Red Tape Defeats Scotch Tape

Don't you feel safer knowing that prosecutors have made the evil members of America's sticky-tape conglomerate pay for a case of terrible lawlessness?

3M Co. has agreed to pay almost $700,000 to settle a Fresno County case that alleged the company sold undersize adhesive tapes.

Fresno County prosecutors made their case stick by showing that 3M's Scotch and Tartan brand adhesive and packaging tapes were 6 percent narrower than advertised. "They knew what the width was, and they seemed to want to exaggerate it," said Alan Yengoyan, the Fresno County deputy district attorney who prosecuted the case.

Six percent short of the stated number. If we prosecuted  all government bureaucrats and legislators who are at least six percent off in what they delivered, we'd be clogging the courts for the next 25 years. No matter:

Under the settlement announced Thursday, 3M agreed to change its labels. It also will pay Fresno County $600,000 in civil penalties and an additional $75,000 into a state trust fund to benefit county and state weights and measures offices. The company also will pay $18,000 to the state Department of Measurement and Standards, which investigated the case.

Comments

[Marty]

that was a sticky situation...

[David]

I'm a fan of the blog but in this case I agree with the government. If we must pay taxes I expect good stewardship of the people's money. That includes not allowing itself to be cheated by vendors. Also note that the court wasn't clogged because the company settled.

[Hunter]

So, David, now that we've handled the ole narrow tape situation, what should we tackle next? weird foreign policy decisions? Terrible schools? Violent policing of drug laws? Tell the class what you've got in mind.

[Rogier]

Going off on a tangent here: There's a Dutch children's book series from the fifties (I think) whose protagonist is a mischievous but (of course) fundamentally decent Rotterdam street urchin called Pietje Bell. When he becomes an adolescent, late in the series, he dabbles in journalism and goes to the United States -- the book is called "Pietje Bell in America," and you can guess why it appealed to me. Once on U.S. shores, he marvels at the ingenuity of one fast-food entrepreneur who (so Pietje is told) amassed his fortune by making all his hot dogs half an inch shorter than they used to be, while keeping the price the same. The book presented that as a rakish, admirable innovation, I seem to recall. That may have skewed my views of such schemes...

So, with that out of the way: I'd have much more of a problem with a roll of tape being six percent too short in LENGTH than in WIDTH. The latter does not really reduce the usefulness of the tape. The former DOES, because you literally run out six percent earlier.

I'm all for truth in labeling, but this strikes me as a case of petty bureaucracy justifying its existence. "Department of Measurement and Standards" -- give me a break. I'm going to go out on a limb here and venture that that's the kind of outfit no one would miss if you did away with it tomorrow.

David, note that I didn't say the 3M case clogged the court. I said the courts would become clogged if we held bureaucrats to the same standards that they hold the industry that they feel called upon to oversee.

[benpal]

Wouldn't it have been fair if the roughly $700,000 had been re-distributed to the customers who suffered from severe shortage of sticky matters?

Nice source of income for the county (hmm, the county are us, ain't it?).

[OGRE]

I'm not sure I can get too worked up on this one.

From what I understand it was a matter of deceptive advertising and/or product labeling. And while 6% isn't generally a great deal, lets compare it to other instances.

- My new car gets 6% less miles per gallon than the sticker stays.

- My new plot of land has 6% less acreage than the deed says

- My new house has 6% less square footage than the realtor said.

- The 'gallon' of milk I just paid 4$ for has only .94 gallons of milk in it.

- The Kwikie Mart adds an unstated 6% 'service fee' that doesn't appear on the receipt, such that everything I buy there costs 6% more than advertised

Clearly, mislabeling or deceptive advertising cannot be tolerated. Now there is certainly a justified question as to how best to remedy such situations, and I'm not convinced that county D.A.s collecting fees into the county coffers is the best solution. But we can probably be pretty certain that we know just how much 3M tape we are buying by looking at the label now.

[David]

Rogier, it's a silly case, to be sure, and I hope Fresno doesn't start looking too carefully at lumber or pipe fittings. But, I do think the department of measurement and standards served a useful purpose here. Being a good watchdog over government purchsing is not the same as being a petty bureaucrat interfering in a private transaction.

[cranberrycynic]

Can I now sue the MBTA for their 13% late train arrival figure?

[Phelps]

Fraud is fraud. I have no problem with them selling whatever they want as long as they are actually selling what is on the label.

If you have a problem with truth in labeling laws, you are veering out of Libertarian Land in into Anarchy Asylum.

[Rogier]

Does it not matter that the difference is in WIDTH rather than LENGTH? To me it does, for the obvious reason that tape that is ever-so-marginally narrower than the packaging says (.94'') is every bit as useful as 1-inch tape. The same cannot be said for tape that is only 188 feet long, as opposed to 200 feet.

Protesting that the tape sold was six percent too narrow reminds me of the petty gotcha games that Consumer Reports plays on its last editorial page of every issue.

[Linda]

"Good stewardship of the people's money"?

Marty's not from Maine, I guess.... (Google "LeMoine" "Augusta")

[Phelps]

If it doesn't matter, then why print "1 inch x XX feet" on the package? Why not ".94 inch x XX feet"? When you decide to label it, label it accurately.