NEWS: Miller Man Sacked For Drinking Bud.

Isac Aguero, was fired from his job as a forklift operator with a Miller Brewing distributor the same day a picture of him holding a bottle of Bud Lite in a tavern was published in a Racine newspaper. Aguero learned there was a problem with the photo shortly after he showed up to work on Monday. Co-workers told him he was in trouble for the picture. He was then called into the general manager's office and was told he was fired.



First a company came along and told their employees if they smoked, the would be fired, now we have a company firing an employee fired for drinking the wrong brand of beer. Just how far are companies going to go?

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?

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.


Related News Links:
www.journaltimes.com

[edit on 13-2-2005 by John bull 1]

WTF? So, if I work at a Crapa-Cola(Coca-Cola) Plant but want to drink something that tastes good and open a Mountain Dew I am to be fired for wanting something that tastes good? Or I work at the Newport caiggarette company and don't smoke, am I to be fired? Or work at Burger King but eat at Taco Bell? You can't fire someone for what they do off the job unless they do something they going to jail for. I would understand if you worked somewhere then were arrested for burning three houses down, but not for drinking a competitors drink.

So as you see one action leads to another results, now people better be careful where you work and what you do after you leave work in your privacy because they are watching you.

I work in a bar as a bartender, when the miller reps come in to promote or casually drink they are required to drink miller...Kinda messed up, but hey they are representatives of the company and it doesn't look good if they are in there as a miller brewing company employee and are guzzling down some budweiser or coronas you know.

There's probably some clause in their employee handbook telling them they can only drink such and such, cuz the reps have stated to me that they could loose thier jobs if they are caught drinking anything else.

Wait... he was fired for DRINKING bud, not smoking it, right? I just wanted to be sure I understand correctly. If a truck driver smokes bud he probably shouldn't be driving a truck, but other than that I don't see the problem.

It'll be a cold day in hell when my employers strip me of my rights. I'd fight a government that tried it and I'd fight a company that tried it. I'd never kill somebody or set a building on fire though. I don't hurt people- people get hurt. I believe in Karma. Bad things happen to bad people. Just because I wanted it to happen doesn't mean I did it

I'm sure Budweiser would hire him as part of a public relations ploy.

Originally posted by Natas313
I work in a bar as a bartender, when the miller reps come in to promote or casually drink they are required to drink miller...Kinda messed up, but hey they are representatives of the company and it doesn't look good if they are in there as a miller brewing company employee and are guzzling down some budweiser or coronas you know.

There's probably some clause in their employee handbook telling them they can only drink such and such, cuz the reps have stated to me that they could loose thier jobs if they are caught drinking anything else.

Had you read the article you would have found;

Aguero added that he was never told he couldn't drink Bud Light, and there was no reference in the employee handbook to avoiding certain drinks.

By the time this guy's lawyers get through, he'll have enough money to buy Miller--the brewer, that is. I can hardly believe that an employer could be so stupid. What if an employee is a Miller drinker and someone bought him a Bud Lite, and, flash, someone snaps a picture of him holding the competitor's brew? Would he get fired? Frankly, I'd like to be in this guys shoes right now.

[edit on 05/2/13 by GradyPhilpott]

This isn't so unusual.

Plenty of corporations have contracts that impinge on their employees' freedoms to consume competitor products. If it's in black and white in the contract, it's legal.

[edit on 13-2-2005 by MaskedAvatar]

Originally posted by The Vagabond
It'll be a cold day in hell when my employers strip me of my rights. I'd fight a government that tried it and I'd fight a company that tried it. I'd never kill somebody or set a building on fire though. I don't hurt people- people get hurt. I believe in Karma. Bad things happen to bad people. Just because I wanted it to happen doesn't mean I did it

It'd be hard to fight the company if you signed the Employee Handbook which states it's requirements both on and off the job. If they pay you, they pretty much do own you.

Edit: A contract could still be argued if the guy knew of the repercussion to his action. For instance, if it's known that employees will be fired for such a thing and they can prove he knew of this then he pretty much has no case.

[edit on 13-2-2005 by SourGrapes]

I'd fire him too. Miller Rules!!!! Budweiser Drools!!!

Originally posted by redhat
I'm sure Budweiser would hire him as part of a public relations ploy.

That would be priceless. He should go to Budweiser for a commercial spot. Between being in Bud commercials and suing the pants off of Miller I think this guy is indeed in an enviable spot. I still wouldn't blame him for mauling the hell out of his former boss with a wrench though.


Edit to respond to Sour Grapes. I'd make the case that the agreement is signed under duress. Besides I'm pretty sure that a contract can not violate the laws or the constitution. We don't have indentured servitude anymore for example. I strongly doubt any court will find that a contract can deprive a person of their personal freedoms, especially not as a requirement for earning a living.
Where would this end anyway? A handful of New Yorkers on the boards of major corporations could rule the country by requiring affiliation with their political party for hiring.

[edit on 13-2-2005 by The Vagabond]

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
This isn't so unusual.

Plenty of corporations have contracts that impinge on their employees' freedoms to consume competitor products. If it's in black and white in the contract, it's legal.

Hmm I can understand this for say exeutives or management, but a forklift driver? However, employment is conditional on your employer so who knows. A good lawyer would have a field day with this.

If the company I work for wants me to use thier product exlusivly and not to use competitor products i should upon being hired

1. Be verbally instructed
2. Sign simple contract conferming agreement with policy
3. Be given product for free, or at a highly reduced retail price that i could take home

Otherwise it is one sided, and unfair

WHile this guy getting fired for drinking bud is ridiculous, if it's actually in some employee manual or part of some agreement he signed he could be in trouble in terms of having a solid case for a lawsuit. If on the other hand he did not know he wwasn't supposed to be drinking bud in his FREE time not on the company time, well as Grady said, this guy is gonna get more money for wrongful termination and mental anguish than he'd ever make driving a forklift.

While not beer related, another subject close to my heart is doughnuts. And while I'm not sure if it's a company mandate I do know that Dunkin Donuts executives (not the poor shlubs working at the stores) refuse to drink Starbucks because it's their direct competition. Dunkin Donuts is not big on the west coast but back east they're huge and hate starbucks with a religous zeal. I was entertaining a couple of them out here and these people drove miles out of their way to go to coffee bean instead of Starbucks.

Some people huh? Though Starbucks does suck, I get my coffee from 7/11.

And in LA there are litterally StarBucks everywhere. Swear to god, no joke in Culver City there is a Starbucks diagonally across from another Starbucks. It's either hilarious or the most frightening thing in the universe.

Not sure which.

SPiderj

My bf works for the company that does most of Miller's promotions and advertising. He said that they are supposed to drink Miller at all work functions, even if it's not a Miller function.

According to the article - Aguero added that he was never told he couldn't drink Bud Light, and there was no reference in the employee handbook to avoiding certain drinks.

I foresee lawyers of all shapes and sizes tripping over one another for a chance to represent this guy.

Someone else mentioned a possible PR coup for the Bud people:

He had at least one supporter in the beer distribution business.

"We hate to see anybody get let go who's enjoying a nice cold Bud Light on his own time," said Dave Hock, vice president of Beechwood Distributors, the supplier of Anheuser-Busch products for southeastern Wisconsin. "We hate to see that come from any competitor, be it CJW or anybody. "We don't think it's fair to the individual to be fired based on what he was drinking."

B.

Originally posted by Bleys
According to the article - Aguero added that he was never told he couldn't drink Bud Light, and there was no reference in the employee handbook to avoiding certain drinks.

As I stated above, it could still be an implied contract if everyone at his work knows that you could lose your job over this.

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

I guess it depends on how 'well known' this is in his workplace. (I think they were probably looking for a reason to get rid of this guy.)

Edit: to close quote

[edit on 13-2-2005 by SourGrapes]

Details, Details

From the source article:
Aguero said he was not given a reason for the dismissal, and claimed he never had problems with his bosses at work.

I've seen enough of these kinds of stories to know that we are not being told everything we ought to know about this case.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure this wasn't all about what brand of beer this guy drinks.

For all we know, he had a Bud in his hand when he walked into the general manager's office.

And that's the problem: we only know Isac Aguero's version of the story.

However, once CJW runs it through their legal department, they may decide they can disclose the real reasons for letting this guy go.

Maybe it really was because he drinks Bud, but I am extremely skeptical of that.

Originally posted by Majic
Details, Details

From the source article:
Aguero said he was not given a reason for the dismissal, and claimed he never had problems with his bosses at work.

I've seen enough of these kinds of stories to know that we are not being told everything we ought to know about this case.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure this wasn't all about what brand of beer this guy drinks.

For all we know, he had a Bud in his hand when he walked into the general manager's office.

And that's the problem: we only know Isac Aguero's version of the story.

However, once CJW runs it through their legal department, they may decide they can disclose the real reasons for letting this guy go.

Maybe it really was because he drinks Bud, but I am extremely skeptical of that.

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.