BP#5: Best Buy to Pay Penalty to Settle Charges Over Recalled Items

best-buy.pngSource: The Wall Street Journal | Best Buy to Pay Penalty to Settle Charges Over Recalled Items | By Josh Beckerman| October 4, 2016 | http://www.wsj.com/articles/best-buy-to-pay-penalty-to-settle-charges-over-recalled-items-1475532617

Best Buy Co. is going to pay a $3.8 million penalty over recalled items. The company sold recalled products such as cameras, computers and washing machines according to the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). Approximately 600 recalled items were sold between September 2010 through October 2015. Best Buy Co. is being penalized for failing to implement adequate procedures to accurately identify and prevent the sales of recalled products. Best Buy Co. realized that what happened was wrong and has taken steps to prevent these issues from reoccurring. Though the company agreed to pay the penalty, it does to mean that it is admitting to committing the offense.

Michael Davis discussed in his article on professional responsibility the different types of obedience. One of the types of obedience he discussed was negligent obedience. Someone who commits negligent obedience is someone who fails to exercise due care. According to Davis, due care means doing everything that you possibly can in a situation and failing to exercise this would be negligent obedience. It also means that having due care is acting conscientiously and acting morally optimally. If someone does not have due care, then they are not doing his or her job and are failing to do something right. The above situation involving Best Buy Co. is an example of negligent obedience. Best Buy Co. did not do its job. It failed to properly and accurately identify recalled items before they were sold to consumers. These items were recalled for a reason, which was most likely due to a defect in the products that could potentially harm consumers. Best Buy Co. put its consumers at risk by not removing these recalled items from its stores. The company should have exercised due care to protect the consumers, but instead it committed negligent obedience.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s