Facts:

In September of 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

found that diesel Volkswagen cars being sold in the United States had
a "defeat device" in its engines that detected the moment in which
they were being tested (Moore, Faiola, and Horwitz). This device would
then change the performance of the vehicle in order for it to appear
having met all regulatory standards and regulations. Since the
investigation ensued, the German car giant has come forward and
admitted to cheating emissions tests in the US and deceiving the
general public.
In response to their newfound mistake, VW has stopped sales with this
device instilled within them in the US. VW also claims that cars already
purchased that have the software in them, will suffer no harm and thus
require no immediate attention. In addition, the customers who
purchased these vehicles were under the impression that VW vehicles
met federal regulations for emissions, so much so, that they paid a
premium for having clean diesel technology in their cars, adding to
the slew of lawsuits and infuriation (Moore, Faiola, and Horwitz).
Furthermore, even with the halting of diesel vehicles in the US, VW has
openly admitted that over 11 million of their diesel vehicles have this
defeat device worldwide, posing not only a problem for the US
environment and EPA standards but also to the world (Ewing). While

Europe has emission regulations that are much laxer than that of the
US, Europe and Germany alike are worried that this deceit causes a
plummet in the economy as VW is a major contributor and generator to
Germany and Europes automobile industry.
Ethical Issues:
In this case, the issue of honesty is the most prominent. VW
knowingly created and installed this device with the purpose of
deceiving its consumers and the EPA. Consumers rely on a corporation
such as VW, to be honest, and forthcoming about the products. By VW
deceiving its customers into believing they were purchasing a clean
diesel vehicle and making them pay premiums for it, shows the lack
of honesty and integrity VW has. Furthermore, their omission regarding
the software to the EPA will inevitably hurt the general public as
hazardous pollutants are being released by their vehicles. This, and
much more, are all negative effects the dishonesty of VW has affected
its stakeholders and the environment as a whole.
Non-injury also plays a role as an ethical issue in this case. VW cars
have been recorded to emit nitrogen oxide at up to 40 times [the]
federal standard according to the EPA (Moore, Faiola, and Horwitz).
This type of disregard for the safety of our environment and a willing
contributor in the pollutants it emits are a prime example of non-injury.
Additionally, the customers deceived by these clean diesel vehicles

and forced to pay a premium for something they never received, have
actual monetary damages, adding on to the reasoning behind the issue
of non-injury.
Lastly, fidelity is an ethical issue to consider in this case. VW is
expected to be loyal to the government in which they do business as
well as the governments agencies and organizations. By being loyal,
grateful, and respectful of the government, corporations such as VW
are expected to follow the law and meet all federal standards and
regulations. VW also has a great deal of responsibility to its
consumers. Consumers expect VW to be forthcoming and honest in
exchange for goods and services. That sense of fidelity is broken when
VW knowingly and willingly evades the law, deceives its consumers,
and damages the general public by having polluting vehicles in US
cities.
Stakeholders and How They Would View this Situation:
There are various stakeholders, in this case, they include VW, the US
government and its agencies such as the EPA, and VWs consumers.
Secondary stakeholders would be the general public of both the US and
Europe, as well as the environment as a whole.
VW is at the forefront of this case due to them being the ones who
caused this case to come to fruition. It has been stated that VW
admitted to their wrongdoing, however, while apologetic and

remorseful now, it may only be because they got caught. So, while
they view this as an unfortunate and regrettable series of events, they
did not view it as such when they decided to deceive the US
government and VW customers.
The US government and government agencies like the EPA are
stakeholders that are greatly affected by the actions of VW. Laws and
regulations such as the minimum standard of emissions are put in
place to not only protect our cities and environment from pollutants,
toxins, and smog but also to protect the general public that breathes
that air. Therefore, it is safe to assume that the US government and the
EPA both view this in a negative light, hence, their opening an
investigation against VW and their deceit.
VW consumers were led to believe that they were purchasing
vehicles with clean diesel which they were obligated to pay for. They
trusted VW and their compliance with US law to provide them with
vehicles that abide by the laws and regulations of this country. Due to
the monetary damages these customers suffered for paying for a
service they never received, they are taking legal action against VW.
These lawsuits are the indication that the customers view this situation
in a negative light and want some sort of retribution for their losses,
and rightfully so.

Secondary stakeholders would involve the general public and the

negative effects this mishap has/had on the environment. The general
public expects corporations to abide by that law set forth in order to
protect their health. Meaning, that company that does emit pollutants
follow legal regulations to keep the negative impact these pollutants
have on the population and the environment to a minimum. While the
environment cannot view a situation such as this one, it is still a
stakeholder since it is being negatively affected by the carelessness of
VW, in turn, that detrimental effect to the environment caused by
careless companies such as VW have a negative effect on the
populations health.
Causative Elements:
According to Benjamin Zhang, a columnist for the Business Insider,
the causes of this scandal are clear. According to Zhang, the newly
appointed CEO Bern Pischetsrieder had a difference of opinion with one
of VWs corporate insiders, Martin Winterkorn, about the EA189 2-liter
TDI engine, the defeat device. The current technology was simply
not complying with federal regulations regarding emissions and
Pischetsrieder was willing to follow through with this issue and perfect
an engine that would meet all regulations.
However, members of the board felt as though Pischestsrieders
interests and delay in production would be detrimental to the success

of the business, and he was quickly let go from his position of CEO at
VW. When the dust cleared, Winterkorn was installed as VW Group's
CEO. He immediately appointed the duo of Hackenberg and Hatz in
2007 to oversee the development of the EA189 engine that entered
production in 2008. (Zhang).
It is during this time, that the cheat emissions software was installed
in all of their diesel vehicles engines. It quickly became an asset to the
companys name and boosted VW to be one of the largest competitors
in their industry. Unfortunately for VW, the EA189 engine that was
originally coined as innovative, was discovered to be a fraud; a fraud
not only acknowledged by authorities, consumers, and the public but
also by VW, the scandal was the result of a combination of individual
misconduct and mistakes in one part of the business but also flaws in
company processes and a tolerance of rule-breaking. (Ruddick).
Comprehensive Solution:
In the weeks since Volkswagen admitted to the US Environmental
Protection Agency that his company cheated, the company has lost
more than $30 billion in stock-market value. (Zhang). This
considerable loss in investments and revenue has led the company to
make considerable changes and provide solutions in order to rectify
the situation. VW has committed to recalling approximately 11 million
vehicles that have been affected by this faulty device. While that is a

step in the right direction, VW owes much more than a recall and an
apology.
In addition to recalling 11 million cars affected by this fraudulent
software, VW will also be giving the owners of these vehicles an
opportunity to sell their affected vehicles back to VW, or to have the
vehicle modified to meet emission standards. Consumers who have
leased an affected vehicle will be allowed to cancel their lease
agreements. (Sorokanich). In addition, consumers who have filed suit
against VW for damages will now be compensated for their initial
premium payments for the clean diesel and other compensatory
damages. In addition, VW will be obligated to establish a fund to
remedy the excess of nitrogen oxide that was emitted due to their
negligence (Sorokanich).
In short, while all of these solutions have already been put into place
to hold VW accountable for their actions, I agree with all of them.
However, I would also add some fines to VW for breaking the law, both
in the US as well as in Europe. While VWs losses are considerable and
their reputation has been tarnished as a result of their deceit, an
example should be made of them by the governments allowing them
to continue to function within their economic system.
Deontologist:

Ross: This solution satisfies Ross deontological ethics because

rectifying their mistake in this manner would mean that VW would be
sharing a duty of reparation to its customers, the governments, and
the general public. In turn, it would be rectifying the injustice they did
to all of those parties; the violation of fidelity and honesty. And they
would be making strides in the direction of self-improvement and
rectifying their maleficence. This solution would satisfy Ross theory
because it applies to and rectifies the duties that a deontologist should
abide by.
Kant: Kant would not agree with this solution because VW would not be
abiding by these solutions out of a genuine moral act. Had they not
been dishonest and deceitful, these solutions would not have to
happen. However, VW is looking to repair their image and their
pockets. Meaning, they are not doing this out of the goodness of their
heart, but simply in hope to repair their damage and rid themselves of
the stigma they brought upon themselves. VW did not act out on
principle and initial duty, making this the scandal that it is today, so
the solutions and reparations are not genuine and thus do not satisfy
Kants ethics.
Virtue: While the ethical theory of virtue would not agree with the
negligence taken by VW, they would be in agreement with VWs
solutions in this case. All of the actions taken by VW to rectify their
mistake is virtuous; theyre giving back to the community for the

environmental damages they have caused, and they are warranting

damages to all consumers affected by their fraudulent engine. While
their solution is virtuous, the causation of the solutions is not, making
this a dilemma in it of itself.
Utilitarian: From a utilitarian standpoint, this option would satisfy the
masses. With the exception of VW, all other stakeholders would benefit
from this solution, making it a perfect example of utilitarian ethics.
While initially VWs actions went completely against the utilitarian
perspective, their solutions apply to it perfectly, because they would be
making the consumers, the government, and the general public happy
by warranting damages and funds in reparation for their fraudulent
actions.

Works Cited
Ewing, Jack. The New York Times. 22 September 2015. Website. 12 May 2016.
Moore, Thad, Anthony Faiola and Sari Horwitz. Washington Post. 21
September 2015. Website. 10 May 2016.
Ruddick, Graham. The Guardian. 10 December 2015. Website. 12 May 2016.
Sorokanich, Bob. Road and Track. 21 April 2016. Website. 12 May 2016.
Zhang, Benjamin. Business Insider. 7 October 2015. Wensite. 13 May 2016.