Product liability cost exposure

Beyond these indirect costs, there are future costs associated with new or more stringent variations of existing environmental legislation. We also need to recognize that all operations, especially those within complex industry sectors like petrochemicals, carry liabilities and exposures to potential catastrophic releases. Systems do fail for a variety of reasons, leading to unplarmed and sometimes innocent mistakes, that may result in third-party exposures for environmental damages or health risk exposures. These costs are related to legal fees, loss in consumer confidence, and subsequent losses in market shares for the products a company sells, as well as the clean-up associated with the spill or release. 

When it is time to develop a written budget, it is important to identify operating cost, potential benefits such as direct benefits (e.g., reduced labor cost, lower accidents, reduced insurance cost, or productivity gains). Indirect benefits should also be considered in light of quality improvanents— reduced scrap less rework reduced product liability, exposure, or produa recall expenses improved corporate image or inaeased market share. At times, indirect benefits are improved anployee morale, which reduces absenteeism and turnover or increases teamwork and ownership. The potential reduction in the numbers of compliance penalties can be a benefit. 

The state-of-the-art defense is asserted in strict liability (failure to warn) claims where the defendant alleges that he did not know, and could not reasonably have known, of the hazards of the product at the time of the plaintiff s exposure. A minority of courts have occasionally rejected this defense, reasoning that the imposition on manufacturers of the costs of... 

It is often overlooked that the manufacturing pathway to ultimately synthesize a product may in fact go through a series of chemical intermediates. This principle seeks to minimize the hazards associated with these intermediates. It is important to make the distinction that this principle is focused on materials that, in a perfect world, should not appear in the product. However, when considering worker exposure and the other associated costs related to handling, storage and disposal of hazardous materials, the avoidance of hazardous intermediates is extremely important. Reducing the hazards associated with the way a product is made can drastically reduce worker liabilities, contribute towards worker health and safety, and minimize the potential for chemical accidents. 

The economic cost of a silo failure is never small. The owner faces the immediate costs of lost production and repairs, personnel in the vicinity are exposed to significant danger, and the designer and builder face possible litigation because of their liability exposure. 

Several factors motivated Nortel to produce the lead-free telephone, including public concern over the effect of lead on the human body and the defeated U.S. Lead Exposure Reduction Act in 1994. In addition, efforts in Europe to ban lead-containing electronics waste initiated by the Netherlands served as a driving force to develop the telephone [23]. Other contributing factors to Nortel s lead-free work included cost issues lead-free products would incur lower handling and disposal costs, and product end-of-life liability and disposal costs would be avoided. 

---