To recall or not to recall ?

"To recall , or not to recall; that is the question". With due apologies to Shakespeare, this could very well be the modern day conundrum for businesses. The travails of Toyota , with its recalls, are very well known. What prompted this post is the news of recall of 1.2 million high chairs (the sort you strap your child to), because they could pose a fall hazard to children.

Readers of this blog know well that this writer is an opinionated individual, prone to verbal excesses and assumes a god given right to hold a point of view on any subject under the sun. The less he knows about a topic, the more strident is his opinion ! For a change, here is a topic on which he confesses to not being sure about; hence both sides of the coin in this post.

The case in question is about high chairs produced by a certain manufacturer in the US. Apparently the risk is that "screws holding the front legs of the high chair can loosen and fall out" and cracking plastic brackets can cause the high chair to "tip over unexpectedly." No less an august body than the The Consumer Product Safety Commission has issued this opinion. The company is complying. A million plus high chairs are being recalled.

In today’s world, at the slightest hint of a product risk, companies have to run like Usain Bolt and announce a global product recall. Otherwise they will be accused of negligence and delay in recalling and get sued. They will hauled in front of US Congress / British Parliament / Lesotho’s Politburo and bullied by the revered elected representatives.

The case for – There can be no compromises on product safety. Period. A dangerous product has to be removed from the market, before it can do more harm. It is because this requirement is so stringent that product safety features have gone up a thousand fold. Consumers can now trust and buy a product knowing that it won’t be unsafe or do them physical harm. It is better to be safe than to be sorry; so at the first whiff of a problem, get it out of the market. Speed is essential – else companies and regulatory authorities can spend months or years debating about the issue and the risk continues. How many injuries should happen, or lives lost, before the action is taken ??

The case against – There is no such thing as a risk free world. It is the inherent nature of screws that they can loosen. In this case there have been 24 reports of scratches, bumps and bruises. Does that justify 1 million chairs to be recalled. There will always be the odd circumstance in any product where potentially something unsafe could happen. Does it mean that at the first whiff, you first recall and argue later. Recalls are incredibly expensive – at the end the consumer pays for all this as there is no free lunch. If there is a genuine and widespread safety fear, the product must be recalled. But not at the first scent of scaremongering.

Which is right ? I don’t know. Would you like to throw some light ?

Bhopal happens and nobody is prosecuted

This week marks the twenty fifth anniversary of the worst industrial disaster in history – the leak of the deadly methyl isocyanate from the Union Carbide plant in Bhopal. Thousands of people died and the horrors have been well documented.

This post focuses on one notable aspect of what happened after the disaster. Or rather what didn’t happen. Nobody has yet been prosecuted in a court of law for the accident. That’s right. After 25 years, there has not been a single criminal prosecution.

There is little doubt that safety systems in the plant were poorly designed, bypassed in actual operation and there was criminal negligence on safety. Those of us who have worked in factories know how elaborate safety systems are when handling extremely dangerous chemicals like methyl isocyanate. And yet multiple safety systems seem to have been routinely bypassed. Just glance at the Wikipedia article on the accident that details the number of safety systems that were reported to have been non operational at that time.

The government, NGO’s and all the shouters wanted to prosecute Warren Anderson, the then Chairman of Union Carbide globally. This is a classic manifestation of trying to go after a global name – the more senior the better to show that something is done. Flash of publicity. But is Warren Anderson really the culprit ? – was it he who bypassed multiple safety systems at the Bhopal plant ? Was he the one who designed the systems in the first place ? He should take moral responsibility, but he is not criminally responsible.

The real criminal responsibility lies with the plant management and the actual operators of the plant. The people who took short cuts. The people who gave lip service to the required safety procedures. The people who tried to cut costs by short circuiting what they saw as elaborate non essential procedures. The people who allowed stocks of MIC to build up because the final product was not selling, but didn’t think of the consequences. They are the people who should be prosecuted. If there were serious design deficiencies with the safety systems, then the design guys must also be prosecuted. By not doing so, we have not served the demands of justice. We have implicitly accepted that it is OK to bypass safety systems, even when the consequences are as disastrous as what happened. We have failed to award exemplary punishment to the people really responsible – and thereby deter similar people in other factories from taking shortcuts on safety.

In some ways, we should look at ourselves. We are cavalier about safety in our own homes. Don’t we overload a socket by drawing an extension box and plugging multiple devices to it ? Don’t we ignore earthing and plug a two pin plug where a three pin plug is required ? Don’t we get irritated by the fuse going off repeatedly and short the fuse box ? Do we even have a single fire extinguisher in our house ? This is the same lighthearted approach to safety that caused the Bhopal disaster. Pardon my sermonising like a snooty b%$#@, but this is one topic where I won't stop being a sanctimonious pest.

We would do ourselves a good turn by not taking safety lightly. By asking for a safety audit of our own homes. And then following the safety procedures without fail. Next time we plug a 2 pin plug into a three pin socket .........

Killer Roads

There’s an interesting story doing the rounds in China. A 74 year old man got so frustrated with drivers violating traffic rules that he stationed himself at a junction and started throwing bricks at cars that jumped the red lights. This story has led to an outpouring of support on the Internet – huge numbers of Chinese have supported what the man did.

I had posted before on road safety here. On this Saturday morning, when Typhoon Molave is raging outside and the wind is howling and rattling windows, the mood is one of how vulnerable man is. Hence this post again on taking road safety seriously.

India and China, lead the world on road deaths. The second most dangerous place in the world is the Indian road. The third most dangerous place in the world is the Chinese road. There are more deaths on the road than in the Iraq war. Than in Afghanistan. Than in Darfur. Than because of swine flu.

Why is it that perfectly reasonable people become monsters when they hit the road ? Refuse to wear seat belts. Refuse to wear a helmet . Drive like a maniac. I know that the male species often considers behaviour on the road as an expression of their manhood, but consider that if you are “Bobbitted”, there is not much use you can make of your machoism.

So a small call for sanity when you drive to work on Monday morning. Drive safely. You owe it to your near and loved ones.

And I am totally in support of the old man . He’s a hero.