Mattel and Toy Safety Essay Example for Free

Mattel and victimize Safety EssayFor the better part of 30 historic period now, corporate executives have strugg direct with the issue of the firms certificate of indebtedness to its society. Early on it was argued by some that the corporations sole responsibility was to return a maximum financial return to shareholders. It became quickly apparent to everyone, however, that this pursuit of financial hit had to take place within the laws of the land.Though social activist groups and others through pop out the 1960s advocated a broader whimsicality of corporate responsibility, it was not until the authoritative social legislation of the early 1970s that this message became indelibly make water as a result of the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Equal Employment prospect Commission (EEOC), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). These new goernmental bodies established that nation al public policy now officially recognized the environment, employees, and consumers to be significant and accredited stakeholders of business. From that time on, corporate executives have had to wrestle with how they balance their commitments to the corporations owners with their obligations to an ever-broadening group of stakeholders who claim both legal and respectable rights. A. B. Carroll, (1991). In this paper I will discuss the issue of swindle golosh in part to Mattel, Inc. , one of the worlds leading flirt makers.Mattel had ordered a series of recalls of childrens playthings that had been found to be coated with lead paint. The toy recalls had alarmed parents and consumer activists, as well as the toy industry, retailers who marketed their proceedss, and product guard duty regulators. I will address the delineateing circumstances that involved Mattel and their safety issues. Do I conceive that Mattel acted in a socially responsible and ethical manner with regard to the safety of its toys? wherefore or why not? What should or could Mattel have done differently, if anything?Who or what do I believe was responsible for the fact that children were exposed to potentially dangerous toys and why? What is the better(p) expressive style to ensure the safety of childrens toys? In responding, I will consider how the following groups would answer this question government regulators (in the U. S. and China) consumer advocates, the toy industry, childrens product retailers and standard-setting organizations. What might explain the differences in their point of view? What do you think is the best way for society to protect children from harmful toys?Specifically, what are the appropriate roles for various stakeholders in this process? Mattel fellowship is the largest toy company in the world, a publicly traded organization with a market capitalization of over $6. 5 billion, employing approximately 36,000 people worldwide in 42 countries. Their produc ts are sold in one hundred fifty nations In the summer of 2007, Mattel suffered a major product recall incident. The first recall was the result of seller failure in China where traces of lead paint were discovered on 83 different products. This led to a recall of 1. 5 million items worldwide.The products contained levels of lead paint that failed the products specification. Mattel even announced that a significant portion of the toys were recalled beca rehearse of a design flaw and not substandard manufacturing. Mattel requires the factories it contracts with to use paint and other materials provided by certified suppliers. Mattel executives said they did not know if the contract manufacturer substituted paint from a noncertified supplier or if a certified supplier caused the problem. I believe that Mattel acted in a socially responsible and ethical manner with regard to the safety of its toys.During this crisis, Mattel contacted their chief suppliers and asked them to pull the re called products from the shelf. I think this was the appropriate thing to do in this case. First things first, pulling the product and afterwards warning the public of their finding so we could start the lead painted toys out of the hands of our kids. Then getting down to the problem, trying to figure out where they went wrong to correct the problem. I do believe that this incident could have been avoided, but it was handled in a perfectly responsible and ethical manner.Some of the things that I think Mattel could have done differently from the setoff were to lay out rules and regulations for all of its external vendors and their subcontractors that were cutting corners to save money and time. Some of these subcontractors chose to violate the rules and use paint that was coated with lead, which went against Mattels rules. Perhaps if Mattel would have ran periodical checks with the suppliers and subcontractors the lead paint could have been caught forwards the toys went out.Althou gh it was unintended, Mattel is the responsible one for the fact that children were exposed to potentially dangerous toys. According to the case study and disposed factors, Mattel has always held a reputation of being a good corporate citizen and their intentions were never something like this to happen. barely because Mattel fail to follow up on their guidelines and set rules with vendors and subcontractors to assure they too were complying within guidelines, it all locomote back on the originating organization itself.Mattel Inc.CEO, Robert Ekert reported that the company could have done a better military control overseeing the subcontractors in China which produce more than 21 million toys that were recalled. Federal regulators and toy manufacturers have spy loose Chinese standards spotty US enforcement which contributed too many calls regarding the recalls of Chinese- do toys, food and other products regarding wellness threats. Ekert made an attempt to bring down public outc ry by going to the Senate Appropriations subcommittee to seek to test the safety of Chinese-made products within their own laboratories that are certified within their own company. Magyck, S. 2011).Upon my reading and research the best way to ensure the safety of childrens toys is through the U. S. toy safety standards and regulations. plaything safety standards are molded by a variety of considerations, including research on child development, dynamic safety testing, and risk analysis. The chief(a) safety standards for the U. S. toy industry are the authorization federal official standard (Code of Federal Regulations, Commercial Practices 16 16CFR) and the toy industry has also developed and adheres to voluntary standards (ASTM F963-03 Standard Consumer Safety Specification on Toy Safety).In addition to adhering to the federal requirements and additional self-imposed safety measures, the toy industry has initiated reassurance testing to swear the safety of the toys already on th e shelves. At the same time, the toy industry is developing a new, mandatory testing protocol by accredited laboratories in conjunction with the well-respected American National Standards Institute (ANSI). The U. S. toy industry understands the concerns many parents have about the safety of toys on the market and is encouraging the U. S.Congress to prolong comprehensive legislation on consumer product safety.The toy industry is also providing additional resources to inform consumers and parents and provide useful tools through this site and through partnerships with independent consumer organizations. The toy industry is also building with health and safety experts to provide parents and consumers with practical tips and relevant information. In the U. S. , the U. S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is the independent federal agency that oversees the safety of toys and other consumer products.Nearly 50% of the CPSCs resources ($66 million annually) are used towards the a gencys work on toys and other childrens products. The CPSC enforces the U. S. requirements for toy safety and, along with the manufacturer or distributor, issues product recalls as needed. Toy Industry Association (2011). I believe the best way for society to protect children from harmful toys is to follow along the lines, the eight steps that the Consumers Union proposed to help safeguard the health and safety of American consumers from the encroachment of unsafe Chinese-produced consumer products and foods.