Legal Environment

The case of Ford Pinto falls under white collar and organized crimes. As a matter of definition, white collar offenses imply felonies that are consigned by company officials when dispensing their services. That is the officials or business firms commit a sequence of illegal acts by applying strategies that are not violent to achieve individual or corporate gains. Organized crimes take form of white collar offense. That is occurs also in the business environment. This one constitutes producing unlawful goods and services to the public with view of accruing huge profits without considering the safety of the users.

Therefore in the case of Ford Pinto, the manager that is Lee Iacocca should be charged for the offenses committed under his supervision (Roger, 2007). According to the provisions in the law, companies are legally responsible for the felony committed by their representatives and workers. And such illegal responsibility is imposed after the prosecutor has proved that the company barred the act, endorsed approval to or had the information of the illegal acts by individuals in charge of supervision. In this lawsuit, Lee Iacocca and his engineers recognized the major fault in the car’s design, but went a head with the process of manufacturing.

They had an intention of acquiring the profits for the company and compete with other vehicle designers without considering the safety of clients. Under the crime legal responsibility, corporate managers and administrators are individually responsible for the offenses they commit. Lee Iacocca had provisions for the plan of the car that were uncompromisable (Frank & Roger, 2009). Any alterations to provide additional protection for the client that brought the car closer to the Iacocca’s restrictions were discarded. Therefore he should be charged because certain conditions required in the manufacture of vehicles were not met.

For example the vehicle should have taken forty three months of planning and manufacturing but instead took only twenty five months. Also Pinto’s green book had other objectives included while the safety of the clients was not included. Lee Iacocca was possessed with the mentality that safety doesn’t provide profits. So the production of the vehicle was a technique for tragedy. The production of the Ford Pinto was like an organized offense because the engineers under the supervision of Lee Iacocca went a head with the manufacturing process while knowing the tragedy they were creating.

In this situation, they ought to face the charges for the offense they committed. This is true because managers and administrators can be held responsible for the deeds of the workers under their leadership. The court has the ability to inflict an offensive legal responsibility on a company’s administrator. This is done irrespective of the official’s participation, direction or recognition of the illegal contravention. In this capacity, Lee Iacocca and also the designers of the Ford Company should be held responsible for the accident as they knew the weakness of the vehicle while they were still in the process of manufacturing.

Even under pressure by the government to recollect all the cars, the company failed to do so. The engineers were under manipulation of officials so they kept silent about the risky cars. This implies that it was an organized crime and should have been charged. The Ford Company resolved that it was unprofitable to recall Pinto cars. It defied the orders from the government which is a crime as it bars the government’s efforts in ensuring the safety of persons.

The company found it more beneficial to compensate the victims of an accident than to recollect the pinto vehicles for repairs (Frank & Roger, 2009).

References Frank, B. & Roger, M. (2009). The Lawful Atmosphere for Business: Moral, Regulatory, International and E-Commerce Matters. New York: Prentice Hall. Retrieved January 16, 2009, from: www. fordpinto. com/blowup. htm Roger L. M. (2007). The West’s Lawful Atmosphere for Business. Chicago: John Wiley & Sons. Retrieved January 16, 2009, from: www. huppi. com/kangaroo/Pinto. htm