Gee, The Exec Got Fired For His Punk Actions

Create Account

Gee, The Exec Got Fired For His Punk Actions

41 comments, 266 views, posted 11:52 am 03/08/2012 in News by Viscera
Viscera has 11857 posts, 1476 threads, 1080 points, location: 1123 6536 5321
Lord of Glencoe
Tweet

Exec Bullies Chick-Fil-A Worker, Then Promptly Gets Fired For It

Adam Smith, former CFO and treasurer of medical supplies manufacturer Vante, caused quite a stir today when he put up a video of himself bullying a Chick-fil-A drive-thru employee in Tucson on YouTube.
Smith berates the worker about her company in the video, which was initially titled ”Reduce $’s to Chick-Fil-A’s Hate Groups.” It has since been taken down (though others have uploaded it too).
"I don't know how you live with yourself and work here," he tells the employee at the window. "I don't understand it. This is a horrible corporation with horrible values. You deserve better."
”I’m a nice guy, by the way … totally heterosexual," he continues. "Not a gay in me, I just can’t stand the hate.”
Chick-fil-A is currently in the middle of a controversy sparked by president and COO Dan Cathy's comments about gay marriage. He said that going against the Biblical definition of marriage is "inviting God's judgment on our nation."

Vante didn't approve of Smith's behavior, and he's no longer working there.
Here's the press release from Vante announcing that Smith is "no longer an employee of our company," effective immediately:

Quote:

TUCSON, AZ--(Marketwire - Aug 2, 2012) - The following is a statement from Vante:
Vante regrets the unfortunate events that transpired yesterday in Tucson between our former CFO/Treasurer Adam Smith and an employee at Chick-fil-A. Effective immediately, Mr. Smith is no longer an employee of our company.
The actions of Mr. Smith do not reflect our corporate values in any manner. Vante is an equal opportunity company with a diverse workforce, which holds diverse opinions. We respect the right of our employees and all Americans to hold and express their personal opinions, however, we also expect our company officers to behave in a manner commensurate with their position and in a respectful fashion that conveys these values of civility with others.
We hope that the general population does not hold Mr. Smith's actions against Vante and its employees.

Maybe Chick-Fil-A can offer him a job, they have good benefits and aren't open on Sundays

Extra Points Given by:

evolution (5), z0phi3l (5), Quaektem (5), HariSeldon (5)

Comments

[1] [2]

7:31 pm 03/08/2012

Flee

Quote by Viscera:

Flee's comments are that of an employee mindset. Not from a business owners mindset.

Incorrect. Its a Canadian mindset where we have the Employment Standards Act that protects employees from unjust termination.

7:53 pm 03/08/2012

Viscera

it's a mindset from an employee pov, that's my point. A business owner is concerned about the image and impression the general public, namely future customers, will have about the company. Corporate execs are reps of the company. The "idea" that a public statement is divorced from their representing the company isn't one that generates from the mgmnt side of the table. Usually corp execs understand the expectation of their behavior publicly, and accept that restriction as part of the job description

8:29 pm 03/08/2012

Flee

The real question is... What was in his contract? I haven't heard of execs that don't have contracts. Especially a CFO

8:37 pm 03/08/2012

Flee

Also, it is this simple...

/phone rings at office...
Me: Hello?
Them: Hi, I want to complain about something one of your employees did.
Me: Were the representing the company at the time?
Them: Well, no, I just found out online that they worked here.
Me: I am sorry you were offended by this persons actions, but what they do on their own time is out of my control.

Just because someone yells, doesn't mean I have to bend over and bow to their demands.

9:27 pm 03/08/2012

Viscera

that is true

9:34 pm 03/08/2012

Quaektem

Quote by Flee:

If he was off the clock not representing the company, how would they know where he worked?

Because he was the one who originally posted a video he made... and he was obviously proud of his actions or he would not have videotaped it in the first place so anonymity was not a goal. Doesn't take a genius.

Didn't he post this? Not too hart to figure out

Quote by Flee:

Does your job require a valid drivers license? Do you drive to client sites? If so, I can understand this. Due to the DWI, you no longer have the ability to perform your duties.

It does, but I can get a hardship waiver, just like Obama's uncle... so why should I be fired? I can still perform my job duties after all.

9:36 pm 03/08/2012

Quaektem

Quote by Flee:

If he was off the clock not representing the company, how would they know where he worked?

Quote by Flee:

Does your job require a valid drivers license? Do you drive to client sites? If so, I can understand this. Due to the DWI, you no longer have the ability to perform your duties.

It does, but I can get a hardship waiver, just like Obama's uncle... so why should I be fired? I can still perform my job duties after all.

Quote by Flee:

Just because someone yells, doesn't mean I have to bend over and bow to their demands.

Like the CEO of Chick-fil-a?

Quote by Flee:

Its a Canadian mindset where we have the Employment Standards Act that protects employees from unjust termination.

I just gotta know... what is a 'just' termination in Canada?

9:56 pm 03/08/2012

Flee

Quote by Quaektem:

I just gotta know... what is a 'just' termination in Canada?

You need a good reason to let someone go. If you can't afford the employee, then you fill out the paperwork and lay off the employee(which means you have to pay a severance package). If the employee is not doing his job, then you can let him go. if he is constantly late, etc, then he can be fired, but you need to a reason to terminate the employee.

If the employee is late once, and they are fired, they will probably be able to sue for wrongful termination as you need a verbal warning, written warning, then termination.

You can't let someone go because you dont like them or other reasons that don't relate to their work ability.

Quote by Quaektem:

If it was his personal youtube account that has no links to the business he works for, and the people Googled his name, found a Linked-In account, then I disagree with his termination.

If at any point he notes the company he works for(driving a company branded car, etc), then he is representing the company, and I agree with the termination.

To give an example, if I was fired for something I posted on teoti, the lawyer I hired would be rubbing his hands together with a greedy smile.

10:08 pm 03/08/2012

Quaektem

Quote by Flee:

If at any point he notes the company he works for(driving a company branded car, etc), then he is representing the company, and I agree with the termination.

So, if he posted it on his Facebook, where he also lists his employer that's OK... but outside that he could walk down Main St. in assless chaps and be confident that his job is waiting for him? I will be sure to avoid opening a business in Canada any time soon...

Quote by Flee:

To give an example, if I was fired for something I posted on teoti, the lawyer I hired would be rubbing his hands together with a greedy smile.

I'm sure he'd even let you keep a few bucks...

10:11 pm 03/08/2012

Quaektem

Quote by Flee:

If you can't afford the employee, then you fill out the paperwork and lay off the employee(which means you have to pay a severance package).

This, BTW, is hysterical. You have to give money to an employee you can no longer afford... basically paying them for not working. Fantastic way to help business owners survive... what if he just closes the doors and walks away? Do they still get severance?

10:43 pm 03/08/2012

Flee

I believe the severance is 2 weeks per year of employment. If the business goes out of business, then the employees are not being laid off.

When Dell closed the doors on the building and laid me off, I got 6 months pay.

Since there are many business running successfully up here, I don't think there is a problem with the laws.

Once again, govt is supposed to be of the people, for the people, so they made law accordingly...

11:06 pm 03/08/2012

Viscera

Flee, really, don't you understand the cyclical nature of business? The 80's were a booming time in the US, but if you listen to the revisionist historians they will tell you that the laws that allowed that gutted the employees. So "business" doing well doesn't mean the laws necessarily make sense or are good. I'm glad the laws make it more difficult to terminate an employee, but really, do you think it takes alot of creativity to work the system?

11:10 pm 03/08/2012

Viscera

I had an employee who was late every Saturday, because he went out drinking every Friday night andd got so shit faced he ended up going to the hospital because his diabetes was out of control after the binges. He was fired, and claimed he was going to bring a wrongful termination suit against us. When I told him I acquired a copy of his bar bill (I knew the bartender at the watereing hole he frequented) and he can continue to claim his "diabetes" was the reason he was sluggish every Saturday, but maybe the judge would be interested in his drinking when he had the knowledge of the effect alcohol has on blood sugar. He played the system, but I played it better. When they build a better mouse, get a better mouse trap.

11:20 pm 03/08/2012

Flee

Quote by Viscera:

do you think it takes alot of creativity to work the system?

of course not. That is referred to "performancing them out". You grill them on any minor performance issue to create a case for letting them go. But you will see it coming as you need the verbal and written warnings.

What I can't get over is the fact you can walk into work one day and your boss says "you don't work here any more" in the US. I am sure it is very rare that people are let go for no good reason, but the fact it could happen would make me not want to work there. I would need a contract.

12:31 am 04/08/2012

evolution

Quote by Flee:

Employers in the US (or most states of the US, as far as I know) can fire an employee for any reason at all, except for discriminatory reasons. You can't fire someone because of their race, colour, religion, national origin, or gender - as these are protected under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Age, disability, and maternity also gets some degree of protection.

Unfortunately, however, the fact that employers can fire employees for any reason at all means that they can and do take advantage of it, and the burden to prove discrimination falls on the employee.

1:10 am 04/08/2012

Viscera

I only discriminate against those who suck at their jobs. Them I have no problem discriminating against

[1] [2]

Add Comment

Log in via teoti, or register to add a comment!

Teh Nook • MayrHayasdan • JaranWeb • AngryShirts • GoneGeek • Eat Liver