This case is about Chinese manufactures producing dangerous products. The biggest problems are because of dangerous chemicals, injuries, choking, electric shocks and strangulation, with children's toys at the top of the danger list. Chinese products are again accounting for most of the potentially dangerous items and the EU nations are issuing safety alerts on consumer products more than ever. An example is the toy giant Mattel. In 2007, it had to recall millions of potentially dangerous toys made in China over fears about unsafe levels of lead in paint and loose magnets. This did not restore customer confidence in Chinese goods after a series of scandals involving manufacturers’ safety standard.
This leads to a morally hard case:
Is it morally permissible for the EU to forbid companies to import products from Chinese toys manufacturers, given that the toys are dangerous to children, but taking into account that this will harm the welfare of the Chinese families?
Since the toys are dangerous to children and in accordance with the right-based theories you might say that the EU should forbid companies to import products made in China. Children have the right to personal security and a right to an adequate standard of living. Selling the dangerous toys, means a violation of those basic rights.
On the other hand, when the EU forbids the import of toys, this will harm the welfare of the Chinese families. They have less money to spend and they might not be able to pay their mortgage anymore. From an utilitarian point of view this is the morally right action, since it brings about the highest possible overall utility. The Chinese manufacturers and families are better off in contrast to the smaller amount of children receiving the toys.
In my opinion, the EU should forbid the toys import, since many children’s lives are being at risk. It is a matter of life and death, which is not the case with the employees and their families. Yes, they need to find another job, maybe move to a smaller house, but at least those consequences are morally acceptable.
S985590
7 comments:
During these years, Chinese manufactures suffer many big problems by producing dangerous toys. As the writer said some companies must recall millions of toys produced by Chinese manufactures. It is not only dangerous for babies but also a big loss for toy companies.
The writer said EU should forbid companies to import produces made in China because their products are dangerous for babies. In my opinion, the reason why the companies choose Chinese manufacturers is that their low cost of labor and material which EU market cannot found. There are some gaps between Chinese and EU quality of toys, some Chinese manufacturers did not know about the level of quality at the beginning, EU companies should tell them at the beginning of the product process. EU companies morally have responsibility on product quality. Not recalling after they found there are some dangerous problems
499432
The EU should not forbid the import of toys from Chinese manufacturers, so I disagree with the writer. This action is morally wrong, because it will have many bad consequences for both societies (China/EU) looking from the functional perspective of morality. Acting as such will harm the efficiency of the markets, for example because of the trade barriers China’s economic growth is opposed and people will lose their jobs. The retail-companies in the EU will also be harmed in a financial way. If trade barriers are set between China and the EU for toys, the principle of freedom (of trade) will be neglected, which is of special importance in the functional perspective. Furthermore, this perspective is a non-perfectionist one, which means that it is just about following the rules. So if the Chinese manufacturers just follow these (EU) rules, both societies will benefit, socially and economically.
ANR: 536273
The case depicts the safety standards issue entirely to black and white. It does not realize we simply cannot go without imports from China. They make everything now. A complete ban on Chinese manufactured toys therefore is infeasible. Besides that, the EU cannot forbid companies to import products from China.
Another solution to this problem is for the EU to have the western companies obey the safety standard, and have them impose them on the Chinese manufactures, which is what should have been done in the first place. When companies only order with the requirement the goods are subject to the safety standards we would not have this problem. The EU could also take a proactive approach, and contact the Chinese government concerning these issues. They could discuss having the Chinese government adopt the same or similar standards.
A company however, has the duty to recall products after they have been found harmful, at least from a moral point of view. If they want to continue to conduct business they should be wise and recall these kind of products to save their name.
ANR: 516459
On another note. The other goods which were tested harmful in 2007 for example included a shipment of mattresses. These containers are filled with a gas to exterminate bugs and other animals which might be in the container.
This actually is a requirement of for example the EU.
Usually this gas evaporates on the way to Europe or anywhere else. However, in this particular shipment the gas was absorbed by the mattresses.
I have different opinion as writer.
Firstly, according to right theory, EU has the right to protect Children’s safety both in mental and physical. It is not means forbiden import all Chinese toys is morally right,but it is morally right for EU forbiden import dangerous toys from all areas.
Secondly, The dangerous toys can be defined in two: one the toys which hurt children by its function such as Simulation pistol. Another is the toys which hurt children because of its materials, such as toys made by toxic plastic. As one commentor said, there are different quality levels of toys between EU and China. Therefore, when EU import toy from China, EU is responsible to train Chinese supplier what is the safety toys in EU. Although it might increase cost for Chinese supplier in order to meet EU requrments, it should not really make Chinese supplir difficult to be survive therefore, it cannot reallly hurt Chinese familiy. And, it is really helpful for Chinese supplier to raise their awareness of what is safety toys. All kids who have the chinese toys will be benifit because of this.
For recall case, it is morally right to do so. And the responsiblity should be shared by both Chinese supplier (make safety products)and EU seller(order safety products)
Above all, this case might not be analysised as Moral Hard Case.
ANR 823205
It is true that by cutting off Mattel, this would influence the life of Chinese families, but the company should be looked as a whole. They should of course strive for profit maximization, but they also have to take Corporate Social Responsibility into account. They cannot just do something morally right (striving for self profit maximization) by doing something morally wrong (producing dangerous toys.) They point here is not just to cut the jobs of these people, or for them to find new jobs, but the company has to be restructure, and redefine their supply chain producing products that are safe for children. They cannot threaten the right to life of children abroad just to earn revenues. They can also earn revenues by producing toys that will not harm the lives of these children even if it means incurring lower revenues.
s690159
Post a Comment