Ford Pinto Case Study: Corporate Greed, Ethics, and Economics

This essay delves into the Ford Pinto disaster, a critical case study highlighting corporate greed and its economic consequences. It examines Ford's actions, driven by profit maximization and the rush to produce a cheap, lightweight car, which led to design flaws, specifically the dangerous placement of the fuel tank. The essay explores the ethical implications of Ford's decisions, including the company's knowledge of the design flaws and its delayed response to recall the vehicles, even after the scandal was exposed. The analysis incorporates a Marxist perspective, viewing Ford as a capitalist entity prioritizing profits over human safety and exploiting the public. This perspective highlights the power dynamics and the potential for companies to act with impunity. The essay also draws parallels with other companies like Nestle that engage in unethical practices. The essay concludes by highlighting the strengths of the Marxist analysis in this context, while also acknowledging its limitations in explaining the eventual recall of the vehicles.

Running head: FORD PINTO DISASTER
Ford Pinto disaster
Student’s Name
Institution
Date

FORD PINTO DISASTER 2
Introduction
Ford Pinto disaster occurred out of greed for profits. Ford had promised the customers a
relatively light and cheap car. It also promised to design a car that would not consume much gas.
As a way of fulfilling its promises, Ford ended up designing engine using lightweight, flimsy
materials to cut costs. In addition, because the engineers were rushing to deliver the model as
soon as possible, they ended up not utilizing the right layout component. As a result, any rear-
end collision could puncture the gas tank and the cases of car fires involving Ford Pinto rose
significantly. It is revealed that Ford knew of the loophole but it went on to manufacture the cars.
In fact even with clear knowledge about what was going, Ford did not attempted to recall the
vehicles. Even after Richard Grimshaw exposed the scandal, Ford didn’t take swift action to
recall the cars. It took more than 8 years for Ford to act and recall the vehicles.
Marxists theory could consider Ford as a company with capitalistic features such as
power and hence ready to take advantage of the innocent majority just for profit. Ford, according
to Marxists, was not worried about the legal repercussion because it had financial muscle and
more influence (White, Eisler & Haines, 2018). The theory would consider the public as a group
of proletariat who have no say and are just at the mercy of Ford. Marxists would consider Ford
as an oppressor, exploiter and as a criminal. Marxism takes the realization of the free and
comprehensive development of mankind and the emancipation of all mankind as the
responsibility, and uses scientific theories as the ultimate guide to the establishment of an ideal
society without oppression, exploitation, equality for all, and freedom for all. Marxism believes
that the free and comprehensive development of man is that every member of the society can
develop and exert all his talents and powers completely and freely, and will not endanger the
basic conditions of this society (In Jennings, 2016). The essence of Marxism is a theory that

FORD PINTO DISASTER 3
serves the practice of the proletariat and the masses in transforming the world. Consequently, the
fact that Ford took several years to recall the defective cars justifies the arguments by Marx,
which demonstrate that some laws are enacted to fetter the activities of specific capitalists
(Greenberg, 2010).
One of the strengths of the explanation is that Ford Company practically demonstrated
that with power, one can have high immunity against law. The Ford Company was powerful
during that time and could suppress the charges easily (White, Eisler & Haines, 2018). The
second strength is that Marx's entire worldview is not a doctrine, but a method. It does not
provide ready-made dogma, but a starting point for further research and a method for such
research. Marxism inherently has the basic requirements of emancipating the mind, seeking truth
from facts, and advancing with the times. It is opposed to following the rules of the old and the
old, sticking to the unity of subjectivity and objectivity, the unity of theory and practice, the
unity of inheritance and innovation, and provides us with an understanding of the world and a
transformation of the world. The only weakness of the theory is that it may not justify why Ford
ended up recalling the cars.
Another company that exhibit the same features as Ford is Nestle. Nestle, according to
Morris (2014) uses child labor to achieve its production goals and cut labor costs. The company
exhibit capitalist’s tendencies just like Ford. Such tendencies forces the company to violate
human rights.

FORD PINTO DISASTER 4
Reference
Greenberg, D. (2010). Crime and Capitalism: Readings in Marxist Crimonology. Philadelphia:
Temple University Press.
In Jennings, W. G. (2016). The encyclopedia of crime and punishment. Chichester, West Sussex,
UK : Wiley Blackwell
Morris, M. (2014). 10 Famous Companies With A Shocking Human Rights Problem. Retrieved
from: https://listverse.com/2013/11/09/10-famous-companies-with-a-shocking-human-
rights-problem/
White, R., Eisler, L., & Haines, F. (2018). Crime and Criminology: An Introduction to Theory
(3rd edition). Toronto: Oxford University Press.