Firestone charts a risky course
Fighting agency on tire recall may do more damage
By
Robert Manor, Tribune staff reporter. Reuters news service contributed to
this report
Published July 24, 2001
Bridgestone/Firestone Inc. is pursuing a high-risk
strategy by defying the government and refusing to recall millions more of
its tires, lawyers and public relations consultants say.
If the government is forced to sue to get the tires off the road, they
say, the beleaguered company may touch off an even greater barrage of
damaging publicity about the safety of its products. Moreover, the company
is far from certain to prevail if the government sues to force a recall,
because auto safety regulators almost always win in court.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
signaled last week that it was preparing to ask Bridgestone/Firestone to
recall millions of its Wilderness AT tires because of concerns that they
may fail at rates greater than comparable tires. NHTSA has linked
Firestone tires to 203 deaths and more than 700 injuries, many in rollover
crashes of Firestone-equipped Ford Explorer sport-utility vehicles.
Firestone recalled 6.5 million tires last fall but has steadfastly
maintained that the rest of its products are safe. And on Monday,
Bridgestone Corp. President Shigeo Watanabe told reporters in Japan that
the company would not honor the government's request for a recall.
"If the command for a recall comes about, Firestone is prepared even to
pursue this issue in the courts," Watanabe said. "As a parent company, we
support Firestone's thinking and will throw our full support behind it."
The NHTSA does not have the direct authority to order a recall. After a
public hearing, however, the agency can refer the matter to the U.S.
Justice Department, which then could sue Bridgestone/Firestone.
Despite the limitations on the NHTSA's authority, it is rare for any
business to defy the agency.
"It has happened eight or nine times," said Rae Tyson, speaking for the
NHTSA. "The agency almost always prevails."
The only NHTSA loss came in the 1980s, when a court ruled in favor of
General Motors on the safety of brakes on Chevrolet Citations and other
X-body cars.
"Usually it's an uphill battle to fight a regulatory agency," said
Stephanie Scharf, a products liability specialist with the Chicago law
firm of Jenner & Block. "Typically this is a very high-pressure
situation."
But Scharf said fighting a recall can make sense under some circumstances
because it buys time for a company to work with customers, insurance
companies, and government decision-makers.
Companies often see no reason to fight a recall if a product is marginal
to its sales.
"But if it's a core product and the complaint is something [the company]
believes is minimal or not well-founded, then that is another matter,"
Scharf said.
Firestone had an earlier run-in with regulators over a proposed recall. In
the late 1970s Firestone fought the NHTSA over the recall of the Firestone
500 tire, which had an unusually high failure rate. That led to
congressional hearings and a big drop in sales as the public decided that
the tires were unsafe.
"U.S. industry has a lesson to learn from Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.: how
not to react to a safety controversy," Business Week magazine wrote in
1978. "Firestone, in its attempts to ward off disagreeable consequences
and defend its honor, has often been its own worst enemy," Fortune
magazine said at the time.
Firestone settled before the matter arrived in the courts. By then,
however, the Firestone brand had been severely damaged.
Clarence Ditlow, executive director of the Center for Auto Safety,
contends Firestone is repeating its mistakes of the past.
"We are still at the stage where there is a perfect parallel with the
Firestone 500," he said. "If I were advising Firestone, I would advise
them to do a voluntary recall."
If the NHTSA schedules a public hearing on its current request for a
recall, it will likely be held later this summer.
Jill Bratina, spokeswoman for Bridgestone/Firestone, said the company
would use any NHTSA hearing to reassure consumers that Firestone tires
pose no threat.
"We will use every opportunity to explain the science and show why our
tires are safe," Bratina said.
But Bridgestone/Firestone could suffer if the government produces
convincing evidence that Firestone tires are dangerous.
Kim Kumiega, general manager of crisis and issues management for public
relations firm Edelman Worldwide, said Bridgestone/Firestone may perceive
it has no choice but to fight the recall.
"It may be what they need to do to preserve their business," said Kumiega,
whose firm is not an adviser to Firestone. "I believe they are in a fight
for the survival of the company."