Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Copy of Decision 2012

A Case study of Manville corporation.

Jessica Smith

on 2 August 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Copy of Decision 2012

Manville History
Johns and Manville companies merged
Ch. 11 Bankruptcy and Reorganization Plan
Largest producer of fiberglass products - $806 Million of business for Manville
1920's- 1970's
1970's- 1980's
largest manufacturer of asbestos products
Lawsuits against the corporation for asbestos exposure became prevalent
In 1933, Johns-Manville settled its very first lawsuit over adverse health effects of asbestos.
Between 1934 and 1964, annual use of raw asbestos increased by 5x to 2,500,000 tons.
US Government and manufacturers suppressed the majority of information regarding asbestos related hazards.
Percentage of profits asbestos accounted for in 1976.
This type of promotional film was used by manufacturers to highlight asbestos related products, even though they concealed the negative effects to workers and consumers
Case Summary
In 1978, Department of Health estimated that employers had exposed between 8 and 11 million workers to asbestos since WWII
Claims against Manville ballooned in the ‘70s. By 1982, 17,000 claims were pending and consultants estimated that 50,000 claims were still to come in the future.
On August 26, 1982: Manville Corp became the largest Industrial corporation to ever file for Ch. 11 Bankruptcy protection.
CEO McKinney was pressured into retirement in 1986 and the Board replaced him with Tom Stephens.
Stephens was instrumental in the development of Manville’s reorganization plan which created 2 trusts to handle payment to lawsuit claims relating to asbestos.
A decade after asbestos issues peaked – the corporation had shifted towards a man-made substitute called fiberglass.
Fiberglass was an $807 Million business at Manville in 1986 and accounted for
75% of it’s profits.
Decision 2012
Manville Corporation was once again the world’s largest producer of an insulation product.
You've already voted once.
Let's get your vote on what really matters.
Manville should take preemptive action with fiberglass
Manville should wait to take action until the dangers of fiberglass are confirmed
Manville Corporation
Group 8
Alex Cornelius
Kyle Leemon
Jessica Smith
Jack Versau II
So what's the issue?
A preliminary report by Dr. Enterline and Dr. Marsh of the University of Pittsburg gave Manville management cause for concern.

The report showed a small, but statistically significant, excess in cancers at plants producing a certain type of fiberglass.

Sir Richard Doll suggested that fiberglass could be as dangerous as asbestos. Could this be happening again to Manville?
End Consumers
• How many people know about the reports?
• Has anyone already been affected?
• How many people are currently using our product?
• Have our lawyers already been informed?
• What was the reaction of our employees?
• Do our customers know?
• Has the press been involved?
•How much is this costing us?
•What is the company's current financial situation?
•Does this affect the going concern?
•What steps are being taken to resolve this issue?
•Are there any current lawsuits?
Duties: Employees have a duty to perform their assigned jobs in return for a salary. Do they still have this duty if their employer puts their health and well being at risk?

Rights: They have a right to safe work environment or to at least be informed of the potential hazards of their job so that they can make the decision to perform the job or not.
Duties: Has a duty to act in the best interest of the company - to make decisions in an effort to maximize profits for investors.

Rights: Has the right to make their decisions based on the best information available - which could be from past experience, internal information or from outside research.
Will this reflect on their reputation?
What are the effects of a recall?
Do they have the right to be informed on safety issues for products they install/sell?
Will they need to inform their customers?
Do they have a right to the information, even if it is limited?
What are the alternatives?
What are the health concerns?
1. To provide accurate and complete data to both producers and consumers of Fiberglass
2. Report Findings to the Correct people in the correct order.

1. To study and report findings on fiberglass and its impacts on health free of limitation and/or intimidation or other forms of threats.
2. Have a safe work environment and safe place to report findings free of unwarranted retribution.
3. To help inform the correct people in a timely and orderly way, along with informing the proper auhtorities (EPA, WHO).
1. To know and inform of possible helath risks related to fiberglass to both consumers and its employees.
2. To properly lable products so as not to mislead consumers or employees

1. To be informed of studies on products manufactured and in a manner in which they are able to make changes before retribution is put upon them.
Suggested Actions for Manville
•Seek lawyers immediately
•Send letters to shareholders
•Conduct further independent tests
•Place labels on products
•Offer updated testing information
•Offer complementary masks and gloves
•Ensure customers and public that we care
Manville Covering Company Established
Thank you!
Enjoy the election results!
Any Questions?
Full transcript