Response to case study scenario 1

I would not ignore the problem because of the many potential threats to the customer, employer and myself. My first action would be to have a meeting with the supervisor and safety team to highlight my concerns and the threats to both the company and it's customers. I would demand that a product recall be initiated and warn that if my concerns were not acted upon then I would be forced to contact the IEEE for guidance in filing a legal case against the company due to it's unsafe practices and total disregard for it's customers safety.

Potential threats of ignoring the problem include threats to both the financial standing and public image of the company; previous incidents similar to this have damaged the companies reputation and have also reduced public confidence in current and future products. An example of this is the 2006 Sony battery recall; this was started after a customers Sony laptop battery exploded and caught fire, the customer suffered serious burns and sued Sony for 2 million Yen (£15,104). The product recall involved over 4.1 million batteries and seriously damaged both Sonys reputation along with the many companies such as Apple, Toshiba and HP whose laptops used the faulty Sony components. The potential damage caused by these faulty memory devices could endanger both life and property of the customer and could be a repeat of the Sony battery incident. By acting sooner Sony may have been able to prevent a customer being injured by its faulty product.

No amount of negative publicity caused by a product recall could ever be as serious as the outcome of a faulty product injuring a customer. A product recall would also show that the company is safety conscious and values its customers well-being, this sends out a strong message about the companies morals and ethics. The financial risks from lawsuits and fines due to corporate negligence are huge and would damage the company much more than the potential financial risk associated with the loss of an important client due to the product recall.

The Public Interest Disclosure Act of 1998 provides protection for individuals who expose malpractice including negligence, danger to health etc. This act is designed to help whistleblowers get their message safely to the people it concerns without having to fear retaliation by the company or organisation. This Act along with legislation from the IEEE would support my right to highlight my concerns about the faulty products even if other members of the safety testing group or management would not approve of it.