Evanger’s is a pet necessities brand that started in 1935, by Fred Evanger. Evanger believed that his dogs deserved the highest quality ingredients in their food to make them and their offspring as healthy as they can be. Which is why Evanger started his company serving only natural ingredients in his food products. Within the last decade or so natural foods has become very popular around the world, especially in America. Since Evanger was already producing an all-natural dog food the company started getting more known and expanding. In 2003 the company was the first pet food company to make a food that is packaged by hand. In February of 2017, Evanger’s had recalled Hunks of Beef and Beef and Gravy dog foods after many dogs sick and one dead. The FDA did an investigation leading to the recall of Hunks of Beef dog food on February 3rd. The contaminated cans were manufactured in Evanger’s plant in Wheeling, Illinois on June 6, 2016. This particular dog food was sold to 15 states in retail locations and on their website. After this recall was made the FDA discovered yet another dog food was made with the same ingredients, Beef and Gravy. This was only sold in 2 states, Washington and Maryland. The FDA has warned customers to not use these two types of dog food if stockpiled in their homes. After the FDA was done investigating they declared that only one batch of the dog food contained the drug. Even though the FDA said they no longer needed to recall all the dog food only that one batch, Evanger’s decided to voluntarily recall all dog food with the two names Beef and Gravy and Hunks of Beef. They are allowing anyone who has bought either can of this dog food to return it for a full refund and a case of another dog food.
Stakeholders are the people affected by the actions of a business in both positive and negative ways. The stakeholders for the controversy of Evanger’s are the employees, customers, potential customers, and pets who were given the food. The employees are responsible for the packaging and they have their jobs on the line when it comes to this case. The customer’s who purchased the bad food are obviously not happy about it, and as for other customers their trust in the company has now shrunk or even vanished. The potential customers who were looking into this brand are now going to look somewhere else for dog food. The company will have to take a big loss on sales because of the case. The last stakeholders are not people but the dogs that were affected, many are sick and one even died because of the case.
|Can of Evanger's dog food|
Individualism is an ethical theory that states a business should maximize profits for the stakeholders legally. Evanger was not trying to make more profits by putting the euthanasia drug in their dog food. The company then had to take all products off the shelf and refund anyone who bought the product. Therefore an individualist would say the company was acting unethical because they were not maximizing profits for all the stakeholders.
Utilitarianism states that all conscious beings should have maximized happiness from a business’s actions. Evanger did not maximize happiness for any conscious being. The sick dogs and one dead dog, has lead to many people angry and sad. The employees and company would not be happy because the employees could lose their jobs, and the company could lose on profits. A utilitarian would say this case is unethical and no happiness was achieved.
Kantianism is a theory that states in something is causing harm to anyone else it is unethical. Kantians believe that we must respect the goals of other human beings and if they are not reached we shall not preform that action. In the case of Evanger’s the actions done were not the correct actions to be preformed. The actions of the recall were also unethical from a Kantians viewpoint, because this did not provide happiness to the people who are already dealing with sick dogs and the people who have to deal with a loss dog. Overall a Kantian would say this case is unethical and all actions by Evanger have been wrong.
Virtue theory is a theory that is based off Aristotle’s ethics, which states a thing is happy if it is functioning the way it should be. If something is happy than they are living a good life. In this case Evanger’s was acting ethically because they were honest with what was happening and they made sure their customers would be refunded fully. The employees that were in the packaging factory acted unethically because they were making many people angry and sad by allowing a euthanasia drug to make it into the food. Based on virtue theory I would conclude that Evanger was acting ethically and was doing what they could to make the stakeholders happy.
Justification Ethics Evaluation
Justification Ethics Evaluation
Evanger’s actions were justifiable in this case although their manufacturers were not. Evanger was doing the correct thing by offering those who already purchased the recalled product a full refund. The manufacturer was not being ethical due to how they had used meat containing the euthanasia drug in the dog food product. The manufacturer should not have been using meat that contained the euthanasia drug to produce Evanger’s product. If they had just used meat that was killed in way that did not leave any drug still in the meat then the whole case could have been avoided. It made the company unethical by selling a product that resulted in one dead and many sick dogs.
Meyer, Zlati. "Dog Food Recalled after Discovery of Euthanasia Drug." Detroit Free Press. N.p., 06 Feb. 2017. Web. 30 Mar. 2017.
"Recalls, Market Withdrawals, & Safety Alerts - Evanger's Voluntarily Recalls Hunk of Beef Because Of Pentobarbital Exposure in One Batch of Food." U S Food and Drug Administration Home Page. Office of Regulatory Affairs, 27 Feb. 2017. Web. 30 Mar. 2017.
"Recalled: Against the Grain Canned Dog Food." Petful. N.p., 17 Feb. 2017. Web. 30 Mar. 2017.
"Dog Food Recalls Issued Due to Risk of Euthanasia Sedative Contamination."AboutLawsuitscom. N.p., 26 Feb. 2017. Web. 30 Mar. 2017.