4 more Ford workers fired over alleged snack theft after $1.95 cookie fiasco with wrongfully canned electrician

[Sherminator98]

https://nypost.com/2026/07/21/business/4-more-ford-workers-fired-over-alleged-snack-theft-after-1-95-cookie-fiasco-with-wrongfully-canned-electrician/

 

Man I heard stories back in the day of people "stealing" stuff from Ford (tires/wheels/etc) from plants and them keeping their jobs, but this is nuts!

[rmc523]

35 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said:

https://nypost.com/2026/07/21/business/4-more-ford-workers-fired-over-alleged-snack-theft-after-1-95-cookie-fiasco-with-wrongfully-canned-electrician/

 

Man I heard stories back in the day of people "stealing" stuff from Ford (tires/wheels/etc) from plants and them keeping their jobs, but this is nuts!

 

It's pretty crazy that their first step is seemingly to go straight to firing before gathering all the info.  Doesn't make sense....

 

Sounds like the employees get called into a room, sorry you're fired.  Without even getting a chance to prove they paid?

[Zestyg]

56 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

It's pretty crazy that their first step is seemingly to go straight to firing before gathering all the info.  Doesn't make sense....

 

Sounds like the employees get called into a room, sorry you're fired.  Without even getting a chance to prove they paid?

It is a bit unusually draconian. In my experience repping warehouse workers and salesmen at a certain company, even in cases of obvious theft they investigated more seriously and gave a chance to respond to allegations before trying to can them. Firing now and asking questions later is a pretty blatant violation of a concept called “just cause”, which is basically due process. If it’s in your union contract you can grieve and get reinstated w/ backpay. Article says 3 previous guys got reinstated this way, the 4th probably will be too I figure. 
 

It's honestly a huge waste of both the company’s and union’s time to do it like this. I would have to think that this is something automated gone awry rather than conscious decisions.

[rmc523]

15 minutes ago, Zestyg said:

It is a bit unusually draconian. In my experience repping warehouse workers and salesmen at a certain company, even in cases of obvious theft they investigated more seriously and gave a chance to respond to allegations before trying to can them. Firing now and asking questions later is a pretty blatant violation of a concept called “just cause”, which is basically due process. If it’s in your union contract you can grieve and get reinstated w/ backpay. Article says 3 previous guys got reinstated this way, the 4th probably will be too I figure. 
 

It's honestly a huge waste of both the company’s and union’s time to do it like this. I would have to think that this is something automated gone awry rather than conscious decisions.

 

Yeah, I'd agree there has to be more to the story.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, rmc523 said:

 

Yeah, I'd agree there has to be more to the story.

Overzealous plant managers most likely.  Hopefully corporate steps in.

[Zestyg]

8 minutes ago, akirby said:

Overzealous plant managers most likely.  Hopefully corporate steps in.

Many such cases!

[Oac98]

After reading the stories about this situation I will NEVER use any of the vending machines or kiosks they have in the plant. Ford should be ashamed of themselves, these employees should’ve never been fired in the first place since they had proof of payment.

[fuzzymoomoo]

3 hours ago, akirby said:

Overzealous plant managers most likely.  Hopefully corporate steps in.

Honestly, I don’t believe so. I believe it’s coming from above the plant level.

[fuzzymoomoo]

23 minutes ago, Oac98 said:

After reading the stories about this situation I will NEVER use any of the vending machines or kiosks they have in the plant. Ford should be ashamed of themselves, these employees should’ve never been fired in the first place since they had proof of payment.

 

It used to be a LOT better. They ditched Continental for Aramark around the time the pandemic started and I knew back then it was about to turn into a shit show. Read about maggots in Michigan prison food and the company that supplies them, None other than Aramark. Ever since Aramark put their kiosks in they’ve been nothing but problems, half the time they don’t work or are just frozen in place. If you try to buy hot food it NEVER is able to scan the tag, you have to manually input what it is and I’ve never had an instance where what I have in my hand is one of the options listed. I always ended up picking an option that’s closest to what I have without being less and it was always a dollar or 2 more than what it should be. I stopped using them entirely about 6 months ago when I first heard this kind of stuff was happening. I will never use them again, even if they end up switching vendors again. Oh yeah, and I’ve never been able to get a receipt from them since the switch. 

[akirby]

2 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Honestly, I don’t believe so. I believe it’s coming from above the plant level.

In my experience the managers probably got a memo to crack down on actual thefts but they went overboard enforcing it.

[akirby]

We had this my last 3 years at AT&T and it was great.  Grab a snack and use apple pay.  Instant receipt.  I don't recall anyone even being accused of stealing.

 

[Oac98]

3 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

 

It used to be a LOT better. They ditched Continental for Aramark around the time the pandemic started and I knew back then it was about to turn into a shit show. Read about maggots in Michigan prison food and the company that supplies them, None other than Aramark. Ever since Aramark put their kiosks in they’ve been nothing but problems, half the time they don’t work or are just frozen in place. If you try to buy hot food it NEVER is able to scan the tag, you have to manually input what it is and I’ve never had an instance where what I have in my hand is one of the options listed. I always ended up picking an option that’s closest to what I have without being less and it was always a dollar or 2 more than what it should be. I stopped using them entirely about 6 months ago when I first heard this kind of stuff was happening. I will never use them again, even if they end up switching vendors again. Oh yeah, and I’ve never been able to get a receipt from them since the switch. 

I don’t blame you one bit based on what you’re saying. You’re better off bringing in your own food or buying snacks and all that  than dealing with all that shit. You shouldn’t have to pay more just to make sure everything is good, f that! Wise decision to stop buying  from them.

[jpd80]

As others have said, avoid these vending issues.

Back during pandemic, our office had a self serve cash only tray of sweets/candy.

we had external auditors to our office, one asked me if he just take the candy because he had no cash…

I asked him wil declining mean we fail our audit? He bristled and said no

Weeks later I get called into the office about cash short in the above set up,

I explained the situation and next day, the thing was removed permanently.

 

[Oac98]

23 hours ago, jpd80 said:

As others have said, avoid these vending issues.

Back during pandemic, our office had a self serve cash only tray of sweets/candy.

we had external auditors to our office, one asked me if he just take the candy because he had no cash…

I asked him wil declining mean we fail our audit? He bristled and said no

Weeks later I get called into the office about cash short in the above set up,

I explained the situation and next day, the thing was removed permanently.

 

Better that it was removed than you being accused or fired for something you didn’t do. 

[paintguy]

Wow. Usually the union committeeperson would be all over this kind of thing. Imagine some of these people will get their jobs back through the grievance process. I've seen results of some "horse trading" type meetings where management gets something in return for some "relief". Hope it all works out.

[Flying68]

Sounds like the original guy (the one that was offered reinstatement plus back pay but declined) is intending to sue Ford and Aramark.  The 4th one filed a grievance.  From other sources and youtube videos covering this, it sounds like the kiosks will beep indicating that the transaction was good but may never process and often people walk away after it beeps without waiting for the final approval screen.  And that it has been an ongoing issue that Aramark is aware of but hasn't fixed.  It sounds mostly like it is an Aramark issue and a Ford Management issue by firing people, when they knew or should have known, that the kiosks were prone to malfunction without an obvious indicator to the user.  Pretty sure the lawsuit discovery will ask for communication internally and between Aramark and Ford about these issues.  The lawsuit will be for emotional distress and lost wages.  Even though the first guy refused to return to work, the claim would be that he couldn't because of a hostile work environment, and why would you, they fired you already so you know management doesn't have your back and is itching to get rid of people.  Guy will likely end up with a sizable settlement and an offer for early full retirement.

Edited July 24 by Flying68

[fordmantpw]

13 minutes ago, Flying68 said:

Sounds like the original guy (the one that was offered reinstatement plus back pay but declined) is intending to sue Ford and Aramark.  The 4th one filed a grievance.  From other sources and youtube videos covering this, it sounds like the kiosks will beep indicating that the transaction was good but may never process and often people walk away after it beeps without waiting for the final approval screen.  And that it has been an ongoing issue that Aramark is aware of but hasn't fixed.  It sounds mostly like it is an Aramark issue and a Ford Management issue by firing people, when they knew or should have known, that the kiosks were prone to malfunction without an obvious indicator to the user.  Pretty sure the lawsuit discovery will ask for communication internally and between Aramark and Ford about these issues.  The lawsuit will be for emotional distress and lost wages.  Even though the first guy refused to return to work, the claim would be that he couldn't because of a hostile work environment, and why would you, they fired you already so you know management doesn't have your back and is itching to get rid of people.  Guy will likely end up with a sizable settlement and an offer for early full retirement.

 

To me, if you are offered your job back along with back pay, you don't deserve a settlement.  They realized the mistake and tried to make it right, but you said no.  So you're just greedy and looking for an easy way out.  F U!

 

Put me on the jury!

[Sherminator98]

9 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:

 

To me, if you are offered your job back along with back pay, you don't deserve a settlement.  They realized the mistake and tried to make it right, but you said no.  So you're just greedy and looking for an easy way out.  F U!

 

Put me on the jury!

 

I thought I heard that he found another job already before being asked back...so who knows maybe he had one foot out the door already when it came to moving on from Ford. 

 

Just as an example of workplace law-I had a friend sit on a jury last year-guy got fired from a school district that had a medical condition that he mentioned to his supervisors as he was hired, in writing. It wasn't anything terrible or life threating. Sometimes he would call out of work (and had sick time to cover it) because of it. 

 

Anyways he was terminated from his job before making tenure...but the whole situation didn't sit right.

 

The lawyer did discovery-come to find out that the school district employees had a nickname they where using in official emails for him and other things where going on. 

 

The guy got paid afterwards, but apparently my friend was telling me that one of his other friends said it had to go to court like 3-4 times because of various reasons within the court system, so it wasn't like it was an overnight pay out either. 

[SoonerLS]

 

[SoonerLS]

On 7/24/2026 at 1:50 PM, fordmantpw said:

 

To me, if you are offered your job back along with back pay, you don't deserve a settlement.  They realized the mistake and tried to make it right, but you said no.  So you're just greedy and looking for an easy way out.  F U!

 

Put me on the jury!

I can’t go along with you there. He was fired for doing something that he verifiably did not do, then found another job. Dunno about you, but if a company calls me a thief and a liar then fires me without proof, there’s not a chance in hell I’m going back to work for them, especially if I’m already working for someone else. 
 

The company deserves to get smacked hard for this. 

[fordmantpw]

On 7/25/2026 at 7:57 PM, SoonerLS said:

I can’t go along with you there. He was fired for doing something that he verifiably did not do, then found another job. Dunno about you, but if a company calls me a thief and a liar then fires me without proof, there’s not a chance in hell I’m going back to work for them, especially if I’m already working for someone else. 
 

The company deserves to get smacked hard for this. 

 

I agree, what they did was likely wrong, but if the original evidence (or lack thereof) showed he did it, then they found out otherwise, apologized and admitted the error, and then gave his job back, there's really not grounds to sue in my opinion.

 

Mistakes happen.  Yes, people (and companies) should be held accountable, but the world has gotten out of hand for suing people for way too much money for non-malicious-intent mistakes.  A simple apology (a very public apology to clear his name) should be acceptable here IMO.

[Flying68]

1 hour ago, fordmantpw said:

 

I agree, what they did was likely wrong, but if the original evidence (or lack thereof) showed he did it, then they found out otherwise, apologized and admitted the error, and then gave his job back, there's really not grounds to sue in my opinion.

 

Mistakes happen.  Yes, people (and companies) should be held accountable, but the world has gotten out of hand for suing people for way too much money for non-malicious-intent mistakes.  A simple apology (a very public apology to clear his name) should be acceptable here IMO.

Would you go back to work for a manager that fired you without examining all the evidence?  How long are you going to last?  They will be looking now for any reason to fire him again.

 

I understand your point of view, however, you are not looking at the entire situation.  Despite the apologies and back pay, the employee suffered harm, reputational, career, and emotional.  His family also suffered.  Despite the offer for reinstatement, going back at the point that the offer was made was too little too late as he had already found another job with presumably a management team that wasn't keen on firing people without examining all the evidence.

 

He will get a nice settlement, above and beyond the initial backpay.  Ford's lawyers know this, they don't have a leg to stand on.  They in essence created a hostile work environment, set up to trap employees with known faulty equipment and surveillance cameras that only looked at one machine.  The management team knew or should have known what they were doing.  At this point for Ford it is damage control and trying to make these cases go away as quietly as possible.  I would also think that several of the people in the chain, involved in the firings, would be moved out of their positions, asked to resign, or terminated.

[fordmantpw]

25 minutes ago, Flying68 said:

Would you go back to work for a manager that fired you without examining all the evidence?  How long are you going to last?  They will be looking now for any reason to fire him again.

 

I understand your point of view, however, you are not looking at the entire situation.  Despite the apologies and back pay, the employee suffered harm, reputational, career, and emotional.  His family also suffered.  Despite the offer for reinstatement, going back at the point that the offer was made was too little too late as he had already found another job with presumably a management team that wasn't keen on firing people without examining all the evidence.

 

He will get a nice settlement, above and beyond the initial backpay.  Ford's lawyers know this, they don't have a leg to stand on.  They in essence created a hostile work environment, set up to trap employees with known faulty equipment and surveillance cameras that only looked at one machine.  The management team knew or should have known what they were doing.  At this point for Ford it is damage control and trying to make these cases go away as quietly as possible.  I would also think that several of the people in the chain, involved in the firings, would be moved out of their positions, asked to resign, or terminated.

 

You know, I can't answer that as I'm not in his position.  It probably depends on how much I liked the job as to whether I would or not.  I don't have all of the details, but I like to think it was a mistake and not a setup to trap employees like you mention.  If it was a setup, then that's a different story.

[fuzzymoomoo]

1 hour ago, fordmantpw said:

It probably depends on how much I liked the job as to whether I would or not. 

Pretty sure the guy suing is an electrician, he’ll be fine regardless. 

 

1 hour ago, fordmantpw said:

I don't have all of the details, but I like to think it was a mistake and not a setup to trap employees like you mention.  If it was a setup, then that's a different story.

Not a setup at all, just a case of HR being over aggressive and not doing proper fact finding. If they had suspended people pending investigation instead of going straight to termination this would be a completely different conversation. 

[fordmantpw]

4 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Pretty sure the guy suing is an electrician, he’ll be fine regardless. 

 

Not a setup at all, just a case of HR being over aggressive and not doing proper fact finding. If they had suspended people pending investigation instead of going straight to termination this would be a completely different conversation. 

 

Yeah, that I can agree with.  Suspend pending investigation is a much better solution.