Question

McDonald's Hot Coffee Case. Who is wrong? In 1992, 79-year-old Stella Liebeck bought a cup of takeout coffee at a McDonald's drive-thru in Albuquerque and spilled it on her lap. There were no cup holders in the Ford car she was in. Her grandson was driving. He parked the car at McDonald's and Stella Liebeck opened the top of the coffee to put milk and sugar in it. She sued McDonald's and a jury awarded her nearly $3 million for the burns she suffered. She was wearing sweatpants that absorbed the coffee and kept it against her skin. She suffered third-degree burns (the most serious kind) and required many surgeries on her legs. . McDonald's operations manual required all restaurants to hold its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit. Coffee at that temperature, if spilled, causes third-degree burns in three to seven seconds. McDonald's admitted at trial that consumers were unaware of the very hot temperature - no sticker or words on the cup as a warning. McDonald's admitted it did not warn customers of the nature and extent of this risk and could offer no explanation as to why it did not. . Liebeck's case was far from an isolated event. McDonald's had received more than 700 previous reports of injury from its coffee, including reports of third- degree burns, and had paid settlements in some cases. At the beginning, before the $3 million dollars was awarded to her, Mrs. Liebeck offered to settle the case for $20,000 to cover her medical expenses and lost income. But McDonald's never offered more than $800, so the case went to trial.

if you are McDonald’s company Answer these questions to help you decide WHO is to Blame:

1. What actually happened and why (root cause analysis)?

2. What are the facts you can use to support your decision (if you are McDonald’s or if you are Stella Liebeck)?

3. What are the possible solutions to this case from your perspective?

4. What is the best solution so that good Ethics and Morality are followed?

5. Will your decision have Universal Consequences for others, now and in the future?

Answer 1

1. Coffee is supposed to be hot as it is a hot beverage. Trying to work with the cup in a car with no cup holders was always a risk increased by the fact that it was being handled by a 79-year old lady. The temperature can be felt from outside the cup when you are holding it, so care must always be given.

2. Facts of the case with respect to McDonald's:

• The car did not have a cup-holder
• The car was being driven by an inexperienced driver
• The server did not warn about the temperature of the coffee to Stella while completing her takeaway order.

3. The onus comes on McDonald's to inform and warn its customers about the temperature of the food they serve and how the customers must always be careful. McDonald's should have opted for an out-of-court settlement which Stella had proposed earlier.

4. The best solution would be that McDonald's take care of Stella's all medical expenses and make sure that all the customers should be advised to be careful with the hot food being served to them and all its containers must have a warning about the same. The coffee was spilled due to Stella's mistake and not because the coffee was too hot. She should also not sue the company for hefty damages.

5. Yes, the decision will be for all and will have universal consequences in future.