(Ford) Pinto Madness (Mother Jones article about Ford's deliberate calculations)

[steve2470]

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/1977/09/pinto-madness

One evening in the mid-1960s, Arjay Miller was driving home from his office in Dearborn, Michigan, in the four-door Lincoln Continental that went with his job as president of the Ford Motor Company. On a crowded highway, another car struck his from the rear. The Continental spun around and burst into flames. Because he was wearing a shoulder-strap seat belt, Miller was unharmed by the crash, and because his doors didn't jam he escaped the gasoline-drenched, flaming wreck. But the accident made a vivid impression on him. Several months later, on July 15, 1965, he recounted it to a U.S. Senate subcommittee that was hearing testimony on auto safety legislation. "I still have burning in my mind the image of that gas tank on fire," Miller said. He went on to express an almost passionate interest in controlling fuel-fed fires in cars that crash or roll over. He spoke with excitement about the fabric gas tank Ford was testing at that very moment. "If it proves out," he promised the senators, it will be a feature you will see in our standard cars."

Almost seven years after Miller's testimony, a woman, whom for legal reasons we will call Sandra Gillespie, pulled onto a Minneapolis highway in her new Ford Pinto. Riding with her was a young boy, whom we'll call Robbie Carlton. As she entered a merge lane, Sandra Gillespie's car stalled. Another car rear-ended hers at an impact speed of 28 miles per hour. The Pinto's gas tank ruptured. Vapors from it mixed quickly with the air in the passenger compartment. A spark ignited the mixture and the car exploded in a ball of fire. Sandra died in agony a few hours later in an emergency hospital. Her passenger, 13-year-old Robbie Carlton, is still alive; he has just come home from another futile operation aimed at grafting a new ear and nose from skin on the few unscarred portions of his badly burned body. (This accident is real; the details are from police reports.)

Why did Sandra Gillespie's Ford Pinto catch fire so easily, seven years after Ford's Arjay Miller made his apparently sincere pronouncements—the same seven years that brought more safety improvements to cars than any other period in automotive history? An extensive investigation by Mother Jones over the past six months has found these answers:

Fighting strong competition from Volkswagen for the lucrative small-car market, the Ford Motor Company rushed the Pinto into production in much less than the usual time.

much more at link

In large corporations, money and profits trump human life. This is Exhibit A.

[MrScorpio]

1. Kickage nt

[steve2470]

2. thanks, hope you are well MrS, love your posts in AA! nt

[MrScorpio]

3. Doing great

Got my show on right now!

It's a party!

[KittyWampus]

4. classic example of corporate management ignoring public safety. And the men who made decisions

that killed people even while KNOWING it was dangerous are not held liable.

[steve2470]

5. so true! nt

[Xipe Totec]

6. Fight Club - The Formula

[Adrahil]

7. What level of risk is acceptable?

Do you think there should be an "no expense spared" standard? What is a product or activity cannot be made completely safe?

What's the line?

[Fumesucker]

10. With the Pinto the line was $11 per car

users.wfu.edu/palmitar/Law&Valuation/.../Leggett-pinto.html

What is your life worth to you?

[Adrahil]

15. That's not an on-point question.

What dollar value would have been acceptable to you?

It may seem cold to you, but every major product you use has gone through a similar analysis. To NOT do that kind of analysis would be irresponsible. Yes. When building something, companies DO do a cost/benefit analysis on safety matters. Happens every friggin' day. If the standard was "spare no expense," some things would be ridiculously expensive, and others simply unavailable.

[GeorgeGist]

25. Why don't you enlighten us.

What dollar value would have been acceptable to you?

[LanternWaste]

11. 1 in 1,000,000 as the level of ‘acceptable risk’ at which no further improvements in safety need to

1 (not-at-fault by individual) in 1000 as the ‘ tolerable risk’ for any substantial category of normative engagement for any large part of a typical individual's daily interaction.
1 in 10,000 as the ‘maximum tolerable risk’ for members of the public.
1 in 100,000 as the ‘maximum tolerable risk’ for members of the public.
1 in 1,000,000 as the level of ‘acceptable risk’ at which no further improvements in safety need to be made.

(Source: World Health Org.)

[Adrahil]

14. Interesting. In aviation, the standard in 1 in 10,000,000

I think a lot of folks here seem to think ANY risk is unacceptable.

[LanternWaste]

19. I don't believe that to be the case...

" think a lot of folks here seem to think ANY risk is unacceptable..."

I don't believe that to be the case... as humans we often project the most absurd arguments onto other people to better validate our own biases (formally known as the Fallacy of False Attribution).

[Adrahil]

22. Well, look at the title of this thread....

The OP appears to be APPALLED that a company would be aware of a risk and be aware of it's potential dollar cost and their decision that that level of risk is acceptable. Interestingly enough, subsequent analysis shows that the Pinto was about average for fire fatalities among all cars and only slightly above average for it's class, being in fact better than some other models, such as the Datsun 1200/210, Toyota Corolla and VW Beetle.

[LisaM]

28. It always seemed to me....

that the Japanese car companies were given a total pass on safety features. I read an interesting article once claiming that Ralph Nader was somewhat responsible for derailing the small car industry in Detroit after he wrote "Unsafe at Any Speed". So the Corvair - yes, probably unsafe, not arguing otherwise - was taken off the market, a few years later the TINY Honda Civic was introduced with nary a peep from Nader, and then the U.S. car companies were blamed for not responding to consumers' wishes for a fuel-efficient small car.


(Takes a while to load....)

[Logical]

37. You sure know what "absurd" posts look like! Yours! Nt

[pnwmom]

17. It is unacceptable for a corporation to not disclose a hidden danger to their product

that could result in a fatality, even if the risk is extremely small. They should disclose and allow the customer to decide whether to take that risk.

A "no swimming" sign doesn't disclose that a tourist could be at risk of an alligator attack if he was standing six feet away from the water. Neither do tables and chairs placed even closer than that to the edge of the lagoon.

[Adrahil]

20. Should they list the possibility of the failure of ANY safety-critical component?

Should you have to sign a waiver noting every possible way an airplane can fail before boarding?

Sorry this isn't a reasonable standard. I agree Disney should post signs. Today they announced they will.

[pnwmom]

21. No. Only the serious ones that the corporation knows about and aren't obvious to the customers.

Everyone knows that a plane is made of many parts that could fail and the plane could fall out of the sky.

But many out of state and foreign visitors do not know of the risk of alligators in the man-made Disney lagoons, where people go so their children can have fun in a safe environment.

[Adrahil]

23. I agree they should post signs. But let's face it...

the risk for an alligator attack HAS been historically extremely small.

[pnwmom]

24. Did you read any of the articles about the fact that some new bungalows

built over the water -- that just opened a year ago -- have been drawing more alligators to the area? Reports have been made to the management that the occupants have been feeding the alligators from their balconies -- a practice that is illegal because it causes alligators to regard humans as a food source. But Disney hasn't taken any measures to stop this. One manager even referred to the alligators as "resident pets."

So the historical risk doesn't predict the risk of the current environment.

[farleftlib]

8. I remember that. Yes I'm that old.

Pintos were the punchline to many jokes only they weren't funny like ha-ha funny.

One of our neighbors had one when I was growing up - a divorced mom with two kids and
it was the only car she could afford. We worried about them until she finally got rid of that
car and got a new one -- a Gremlin. No lie! She used to deliberately leave it unlocked hoping
someone would steal it and she could get the insurance money. No such luck.

[steve2470]

9. Gremlins, now THAT was a piece of work

Yes I remember this case also. I was completely horrified at the time.

[PasadenaTrudy]

35. We had a Gremlin

Big ass 8 under the hood. Fun car!

[PJMcK]

27. I'm that old, too

But I still have some memory left and I think I recall that at trial it was discovered that Ford had decided that it was less expensive to pay for any wrongful death lawsuits than to fix the design and issue a corrective recall. I think that evidence (it was an internal memo) sealed the case for the plaintiffs.

Here's a complete history of the vehicle:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto

[Manifestor_of_Light]

32. The lawyers I knew called the Pinto "the Molotov" for burning up, as in Molotov cocktail (bomb).

[PJMcK]

33. The sick side of me loves that! (n/t)

[Omaha Steve]

12. Thanks for posting

K&R!

OS

[steve2470]

13. my pleasure

People need to understand that, yes indeed, MONEY AND PROFITS trump human life at the highest level of major corporations. It's why they exist. To make as much money as possible for the investors.

[pnwmom]

16. Thank you. This is very relevant to the $75 billion Disney corporation's

decision not to warn guests about the potential dangers posed by the alligators in the lagoons on their properties.

[steve2470]

18. my pleasure! nt

[tonyt53]

26. I dated a girl that bought a new Pinto in 1973. She kept it for about a year and traded it in.

The car was a piece of crap. Always something wrong. It was still under warranty when she got rid of it.

[sarge43]

31. I had a 76 Pinto

It lasted about 3 years before it fell apart. Ford: Fix or repair daily.

[JustAnotherGen]

29. Great OP steve!

[steve2470]

30. thank you nt

[AllyCat]

34. Profits before people. It's the corporate way.

[steve2470]

36. overnight kick nt

[steve2470]

38. last kick nt

[seabeckind]

39. I remember the old Class Action movie

Seems like few other people do. In fact wasn't there an anti-class action being done in the SCOTUS? (http://www.thenation.com/article/the-death-of-the-class-action-lawsuit/)

Class action: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101590/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_22

How's that GM ignition switch working out? How many people died before it became an issue?

How about the acceleration problem? Did you know that the controllers in quite a few cars are made by the same parts supplier? And you're not allowed to see the code in it?

And then the airbag thing. Whatever happened to parts coming from different suppliers? I think with the big M&A and the auto companies divesting their parts plants might have had something to do with it.

Good thing we have gov't watchdogs. Too bad they get their steaks from the corporations.

How's the campaigns going? Gonna be some big shakeups coming.... (not)