It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Miller Man Sacked For Drinking Bud.

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by SourGrapes
This brings a new perspective to the issue. If the guy was never told why he was fired, then the company is in the green. If WI is an 'At-Will' state (which most are these days), then the company is safe as long as they don't give reasons for termination.


Doesn't the "at will" provision only come into play for someone who is not under contract? I was thinking that most beer companies are under some sort of union contract.

B.




posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bleys

Doesn't the "at will" provision only come into play for someone who is not under contract? I was thinking that most beer companies are under some sort of union contract.

B.



I believe he works for a company who is on contract with Miller. I guess it depends on his company and whether they hire union?



posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Contractual Obligations


Originally posted by Bleys
Doesn't the "at will" provision only come into play for someone who is not under contract? I was thinking that most beer companies are under some sort of union contract.

If anyone is aware of the terms of Isac Aguero's former employment, it's CJW and its management.

Any company that wants to stay in business is very careful about personnel matters. Companies that aren't go out of business. It's that simple.

Thus my skepticism in this case.

While it is, of course, possible that the management of CJW really is that stupid, I doubt it.

Folks in this thread are already talking about lawsuits. There may be one, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was for trade defamation instead of wrongful termination.

More likely, however, CJW and Miller just want this story to go away.

We'll probably never know how this all plays out.



posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Looks like this company has a history of 'wrongful termination'. (Although, I think I would side with the company on it's decision to fire a driver who admitted to being arrested for 'suspected' DWI. They should have suspended the guy indefinately, until the case decision was made.)

Edit: oops, here's the link.

www.dwd.state.wi.us...

[edit on 13-2-2005 by SourGrapes]



posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 03:14 PM
link   
This is not unusual at all in my experience working on companies' brands and just knowing guys in unions and on production lines.

What shocks me is the complete lack of understanding of the general public that they think your employer needs a reason to fire you. Much a less a good one! They can't let you go for demonstratable discrimination, but that's about it.

This is micro-political correctness and it's as old as capitalism.

Perhaps it's mostly still alive and well in small town America, but when a plant employees 70 to 90% of your town, you just don't do some things. One is kicking your employer or coworkers. That's how it's seen. Taking food out of your neighbors mouth.

It's not a free speech issue, it's a loyalty issue. Man, just thinking back to my former father in law (Miller Union employee) over 500 miles from home scared to even take a sip of a micro-brew in a public restaurant.
Terrified even! He wouldn't do it. Wanted to. Wouldn't. You support your brand to support your brothers in the Union, as much as your company. It's a matter of pride, and not one I'd imagine the Union would bend over backwards to change.

You don't smoke Marlboro if you get your check from Winston. You don't drink Bud if you make Miller. And my God, you never get photographed doing it in public!

I guess things change, but this is how it used to be and still is alot of places.

I'm just kind of shocked people are so shocked. Especially the conservatives.


[edit on 13-2-2005 by RANT]



posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bleys
Doesn't the "at will" provision only come into play for someone who is not under contract? I was thinking that most beer companies are under some sort of union contract.


No not in Wisconsin since there is another law that applies


Attorney Nola Cross of Milwaukee thinks Aguero might have grounds for legal recourse. While Wisconsin is an "at-will" work state - meaning people can be fired at a employer's discretion, as long as it's not for discrimination - another state law may be on Aguero's side.

"In Wisconsin, employees are protected from discharge or other adverse employment action based upon the `use or nonuse of lawful products off the employer's premises during nonworking hours,' " she said.



posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 03:22 PM
link   
The Difference Between Right, Wrong And Labor Laws


Originally posted by SourGrapes
Looks like this company has a history of 'wrongful termination'.




4. Gustafson disclosed his arrest to general manager Richard, Knapp on January 24, 1986. At that time, Gustafson told Knapp that he had been driving while drunk, that he had been in an accident, and that he had been arrested for driving while under the influence of alcohol and for driving with a blood alcohol content of .10 percent or greater.

It's an interesting case, and an example of why employers are so touchy about labor issues.

This guy admitted he had been driving drunk and that doing so had resulted in an accident. He was a warehouseman, but also drove beer trucks.

However, because he wasn't officially terminated for that -- but for the arrest, the employers were still found liable.

If anything, this makes me even more skeptical that CJW canned Isac Aguero simply for drinking Bud.

Almost positive, in fact, but I could be wrong, of course.



posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 03:25 PM
link   
Rant, your post was 'right on'. My posts were from a 'legal' stand-point. (I was thinking what you were, but didn't want to 'stir the waters' with an emotional post that screams "Cry babies"!)

It's time for us to 'grow up' and stop looking for lawsuits everywhere! When are we going to start holding ourselves accountable for our own actions? The U.S. has got to be the 'Sue Capital' of the world (I'm sure it is, but don't have any statistics available).

(How do we know this guy wasn't looking for a lawsuit? Maybe he already knew he was to be fired and saw an opportunity to 'get his last jab in'.)

It's so easy to blame others for our actions, then we don't have to take the time to really learn from our own mistakes.



posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by SourGrapes
Rant, your post was 'right on'. My posts were from a 'legal' stand-point. (I was thinking what you were, but didn't want to 'stir the waters' with an emotional post that screams "Cry babies"!)


Well, I responded before following the legal debate which raises some excellent points, so mine was just a gut reaction from the "old school."



posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Stupid Move. Should be fun in court.

As for the beers they both suck anyway, American Big brand beer is watery crap. Give me a Guinness Stout or a Bass Ale.



posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots
The next thing you know; if you work for Ford they will tell you that you are fired for driving a Chevrolet. If abuse like this is not stopped fast who knows what will happen in our workplaces?

Actually, when my father worked for Ford's in the late 50s to early 80s, a non-Ford vehicle in the lot was uncommon.

As long as our country is in the economic position it is is now (outsourcing, poor job growth), the employer holds all the cards.



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by SourGrapes
If my Employee Handbook doesn't state that I could be fired for stealing, does this mean that I couldn't be?

[edit on 13-2-2005 by SourGrapes]

Stealing is illegal so yes you could be. As far as Im aware of, drinking Bud isnt illegal (perhaps it should be but thats another debate
) so there is no comparison between the two.



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 10:08 AM
link   
It would be some bad press if was in his Miller uniform and drinking a But, but if was just in plain-clothes, then there is no problem.



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by techmint
It would be some bad press if was in his Miller uniform and drinking a But, but if was just in plain-clothes, then there is no problem.


As I recall he was in normal street clothing. I emailed the editor to see if they have a copy in their photo archives showing him with the bottle of bud and will post it if they have one. They do have one in the archives but it shows him in his own home, which will not answer your question.



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 11:20 AM
link   
OH NO !!!

I'm in a real mess...

I work for Schindler Elevator... now I can't ride in an Otis, Thyssen-Krupp, Kone.....

Looks like it's the stairs for me...



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 01:29 PM
link   
For those interested here is a link to the actual picture that shows him holding the bottle of bud lite.

www.journaltimes.com...



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Note the button on the necklace worn by the person to the bud-drinker's right. I wonder if that's part of the problem?



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 02:13 PM
link   
What's really tragic is that he lost his job because he chose one wretched, pissy
excuse for a beer over another of the same type.. If it had been because he was seen with something like a Sierra Nevada product or a regional microbrew (New Glarus, Bell's, Lakefront, Sprecher, Hinterland, etc.) he might have sent a message that the brewing behemoths might have taken to heart: I prefer to drink the drinkable. THAT would be worthwhile....



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Even if an "at-will" state, if he can argue well that he was "wrongfully terminated" he might have a case.


The related story link shows that Aguero is now looking for a good lawyer, so he can take the company to court; as well he should.


I don't know if this was stated... Was he wearing any company uniform or insignia while this pic was taken? If so, he's screwed. If not, he's got a great case imho....



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 02:30 PM
link   
Having seen the photo, I would back the company fully.





top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join