More Recalls and Even More Harm

  • Hari Bapuji

Abstract

The recent increase in toy recalls can be rationalized in many ways. More toys are sold now than ever before, while at the same time, regulations have become stricter. Thanks to electronic media, society now has a heightened awareness about product safety and, in turn, a correspondingly stronger paranoia. Certainly, children’s products must be held to the highest possible safety standards, but companies will still make errors, and slippages may occur anywhere in global supply chains. There is no lack of explanations for the increased number of recalls and no dearth of factors that could result in recalls.

Keywords

Mercury Rubber Nitrite Beach Charcoal 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    CPSC, “Bookspan Recalls Discovery Bunny Books Due to Choking Hazard,” May 17, 2007, http://www.cpsc.gov/CPSCPUB/PREREL/prhtml07/07551.html.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chen and colleagues use the label proactive to denote recalls without incidents, injuries, or deaths, and use the label passive to denote those with incidents, injuries, or deaths. Please see Y. Chen, S. Ganesan, and Y. Liu, “Does a Firm’s Product-Recall Strategy Affect its Financial Value? An Examination of Strategic Alternatives During Product-Harm Crises,” Journal of Marketing 73 (2009): 214–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    CPSC, “Old Navy Recalls Stuffed Toys; Button Eyes Can Detach and Pose a Choking Hazard to Young Children,” February 19, 2009, http://www.cpsc.gov/CPSCPUB/PREREL/prhtml09/09134. html.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    CPSC, “Child’s Death Prompts Replacement Program of Magnetic Building Sets,” March 31, 2006, http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml06/06127.html.Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    J. Garnaut, “Toy-Makers Play the Blame Game,” Sydney Morning Herald, September 17, 2007, http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/toymakers-play-the-blame-game/2007/09/16/1189881341230.html.Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    CPSC, “Playskool Voluntarily Recalls Toy Tool Benches after the Death of Two Toddlers,” September 22, 2006, http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml06/06266.html.Google Scholar
  7. 8.
    CPSC, “Graco Recalls Cradle Portion Of Swing Based On Reports Of Suffocation Incidents,” February 24, 1992, http://www.cpsc.gov/CPSCPUB/PREREL/prhtml92/92054.html.Google Scholar
  8. 9.
    For further details, please see E.M. Felcher, It’s No Accident: How Corporations Sell Dangerous Baby Products (Monroe: Common Courage Press, 2001).Google Scholar
  9. 10.
    CPSC, “Child’s Death Prompts Replacement Program of Magnetic Building Sets,” March 31, 2006, http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml06/06127.html.Google Scholar
  10. 11.
    CPSC, “Magnetix Magnetic Building Set Recall Expanded,” April 19, 2007, http://www.cpsc.gov/CPSCPUB/PREREL/PRHTML07/07164.html. Around the time of the recall, Rose Art was acquired by Mega Brands. It was later reported that Mega Brands was not made aware of the extent of damage due to magnets issue by Rose Art.Google Scholar
  11. 12.
    CPSC, “Implementation of a Searchable Consumer Product Safety Incident Database,” September 10, 2009, http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/reports/cpsia212.pdf.Google Scholar
  12. 14.
    CPSC, Regulated Products Handbook, January, 2005, http://www.cpsc.gov/BUSINFO/8001.pdf; “Statement of The Honorable Thomas H. Moore, The Honorable Robert S. Adler, and The Honorable Inez M. Tenenbaum on the Final Interpretive Rule on Civil Penalty Factors,” March 10, 2010, http://www.cpsc.gov/pr/civpen03102010.pdf.Google Scholar
  13. 15.
    CPSC, “CPSC Approves Final Rule on Civil Penalty Factors,” March 16, 2010, http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml10/10168. html.Google Scholar
  14. 16.
    CPSC, “Brinkmann Corporation to Pay $175,000 to Settle Civil Penalty Case,” November 20, 2996, http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml97/97025.html.Google Scholar
  15. 17.
    CPSC, “L.L. Bean, Inc. to Pay $750,000 Civil Penalty for Delay in Reporting Backpack Child Carriers,” August 30, 2000, http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml00/00174.html.Google Scholar
  16. 19.
    CPSC, “CPSC Approves Final Rule on Civil Penalty Factors,” March 16, 2010, http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml10/10168.html.Google Scholar
  17. 20.
    CPSC, “Kansas Firms to Pay $600,000 Civil Penalty for Selling Banned Fireworks,” December 8, 2005, http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml06/06050.html.Google Scholar
  18. 21.
    CPSC, “Great Lakes Products, Inc. Pays To Settle Civil Penalty Case,” “September 22, 1994, http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml94/94136.html.Google Scholar
  19. 22.
    CPSC, “Walgreen Co. To Pay $50,000 To Settle Civil Penalty Case,” February 28, 1994, http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml94/94040.html.Google Scholar
  20. 24.
    CPSC, “Parent Company of Bloomingdale’s/Macy’s Pays Record Fine for Selling Flammable Children’s Sleepwear,” April 12, 2001, http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml01/01123.html.Google Scholar
  21. 25.
    CPSC, “Commission Levies $1.5 Million In Penalties,” September 23, 2003, http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml03/03188. html.Google Scholar
  22. 26.
    CPSC, “Tennessee Man Sentenced to Prison for Making False Statements to CPSC in Cigarette Lighter Case,” April 21, 2000, http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml00/00101.html.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Hari Bapuji 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hari Bapuji

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations