The Effect of Product Liability on Engineers
Sam Heithoff
Mechanical Systems Design
8-27-12

The objective of this paper is to show that while general law processes in America are wasteful and hinder people and companies, product liability is beneficial to engineers. Since the inception and revolution of product liability law, the engineering process has been affected. Through specific examples and firsthand accounts, it will be established that the relationship between product safety mandates and standard engineering practices is symbiotic. America is a sue-happy country. A sentiment uttered by many patriots and internationals alike, there are even organizations formed purely to stand against the American litigious nature. Although whether it is culture or simply the 1.2 million lawyers eager to prove themselves in court remains to be seen. While lawsuit abuse has harmed innumerous people worldwide, practical legal pursuits improve the security of general life in society. From an engineering standpoint, product liability suits fall under the latter category. While some companies state that product liability hinders innovation by funneling company resources away from engineers and other productive ventures, most cases show that product liability does not inhibit creativity [1]. Certainly there are frivolous suits in the realm of product liability just like any other aspect of the legal system, but engineers are protected from potentially ridiculous claims. With legal harm an impossibility, product liability simply pushes engineers to improve practices in design and manufacturing processes. Essentially, engineers enjoy the benefits of working on the safety of the public, which puts them in high regard among society, while avoiding the negative effects of massive lawsuits. Design is where most safety issues can be avoided in the production of public materials. Through the patterned process of analyzing and correcting potentially hazardous product aspects, engineers account for all applications and possible failures [2]. Through three steps during the design process, engineers ensure and enhance safety. System design is the first step, when an engineer creates and analyzes the basic product architecture to maintain basic functionality. The following stage, parameter design, is used to incorporate safety with no excessive cost. For example, deciding on a material that provides improved performance and safety for the manufacturers. The final design step is the tolerance design stage. At this point, if safety regulations are not yet met, they are reached using a higher cost budget [2]. These steps are results of product liability law, especially step three of the design process. In general, this has enhanced the safety of products for the public. For example, experts believe that product liability has made automotive engineers more cautious in the design process [1]. This makes sense, since some of the largest product liability settlements in the last half century have been in the automotive industry. For instance, in the case Musick vs. Dorel Juvenile Group Inc. (2009), a faulty child safety seat caused a young girl brain damage during an auto accident. The family was awarded $50 million. Because of cautionary tales like this, engineers have improved their design methods to protect their companies and make the public safer. Even with a perfectly safe design, a product easily becomes unsafe when manufactured improperly. Often times a manufacturing defect is an isolated incident among a batch of successful productions [2]. In this case, the bad products are rejected during quality control inspections and thrown out. On the occasion when a bad product reaches the public, that is when a company is at risk for product liability. For example, Geordie Markup vs. a tractor manufacturer (1993) was a case involving a man who severely injured his forearm on a protruding bolt on a tractor. The court found that the rear bumper did not meet manufacturer’s standards, and Markup settled for an undisclosed amount [2]. Since the product liability revolution in 1964, companies have adopted quality control practices to prevent accidents and their repercussions. In addition companies such as John Deere utilize design and manufacturing engineers to create products, and then completely separate teams of engineers to test the quality of each product before consumers have a chance to purchase it. This practice ensures safety for the public, and creates new jobs for engineers. Quality control engineers are not the only people who enjoy more career opportunities thanks to product liability laws. Many engineers are hired by prosecutions or defenses to give expert testimonies in court, or perform case investigations to find where potential fault may lie in a case [3]. Occasionally even the court will pay for such a witness. Regardless of who is paying, it means more jobs for engineers. Because of product liability cases and the need for technical professionals, engineers enjoy a more valuable job market.
All engineers are affected by product liability, especially because of the improved job outlook. When asked about his involvement with product liability, University of Iowa associate professor in mechanical engineering Albert Ratner said, “I don’t make products, so I don’t deal in product liability.” Even though Professor Ratner is not directly impacted by product liability, the standards he faces at work every day came about from liability situations. And like many other engineers, he has rarely found trouble finding a job, in partial thanks to product liability. In every product liability case, there are two questions that are addressed. Does the product meet the consumer expectations? And does the product meet safety standards required by society [4]? The latter question is especially important for engineers. It is the conclusion of this paper that the safety standards defined by product liability laws push engineers to improve their work, using an improved design process and checking manufactured parts for durability and functionality multiple times. A safer engineering process means a safer public, and product liability laws encourage companies to comply with society standards. While engineers have their own code of ethics and most place public safety at the top of their priorities, corporate leaders often do not follow such a code. These product liability guidelines encourage companies to consider safety, giving engineers more jobs in more comfortable work places, where they are not asked to watch unethical behavior unfold. References

1. Hunziker, J.R. and Jones, T., 1994, “Product Liability and Innovation: Managing Risk in an Uncertain Environment,” pp. 14-18. 2. Dowlatshahi, S., 2001, “The role of product safety and liability in concurrent engineering,” Computers & Industrial Engineering, 41(2), pp. 4-10.

3. Weinstein, A.S., Twerski, A.D., Piehler, H.R., Donaher, W.A., 1974, “Product liability: An interaction of law and technology,” The Duquesne Law Review, 12(3), pp. 494

4. Twerski, A.D., 1977, “From defect to cause to comparative fault: Rethinking some product liability concepts,” The Marquette Law Review, 60(2), pp. 44.