Cargrill Gives In Employee Fired In Sign Dispute Gets Job Back

The Daily News Record ^ | 10/27/2006 | Jeff Mellott

[High Cotton]

Padilla had marked the rear window of his black pickup truck with white letters spelling out the political message and drove it to work during the first week of October.

Cargill and Padilla, with representatives of the Valley Family Forum, issued the statement that includes an acknowledgement that the firing was about the sign.

"Mr. Padilla," the statement said, "was terminated on October 5th because his personal vehicle bore a sign that read, ‘Please Vote for Marriage on November 7th.’"

An earlier statement from the company’s attorney said Padilla was dismissed because of insubordination. Padilla, the attorney said, had ignored orders to remove a sign that could be "reasonably construed as a show of hostility and intolerance toward homosexuals."

Thursday’s statement goes on to say that after Cargill’s initial request that he remove the sign, Padilla replaced it before returning to work the next day, and then parked on what he believed to be property not owned by Cargill.

[High Cotton]

The company feared the promotion of a law would be "intolerent to homosexuals"...well THAT certainly justifies violating a man's First Amendment rights. (scarcasm)

[Alberta's Child]

Cargill had every right to fire him. They probably just realized that doing so would be a terrible business decision.

[Jaysun]

I'm not sure I'd want the job back. Perhaps he has little choice.

[Blueflag]

um, they specifically did NOT have every right to fire the guy. What set of legitimate rules did he violate? Curious what your thinking is.

[The Blitherer]

Cargill had every right to fire him.

They did? How so?

[digger48]

Sounds like some low level supervisor was being PC and the big guns had to come in and fix it.

[Alberta's Child]

He doesn't have a constitutional right to work there. The company could fire him just because they don't like him.

[BenLurkin]

"reasonably construed as a show of hostility and intolerance toward homosexuals." Is that actionable?

[doc1019]

Hope he is using his return as a means to a paycheck until he can get another job.

[Frohickey]

Cargill had every right to fire him. They did? How so?

Freedom of association. First amendment right to free speech is a limitation on government, not on private citizens/companies.

[Blueflag]

True. And I agree.

It's just that they apparently stated that they fired him because of his sign. That was an oops.

NOW they can fire him cuz the just don;t want him there anymore. ;-)

[muawiyah]

Marriage is a "contract" authorized/regulated by law. A "company" exists because it is "incorporated", and a "corporation" is also authorized/regulated by law.

Incoporated companies have a vested interest in the continued existence of marriage, partnership and corporations.

Otherwise the neighborhood gang would have as much right to their assets as they would.

Obviously the company's managers have thought this one out a little bit more, but they really ought to see who it is blocking access to the men's room more often.

[muawiyah]

BTW, the free speech rights of a real person certainly exceed those of a fake person, right?

You need to think this one out. Corporations are creatures of the law ~ people have God-given rights.

[mom4kittys]

Why do people say that? Of course they can fire him because they don't like him--THAT IS NOT WHAT THEY DID They should have done that. THEY were the ones who made the sign an issue. They were stupid. It would have been hard to prove if they had just fired him for no reason.

[The Blitherer]

Freedom of association. First amendment right to free speech is a limitation on government, not on private citizens/companies.

Really? So even though the sign was on his personal property he can still get fired for it because its a private business? But that seems like a loophole conservatives can use as well. A business can fire somebody because of their VIEWS on homosexuality, not because they are a homosexual?

[vikzilla]

Sounds like some low level supervisor was being PC and the big guns had to come in and fix it.

Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding, We have a winner.

[slaymakerpowertape]

Cargill is the largest private US company and is responsible for 25% of US grain exports, among other things. I think that regardless of their stand on marriage, their business will be won't be affected.

[slaymakerpowertape]

I meant '...their business won't be affected.' Oops.

[Woodman]

Well NJ and NY are "At Will" employment states. So you can fire anyone, anytime you want, just as long as it isn't for discriminatory purposes.

[LasVegasMac]

Cargill had every right to fire him.

Waiting for the why's on that statement.