Outside Chicago, car salesman John Stone was reportedly fired for the world’s most ill-conceived neck wear: a Packers tie. The sales manager at Webb Chevrolet ordered Stone to remove the tie and when he refused, he fired him.
When I first read this story, I was going to post it to show that Bears fans can be as idiotic as the Packers fan who roasted a bear. However, I am not so sure on second thought.
The position of Webb’s general manager Jerry Roberts was that wearing the tie the day after the historic loss of the NFC championship to the Packers would alienate (if not infuriate) customers. That was likely. This is after all a business and Roberts told Stone that it would not be good for sales. The dealership had just done a long promotion based on the Bears.
What do you think?
Source: Sun Times
Ya don’t think that complexion had anything to do with it, right? Nobody’d be that stoopid in 2011, right?
The workplace is not a Democracy it’s private property and with the exception of the Civil Rights Acts and it’s applicable titles and the American with Disabilities Act and a few other laws, employment is At Will meaning that an employer can discharge you without providing you a reason. Since the Dealership had a contractual agreement with the Chicago Bears Organization to promote the Bears, the salesman was acting against the interests of his employer. The salesman admits to having been asked 3 times to remove the tie and he did not. The manager who discharged him could have handled it much better with a up front explanation and leaving the expletives and emotions out of it.
You have got to be kidding … did everybody forget to take their common sense pills today?
The employees of the Packers and Bears are NFL players … that is their job. You are a salesman or the owner of a car agency … that is your job. Your pay check does not read NFL player and I don’t care how many ties you wear or promotions you run … you ain’t ever going to be an NFL player. Give it up high-school boys and leave your fantasies on the couch where they belong.
Wearing the tie was idiotic; firing the guy for wearing the tie was pure stupidity in action. Now you can both sit for years while the law suit works its way through the courts. Go Team.
I don’t think the salesperson should have been fired because of the tie incident, notwithstanding the fact that it is an ugly, ugly tie! The employer can hire or fire the guy for any non-protected reason, absent any contractual prohibitions or limitations. I believe he was an “at-will” employee and could be fired. I don’t think the “freedom” to wear a certain tie is really free speech in the corporate world. Most car dealerships I have been in have a uniform shirt or sweater or jacket that the sales force is required to wear so he may have violated that requirement for including a tie that was not allowed under the policy. That last statement is a guess because I do not know if this dealership had that uniform or clothes policy. It has been quite a few years since I did any work in this area, so I will qualify my statements accordingly.
If the salesman was really that adamant, then once he was fired he should have crawled into the most expensive car, doused himself and struck up a match.
Fighting fired with fire.
BTW:They showed the salesman and it turns out the tie belonged to a relative who was a packer fan who has passed away.
Oh, now it done got personal, dem dirty bastards
14 cars last month nice find eniobob
BTW:They showed the salesman and it turns out the tie belonged to a relative who was a packer fan who has passed away.
Understand the gentleman has been hired by another car company.
Sales qouta for last month also answered here:
http://search.espn.go.com/salesman-fired-over-vicking-tie/videos/6
“If his numbers were good and he was doing consistent volume he could wear what ever he believes will make him successful. The old saying,sales cover up a multitude of mistakes is true.”
Bdaman,
You cut to the heart of the matter, as does Bob. I grew up in the car business via my father, but what you expressed is a truism of any business. Eccentricities are fine if you’re doing your job well.
My initial and current feeling on this as I read it was that given the quasi-religious fervor of many team partisans, the tie if seen would hurt sales, especially so close to a bitter loss. As a sports lover myself, I find the fanaticism of some fans disturbing and yet it exists and must be catered to in a sales environment.
The tie may have been what pushed the manager over the edge. I’d like to know number of cars sold. If his numbers were good and he was doing consistent volume he could wear what ever he believes will make him successful. The old saying,sales cover up a multitude of mistakes is true.
If a Chicago Cubs fan is known as a Chub….or Chubby…what is a Chicago Bears fan known as? A Chare (Chair)….the steps to the SUPER BOWL……
Lets look from the managers point of view.
Manager feels tie insults the people of Chicago (Chicagoans, Chicagoites, Chigagoons??) causing possible lose of business. Manager ordered tie removed, employee refuses, manager fires employee. Employee is NOT fired for wearing tie, but for NOT following order.
I am always for free speech, and expression, but not on your employers time. During working hours you are an extension of your employer, and responsible for his interests.
He had a choice; wear a tie that would tend to drive away customers or be fired after six weeks on the job. He chose the latter.
No lawsuit will protect him from his own stupidity and arrogance.
And imagine a Packer’s fan, on a high… He (or she) wanders in, sees the Packer’s tie, and buys an entire fleet of vehicles…
(These “games” are taken way too seriously, IMHO, and I’ll be leaving the blog now.. 🙂 )
You don’t think that when some Packer fans were trying to find Dallas they got lost in Chicago….I bet you have at least one or two there…
Excessive. The firing crossed the line. I smell a winning lawsuit.
The expression “loaded for bear” comes to mind…
This is a reach but I’m in the right place so if I go to far I’ll be pulled back in:
“Within sociology, ‘discrimination’ is the prejudicial treatment of an individual based solely on their membership in a certain group or category”
EEOC complaint?
Firing the guy seems excessive. The salesman could have been sent home for the day.