of an automotive rivalry and at least nine of them will instantly conclude the Chevrolet or Chevy Camaro and the Ford Mustang, two cars that make up part of a small automotive segment known as Pony Cars. These fire-breathing leviathans of the street snarl with guttural reverberations boastfully announcing their presence with the mere turn of key. For nearly five decades, these mechanical beasts have captured the imagination of the American driver and ignited the most contentious debate in automotive history: Which car reigns supreme? Muscle car buffs waste no time quoting sales figures, vehicle performance, track times, or even mundane statistics like vehicle dimensions or available colors to simply justify their support for one model over the other. As this debate rages on, the makers of these brutes fan the flames through targeted marketing strategies, consumer promotions, pricing strategies, and creative advertising all in effort to win an automotive war the likes of which have never been seen or fought before (Davenport, 2013).
Ford, General Motors, and Chrysler surfaced as the “Big Three” auto companies heading into the 1920’s. The invention of the automobile revolutionized transportation; by the 1920’s cars made places easier to access to people. Many of the traditionalists did approve of the automobiles, but some of them just favored the old way of walking places. The traditionalists were fearful of car accidents with the upbringing of the automobile. During the 1920’s a driver’s license was not needed in most states, and there weren’t really any “rules of the road” quite yet. No signs, signals, or traffic guards, and the roads were not ready for automobiles or pedestrians yet. Some traditionalists were not for these life risking ways of automobiles, but they were accepted among most for an increase in transportation and their easy access to even those who were not rich. The modernists at this time were known to want the exciting new changes and risks, so they were all for the automobiles. This rebellious group knew the advancement of technology with automobiles meant transportation to explore, and not be stuck in the same places within walking distance. The 1920’s
Flink’s Three stages of American automobile consciousness fully express the progress of the whole automobile industry. From the first model T to the automatic production, it gives me an intuitive feeling of the automobile history from a big picture. On the other hand, Kline and Pinch focus more on a certain group of people--farmers or people who live in the rural area, they use it as an entry point to talk about automobile, alone with the role and duty transition between male and
With this chapter comes about a lot of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is the word we use to describe something that bring the most amount of pleasure and the least amount of pain for everyone involved. It also takes the consequences into effect. I say
Henry Ford wanted to build a high-quality automobile that would be affordable to everyday people. He believed the way to do this was to manufacture one model in huge quantities. Henry Ford searched the world for the best materials he could find at the cheapest cost. During a car race in Florida , Ford examined the wreckage of a French car and noticed that many of its parts were made of a metal that was lighter but stronger than what was being used in American cars. No one in the U.S. knew how to make this French steel a vanadium alloy. As part of the preproduction process for the Model T, Ford imported an expert who helped him build a steel mill. As a result, the only cars in the world to utilize vanadium steel in the next five years would be French luxury cars and the Model T. Ford realizes he needs another efficient way to produce the cars in lower prices. Ford saw what he was missing was 4 principles that would help with the Model T which was interchangeable parts, continuous flow, division of labor, and reducing wasted
Greed is the root to evil or at least the motivation behind some corporations making a good, ethical decision. The Ford Motor Company fell into a trap of greed that would cost many human lives. Before the disaster of the Pinto Fires, Ford had a reputation as being the safety pioneer in the automobile industry with additions such as the seat belts. However, as the invention of small cars began to take emerge Ford began to loose market shares to the foreign market. Ford had to do something and quick.
One image which Daniels frequently co-opts to highlight Fords’ ironic approach to its workers is the manufacturer’s slogan. Quality appears to be job one in Daniels’s portrayal so long as it does not impede on the bottom line. Buying a cheap radio from a merchant who assures him that he is purchasing "Quality Merchandise", (author’s italics) the author curses the mal-functioning machine, remarking to himself that he should "know all about quality by how." The shrewdly placed slash in the title of "Quality/Control", again highlights the company’s ambivalent stance on quality versus profits. In the poem,...
Examining the case with the Utilitarian mindset, we consider the overall positivity of the action vs the positivity of the alternative. In this case, what is the measure
Early 20th century, the automobile was vastly used by the rich, due to its high pricing and complicated machinery models. Most models required a chauffeur acquainted with the individual model’s mechanics. This sole reason drove Henry Ford’s determination to build a simple, yet reliable and affordable car. In the article “Henry Ford - An Impact Felt”
According to Steve Gorman of Thomson Reuters, the world’s largest international multimedia news agency, 40 consumers, and businesses filed legal claims against Toyota. The claims involved financial losses including diminished vehicle principles steaming from complaints of Toyota cars racing out of manage (Gorman, S. 2010). An international company memo cited that a reliable (brake override) option in 2007, three years prior to the safety feature made standard.
...other manufacturers to copy his work and put all the safety and performance parts on their vehicles also. Henry’s labor for the worker has turned over to forty to sixty percent in his company, therefor in return the company’s workers has gotten a bigger turn out because of more pay.
When talking about pleasure there needs to be a distinction between the quality and the quantity. While having many different kinds of pleasures can be considered a good thing, one is more likely to favor quality over quantity. With this distinction in mind, one is more able to quantify their pleasures as higher or lesser pleasures by ascertaining the quality of them. This facilitates the ability to achieve the fundamental moral value that is happiness. In his book Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill offers a defining of utility as pleasure or the absence of pain in addition to the Utility Principle, where “Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (Mill 7). Through this principle, Mill emphasizes that it is not enough to show that happiness is an end in itself. Mill’s hedonistic view is one in support of the claim that every human action is motivated by or ought to be motivated by the pursuit of pleasure.