The Return Of the Soup Nazis.
You recall we had a little discussion here a while ago about Dillards'-you know, the people with the department stores-firing a person over two hot dogs they didn't even want, and we mused over the kind of company that could be that petty?
At the time I was feeling a little bit holier than thou, figuring it'd never happen in Iowa.
Well folks, I'm here with a plateful of crow, and as Joe Hammond of Eagles' Nest, New Mexico used to say "Hell, that crow don't taste too bad if you put salt and pepper on it. Hah!"
In Tompkins-Kutcher v. Employment Appeal Board, 11-0149 (Iowa Ct. App. Aug. 24, 2011), a woman who worked for Casey's was fired and was denied unemployment.
It seems that she took outdated soup from the store as she was directed to, placed it in the dumpster outside the store and then removed it, took it home and used it to feed her dog.
Tompkins-Kutcher was initially awarded unemployment benefits but Casey's resisted because she had violated company policy, to wit: employees are required to pay for any item they intend to use, whether outdated or otherwise, trash or whatever. The administrative law judge concluded Tompkins-Kutcher was discharged for misconduct because she'd signed for a copy of the employee handbook wherein this policy was set out.
The district court affirmed, finding that she intentionally disregarded the standards of behavior employers have a right to expect from their employees.
Atta way, Casey's. You sure showed 'em.
Of course there's the small matter of the secret video camera that was set up in a Casey's office to observe a woman employee who was, as she thought, expressing breast milk in a private place. It's been removed to Federal Court, but stay tuned.