John Mackey and Whole Foods: Finally Giving the Whole Story
Lesson #1 in business career management: Don’t say or do anything that you wouldn’t be comfortable having plastered on the Front Page of the Wall Street Journal. Now this might seem like a pretty rigid guidepost, but at least it forces thinking about the consequences of one’s actions and its possible impact on your reputation and that of your employer. Imposes pretty good discipline, I’d say. This includes things you say to others both inside and outside your company and all forms of written communication, including emails and, say, postings on blogs and message boards. And if you happen the CEO of a public company, the stakes are that much higher because of heightened reputational risk as well as rules like Regulation FD. Now, my lesson should be second nature to all CEOs, as it has probably been repeated to them 1000 times by their General Counsel, Head of Compliance, Head of the Audit Committee, etc., yet it doesn’t seem so in light of revelations about the CEO of Whole Foods, John Mackey, and his behavior as chronicled in a recent WSJ Online story. So my question to my readers is this:
HOW DOES JOHN MACKEY, CEO OF WHOLE FOODS, THINK THAT POSTING RAH RAH MESSAGES ON YAHOO! MESSAGE BOARDS OVER AN 8 YEAR PERIOD IS OK? MESSAGES THAT INCLUDE FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES AND PERSPECTIVES FROM THE CEO OF THE COMPANY, WHO IS NOT PUBLICLY DISCLOSING HIS TRUE IDENTITY AND CERTAINLY NOT DISCLOSING THIS INFORMATION TO ALL INVESTORS AT THE SAME TIME?
Sorry for the use of all caps, but I am so blown away by this discovery that I couldn’t control myself. For those who are playing along, Reg FD was imposed in October 2000, a full six years before Mr. Mackey ended his message board posting career. Did it ever occur to him that maybe, just maybe, his postings using a pseudonym were in violation of a pretty important securities law? Did anyone in the company know about this like, say, company counsel? I don’t even know where to begin as it relates to governance best-practices. This is such a horrible example of corporate stewardship that it is truly mind-boggling. Through his actions, which I will assume for the moment were fueled by ego and not the conscious desire to manipulate stock prices, he has jeopardized the very brand and franchise he and thousands of employees have worked so hard to build over almost 30 years. Did this ever occur to him as he was posting as Rahodeb that he could be placing his company, his employees and his stockholders at risk? I’d assume not. But isn’t this part and parcel of being the CEO of a public company? I’d say so.
Just check this out from the WSJ story and think to yourself: is this one of the most astounding lapses in CEO judgment that you’ve every heard of?
Mr. Mackey’s online alter ego came to light in a document made public late Tuesday
by the Federal Trade Commission in its lawsuit seeking to block the
Whole Foods-Wild Oats deal. The 45-page filing, submitted under seal
when the lawsuit was filed in June, includes a quote from the Yahoo
site in which Mr. Mackey said “the writing is on the wall” for Wild
Oats. An FTC footnote said, “As here, Mr. Mackey often posted to
Internet sites pseudonymously, often using the name Rahodeb.”Whole Foods didn’t authenticate each and every one of
Rahodeb’s postings as being from Mr. Mackey, who declined to be
interviewed. However, the company said in a statement that among
millions of documents the company gave the FTC were postings Mr. Mackey
made from 1999 to 2006 “under an alias to avoid having his comments
associated with the Company and to avoid others placing too much
emphasis on his remarks.” The statement said, “Many of the opinions
expressed in these postings now have far less relevance than when they
were written.”********************
Rahodeb began posting messages about Whole Foods
shares on Yahoo.com in the late 1990s. He quickly gained a reputation
as being one of the stock’s biggest cheerleaders, and gamely defended
himself when other posters chastised him for being too rosy. “I’ve
never pretended to be anything but enthusiastic about WFMI,” he wrote
in 2000, using Whole Foods’ stock symbol. “I admit to my bias — I love
the company and I’m in for the long haul. I shop at Whole Foods. I own
a great deal of its stock. I’m aligned with the mission and values of
the company… Is there something wrong with this?”Rahodeb often expressed pride in the work of Mr.
Mackey. “While I’m not a ‘Mackey groupie,’ ” he wrote in 2000, “I do
admire what the man has accomplished — building a $1.6 billion
business from scratch is quite an achievement.”********************
By 2005, Whole Foods had grown to more than 160 stores
and its annual sales were $4 billion, making it the leading player in
the natural and organic foods sector. In a message in January of that
year, Rahodeb predicted great things for Whole Foods’ stock. “13 years
from now Whole Foods will be a $800+ stock before splits,” he wrote.
“Whole Foods is a tremendous growth stock.” At the time, the shares
traded at about $94. Whole Foods’ shares closed yesterday at $39.50, up
$1.03, or 2.68%.Rahodeb often sparred with other users, deploying a
rigorous analysis of financial statements. “Your quarterly cash flow
variance isn’t statistically meaningful because the time period is too
short,” he complained to another user who had criticized Whole Foods in
March 2006. He then pasted a summary of the previous six years of Whole
Foods’ operating cash flow. “Over the past 5 years operating cash flow
has increased 330%,” Rahodeb noted.When it came to Wild Oats, Whole Foods’ main rival,
Rahodeb didn’t pull punches. He often criticized Perry Odak, Wild Oats’
former CEO, who resigned last year. “While Odak was trying to figure
out the business and conducting expensive ‘research studies,’ to help
him figure things out, Whole Foods was signing and opening large stores
in OATS territories,” Rahodeb wrote in 2005. “Odak drove off most of
the long-term OATS natural foods managers” and brought in executives
who “didn’t know too much about the natural/organics industry or their
customers.”
And to think: all of this came to light because of a filing relating to the proposed Whole Foods-Wild Oats deal. Given today’s revelations I’d say that Mr. Mackey might have some problems somewhat larger than whether or not the OATS acquisition goes through. Let this experience be a reminder to everyone, be you a corporate chieftan, a junior employee or a high school student posting on Facebook: Nothing is truly private and your actions have consequences. Be mindful of what you do and how you do it because, some day, it just might end up on the Front Page of the Wall Street Journal. Just like Mr. Mackey learned today.
——-
——-
COMMENT:
AUTHOR: Michelle
EMAIL: ml@footnoted.org
URL: http://footnoted.org
DATE: 07/12/2007 10:57:54 AM
Love this post, Roger. And to think, this was actually in a footnote to the lawsuit the FTC filed. Just shows you why it’s important to read footnotes!!!
——-
COMMENT:
AUTHOR: Java Master
EMAIL: noonehome@gmail.com
URL:
DATE: 07/13/2007 10:22:52 AM
Whole Foods has never been all that.
——-
COMMENT:
AUTHOR: Gari N. Corp
EMAIL: gringcorp@gmail.com
URL: http://gumbyfresh.blogspot.com
DATE: 07/13/2007 01:58:51 PM
I’m not sure Reg FD will apply, because, firstly, Mackey was posting to a publicly accessible board (not private disclosure to a certain few), secondly it was not as a company officer (unless it was widely known that the pseudonym was his, but the first would still apply), and I haven’t yet seen an instance where he disclosed market-moving insider information about whole foods.
I’m not a securities lawyer, more a reporter that’s been beaten over the head with Reg FD too many times. But Mackey’s behavior speaks more to a certain lack of moral fitness to be running a company than a securities violation. Talking down stock in which one holds a short position was a staple of cable shows until recently, and commentators have only recently begun to disclose such positions to enhance their credibility.
——-
COMMENT:
AUTHOR: Brian
EMAIL: briano_155@msn.com
URL:
DATE: 07/13/2007 11:56:26 PM
I couldn’t agree more: what Mackey did is so patently unethical on so many levels it is almost unbelievable that a CEO of a major corporation could behave in such a fashion. Truth really is stranger than fiction!
——-
COMMENT:
AUTHOR: helsinki_mood
EMAIL: helsinki_mood@yahoo.com
URL:
DATE: 07/14/2007 01:15:04 PM
I read all the postings on the blog expecting this to be horrible. It is funny and awefully odd but unethical? Hardly! Anyone who sees it as so is a little too bunged up for my taste.
——-
COMMENT:
AUTHOR: cfageek
EMAIL: cfageek@yahoo.com
URL:
DATE: 07/14/2007 03:52:08 PM
He did stg wrong apparently, but I don’t think it’s unlawful. If you follow what’s happening in credit derivatives and options market and the fortune made by some people (you know who they are) using non-public information, attacking another CEO for his greed and stupidity is just naiveness.
Insider trading in the Street is soaring. No serious charges for option backdaters. Nothing’s changed since Sarbox. Feels like we are living the dark ages of market manipulation, insider trading and corporate crime.
——-
COMMENT:
AUTHOR: JonathanD
EMAIL: asdf@asdf123.com
URL:
DATE: 07/16/2007 11:08:08 AM
“Nothing is truly private and your actions have consequences.” So very true, Roger. I think another aspect of this story is interesting as well: Forums and blogging allow people have an amazing opportunity to expose themselves to the public like never before - be this for good or ill is entirely for their discretion. But on the other side of the coin, it also provides a many with a feeling of anonymity. I could be anyone from anywhere posting this right now from a library, and who would know who I truly am? Mackey is absolutely not the only one engaging in this type of behavior. Yes it could be legally incorrect,(and far too many happenings on wall street are so much worse than this and go unaccounted for), and yes it was stupid, but consider the interest that would come with being a ceo, being able to read what the common investor thinks about your company, and then being able to respond without anyone knowing your true identity for *eight entire years.* This is tempting for some, and I believe that they feel that their exposure simply isn’t possible. Reading what Mackey has wrote, it is obvious that he cares about his company and its stock price. If anything, Mackey’s posts should reaffirm investor’s confidence in Whole Foods… after the embarrassment has subsided.
——-
COMMENT:
AUTHOR: Maureen
EMAIL: abdc_apples@yahoo.com
URL:
DATE: 12/30/2007 06:12:21 PM
Below is something that may draw attention to Whole Foods CEO, John Mackey’s, twisted morals, sneakiness, and indecency in his conduct in business-related matters so that every situation is steered/manipulated to his benefit and gain.
On the evening of March 11, 2007, I was approached, accosted, publicly falsely accused, and ordered to leave the store premises immediately by an employee in the Arlington, VA, Whole Foods. What I was loudly falsely accused of publicly was having been ordered to leave the store on a number of past occasions. I was repeatedly loudly accused that I was a particular person who had been ordered to leave the store premises on a number of occasions in the past and who, apparently, was banned from the store premises. The accusing employee repeated his accusation of me several times and continuously stated, “yes you are” to me when I said I was not the same person who was involved in the alluded to past incidents, and repeated the words, “yes, you have,” again and again, when I said I had never been instructed to leave the store before on any occasion. The accusing employee also repeatedly stated, “it’s her,” “that’s her,” “it’s her.”
I was verbally identified by the the employee as being that other person, who allegedly was involved in past store incidents because I “fit a profile” of that other person, but who’s identity was definitely not the same as mine. For what reason(s) the other person was ordered from the store on a number of occasions in the past, I was not told. However, it was profoundly publicly implied that I was suspect of some egregious wrong doing in the store (at that time and/or previously, and/or was in another way inappropriate).
I tried displaying politeness, without hostility, to resolve the false allegation of me, however, my attempts to assert my innocence of the false allegation to the two Whole Foods’ employees who had confronted me, were met by their viciousness toward me. Anything I tried to assert to them about my innocence and unawareness of the past store incidents alluded to in the false accusation of me, was compeletely untolerated by them. The employeeís declared, and maintained, their assumption that I was definitely ìherî (the other person, a previous store offender), which was persistently maintained by both employees. They had absolutely no intention to even consider that their assumption of me may be incorrect. I was in a profoundly humiliated state. Both employees consistently forcefully demanded I leave the premises immediately. I was shaken and intimidated. It became a huge scene in the store, in that, many people had gathered around the scene to watch. I was not hoping not to attract the attention of others who I would be so embarrased in front of. I don’t know how it can be communicated how vicious the two employees were to me. The incident was very violent in nature.
I did not raise my voice, become emotionally out of control, use profanity or threaten anyone in any way in the store. Any assertion on the part of Whole Foodsí employees that I was ìupsetî ìoverly upsetî or ìtoo upsetî to be listened to, or too unacceptable to be in the store, is a convenient and very sneaky lie.
I was very conscious that if I became ìout of control, or appeared ìout of controlî or hostile, it would be to my detriment. From the beginning of the time I was accosted and falsely accused by a Whole Foodsí employee, I attempted to speak with civility and gentility, being very careful not to show a threatening manner or hostility to him in my reply to the false statement he had just made of me. I tried to communicate my innocence of his false allegation in a way that could resolve it with no difficulty, but the employee was intentionally completely unreceptive to my contention he was mistaken.
In the store, I repeatedly requested of the two Whole Foodsí employees that the head store manager on duty be contacted so I could speak with him about what had just happened to me in the store, but they completely refused to contact him. I was completely ignored, as well, when I asked the two employees over and over why they would not check existing store records of the alluded to past store incidents I had just been falsely accused of being the subject of, incidents I had absolutely no knowledge of, so it could be seen by them that I was not the same person involved in those incidents. The accusing employee was franticly intent about not appearing wrong about his accusation of me. I was forced to leave the store premises, being observed by many witnesses, under a cloud of profoundly presumed guilt of a wrong doing I had supposedly committed, and my identity publicly defamed.
I am forced to carry with me that witnessesí (Whole Foodsí employees and customers) perceptions of me as suspect could remain, and was told I am not permitted in the Arlington, VA, Whole Foods store. I am terrified to go back into the Arlington, VA, Whole Foods store and donít want to think of what would happen to me if I did. To shop in that store again, I would need an official written, signed, and dated document/letter of permission from the head management of Whole Foods that I would have to carry on my person while in the store as proof that Iím allowed to do so.
Following this incident, I was fearful of entering any other store to shop. I subsequently also havenít been able to wear or bear looking at the same garments I wore on the evening of the incident because of intense bad feelings and memories associated with seeing these items.
I was not under the influence of any substance, I am not a drinker and donít use illicit drugs, nor was I behaving in a suspicious or strange way in the store and had no intention to do so. I sincerely have never been told to leave that Whole Foods store for any reason previous to that evening. I did not, nor have I ever, behaved in a questionable or strange manner in the store. I have never shoplifted, nor have I ever attempted to.
On that evening, I was wearing informal, plain, old clothing. I have wondered if this incident would not have happened to me if I had not worn the hood of my coat over my head upon entering the Whole Foods store or had been wearing more upscale attire. I kept my hood on because my hair felt sweaty and I only intended to be in the Whole Foods store for a very short time. The accusing employee could have viewed me as trying to conceal my face/identity by wearing my hood on my head. Yet, when I walked through the same store aisle in which he was stocking items, I didnít attempt to conceal my presence from him or anyone. I saw the accusing employee on a ladder stocking in the aisle, and was aware he was an employee, and I said ìexcuse meî very audibly to be considerate of other customers in that aisle when I was walking by them so that they would be aware of my presence and wouldnít back up and bump into me. This showed that I was not at all concerned that any store employee may be aware of my presence in the store.
On the evening of the incident, I very consciously had not physically gone very near to, or touched, any of the products/items displayed on the store shelves. I try to be very, very conscious always of my movements while I am in stores to protect myself from others wrongly viewing my actions as being suspicious in nature. I used extreme caution in my physical movements and actions while in the Arlington, VA, Whole Foods store on that evening. I was thoroughly careful.
I have no knowledge of the alluded to past store incidents which I was very anxiously and irresponsibly falsely accused of being the subject of and maintained as such the two Whole Foodsí employees. If the police were involved in the alluded to past store incidents, there would be police records documenting those incidents, and those records would show I was definitely not the person involved in those incidents.
The police were called to the scene. One of the Whole Foods’ employees eventually called the police and spun misrepresentations about the situation to the 911 dispatcher. I then made a call myself for police assistance (in instances beforehand, I told the employees I wanted the police to be called). I felt a need for assistance because the two employees wouldnít acknowledge anything I tried to say to them regarding my having not been involved in any of the past store incidents alluded to, wouldnít contact the head store manager for me to address as I requested of them, nor would they check store records of the alluded to incidents which would have shown I was not the same person involved in those incidents as I had been accused of.
When I saw the police car pull into the store parking lot, I went up to the police car as soon as I could, before the Whole Foods employees could begin to talk to the cops, because I was instinctively very afraid I would not be given an opportunity to address what actually was just done to me, by othersí refusing to allow me to speak, and there was no way I would get away with interrupting the cop or who he was speaking with.
I have written details down about the police behavior toward me. One cop did all of the talking for both officers who came to the scene. Upon seeing me, it appeared the cop instantaneously determined I was an amusement to him. The cops were highly protective of the Whole Foods employees and refused to see them embarrassed by their accusation of me being found to be wrong, and their being shown as guilty of recklessly defaming me. They refused to give any manner of assistance to me to pursue the actuality that I had no involvement in the alluded to past store incidents I was accused of being the subject of, but just the opposite. The cops and employees refused to put attention on the existence of store and police records of the alluded to past store incidents that would have shown I was not the same person involved. The police additionally refused to question the employeesí refusal to notify the head store manager on duty to inform him of the incident that was happening in the store, as it was that manager’s role to give his attention to the matter and my right to address that head manager regarding what had just happened to me in the store for which responsibility he was entrusted with. The situation was treated by the cops as if I had committed some shameful act against the Whole Foods’ employees by disputing the false allegation made of me.
I have also written in detail about particularly bizarre behavior (I donít know how else to put it) exhibited toward me by the cop who did all of the talking for both who arrived at the scene. This cop brazenly declared of me, upon getting out of his car, ìYou regularly deal with HHS on a regular basisî (he was Referring to Arlington County Human Services). This cop didnít know me at all (I guess he formed his impression of me as being a ìspecific typeî of person from the way I emoted in the shaken, disturbed emotional state I was in when I tried to speak to him [to realay what had just happened to me in the Whole Foods store] as his car pulled in front of the Whole Foods store). He came out and asked, and re?asked, intimidating, humiliating, personal questions of me, including inquiring about medication, where I lived, and who I lived with, expecting my responses to his inquiries (appearing shocked to my response that I lived by myself), in front of a considerable number of people who had gathered to watch the scene and, out of the blue, he suddenly interjected a strange male name directly to me, and me only, expecting a response to it from me. I stated to him, “I don’t know who that person is.” I then asked him the question of, “Why?” He responded to me by stating, “Because I’m doing an investigation.” His direct inquiring of a strangerís name to me had nothing at all to do with the matter at hand. In referencing the strangerís name to me, it became apparent he was attempting to see if he could possibly get me to provide him with information that I might have been aware of about the stranger with the male name (trying to use me as some kind of information provider to him). His stating to me that “he was doing an investigation,” successively following his reference to me about the stranger, brought to light that his reference to “the investigation he was doing” was apparently directly related to the stranger with a male name. His reference to ìthe investigation he was doing,î was referring to an investigation that had no relation at all to the matter at hand. (Iím certain this did not make it into the police report, things such as this are conveniently omitted by cops to protect themselves and each other.) I am also certain no one who was present, the other cop who also arrived at the scene nor the Whole Foodsí employees present, would ever acknowledge that they heard or witnessed this from the cop. I could never make this up.
This cop was unreceptive to me, and purposely showed a lack of respect and concern for me and what had just happened to me inside the Whole Foods store. The cop forced me to accommodate his deprecating, bizzare treatment, truely as though I was appropriately being “given my due” or “given street justice” (to show he was street savy cop who knew how to “handle” me). He ensured that I was snubbed, showing that I was unworthy, to him, of receiving assistance to substantiate my assertion of having just been misidentified as a previous offender in the store by the accusing employee. He deliberately discounted the existance records of alluded to past store incidents and refused to have the store’s head manager contacted, which furthered my emotional distress and extreme traumatized state.
The cop’s intention at the scene of the conflict was to keep me shut up about any detail of the store incident I wanted to articulate and addressed adn that I not be paid attention to. I knew not to interrupt the cop or anyone speaking with him. In my attempts to speak, the cop ensured I was not provided attention. I was cut off in speech, completely ignored, and loudly spoken over by this cop and the two Whole Foodsí employees when I attempted to address the questions of why the Whole Foodsí employees refused to check existing store records of the alluded to past store incidents I was anxiously accused of being the subject of, and why they would not contact the head store manager on duty for me to address my just having been falsely accused by an employee in the store, to attempt to rectify the false allegation of me.
Upon leaving the store premises, immediately after the incident, I reacted to this trauma, crying for an extended period and suffered an extreme psychosomatic incident where I sunk into a profoundly deep depressive state, too intense for a human to bear (it was, with no exaggeration, among the most, if not, the most excruciating mental states I have ever experienced). I was aware I should have received medical treatment that evening (relief from my mental state was unattainable for me at that time without being properly medicated, as should have been), however, I was affected by my circumstance that I had no one available to me to assist me in receiving treatment at that time. I was in an incapacitated emotional state and felt incapable of doing this myself. Had I accomplished getting to an emergency room for medical treatment, I’m uncertain if I would have been able to communicate effectively enough with a doctor for them to even consider treating me. It was too hard for me to speak (my neighbor tried to speak to me upon my arriving back at my apartment, and I was unable to respond to her). I also was unable to be still or sleep that night. It was urgent for me to escape from my mental state. It was apparent I had to recover some strength and place my and direct my emotions on n on writing down what had just happened to me at the Whole Foods store. I couldn’t speak of the incident to anyone for several days subsequent. An effect of the traumatic incident on me has been enduring recurrent emotional disturbance of this traumatic incident as an effect of this incident.
This incident caused acute trauma for me. Iíd been taking medication for anxiety, and the dosage level was recently increased considerably to help ease my elevated anxiety level, as this situation has produced a lot of mental anguish and difficulty in me. This has also resulted in an increase in the cost of my medication.
I wrote a letter dated April 12, 2007, concerning what was done to me by the Whole Foods’ employees in the store incident, addressed to Whole Foods Market, Inc., CEO and a board director of the corporation’s board of directors. In the letter I stated that I was owed an apology from Whole Foods. I made no threats against Whole Foods or anyone in the letter, nor indicated anything that could even be construed as a threat in any way. I sent a copy of the letter to both, via U.S. mail and their personal e-mail addresses. On the same date, April 12, 2007, I also submitted an electronic copy of the letter to the CEO’s blog site and the e-mail address of the Arlington, VA, Whole Foods store. No one will respond to me.
Whole Foods managementís intent seems to be to protect itself and to refuse to acknowledge what happened to me in their store on that evening, allowing it to continue being considered that I am an offending trespasser and am banned from the store. My presence in the Arlington, VA, Whole Foods store on that evening was treated as an extremely serious matter by the Whole Foodsí employees involved in the incident, but Whole Foodsí management wants no part of acknowledgement of what was so incredibly eagerly and brutally done to me by its employees in its store.
Only after wondering what others would do if what happened to me in the Arlington, VA, Whole Foods store had happened to them, did it occur to me that others would very likely feel strongly that itís right that a legal complaint filed against Whole Foods Market, Inc.
I searched out and exhausted all government legal assistance I was referred to, or became aware of, with all saying they could not assist.
I didnít rush to pursue a legal complaint action against Whole Foods through a private firm/attorney because I felt ill prepared to so immediately following the incident and thought significant details had to be written down first (I didnít intend such prolonged delay in actively seeking legal assistance). I was highly emotional in my writing of the incident, which Iíve had to condense/summarize, with very limited computer use (at the public library) to do so. Iíve proceeded cautiously because of extreme nervousness and inhibition Iíve experienced and unease I feel about bothering someone for their time in seeking possible assistance. Iíve been searching for legal assistance now for a time. I e-mailed several consumer news sites asking them to post my written account of this incident. I also have read advice, posted on the internet, recommending making contact with legal match services in trying to find an attorney, which I have done, with no matching result for my concern.
Iím the only person whoís had to bear consequences of the two Whole Foodsí employees negligent actions throughout the incident. I believe Whole Foodsí CEO should be publicly confronted and forced to acknowledge accountability, and to provide reparation to me, for the profound wrong done to me by its employees in the Arlington, VA, Whole Foods store on that evening, and not to be permitted to get off with this without due consequence. What was done to me was too severe in extent for the CEO to be able to keep it under a veil of secrecy. I want the Whole Foodsí employees involved in the incident to have to witness that reckless behavior in their accusations of customers and others is serious offense and can have legal consequences. They should have to face the actuality that the accusation made of me in the Whole Foods store on that evening, for which I was terrorized by them for disputing in the Arlington, VA, Whole Foods store, and which they fervently persisted to maintain of me, was false and grossly negligent, and see that they and Whole Foods Market, Inc., are libel for this.
Both employees truly had every opportunity during this incident to observe the vehement forewarnings I had given to them, that I was innocent and unknowledgeable of the false allegations made of me and, the requests I made to the employees to please check existing store records regarding the alluded to past store incidents, further signified my innocence, but both employees reacted with an alarming viciousness and non?concern, maintaining the false contention of me. Their desire and intent to assure (and stage) their being unmistaken (about me) and, to show their expertise and the unrestricted executive privilege they held in their positions, was principal to them.
Ethics concern the effect of our actions on others. Whole Foods CEO and his employees should be publicly informed of what business ethics are and why they exist.
I know this is quite unusual (although it seems in kind to being falsely accused of shoplifting in a store).
I have also just become aware that members of my extended family are refusing to shop at Whole Foods stores.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Maureen McLaughlin
(571) 241-3271
abdc_apples@yahoo.com
I have included the following response which I received from contacting the Ashcraft and Gerel law firm with an inquiry:
Ms. McLaughlin:
I’m very sorry for what happened to you and also for the deep and persistent hurt you obviously have experienced as a result of the same. As you seem to recognize, you may have a valid civil damage claim for slander based on the explicit words and conduct of these employees in the presence of others implying that you had committed some egregious wrongful acts in the past. However, due to the value of the claim and the probability that it would have to be litigated, a very labor intensive undertaking, this is not a claim we’d be interested in taking on. Unfortunately, I don’t know of any other lawyers to whom I could refer you who I think would be interested in the case, but I would suggest you continue to contact personal injury lawyers to inquire. Good luck.
Robert G. Samet
Ashcraft & Gerel LLP
——-
————
3 years ago
| view comments
| Wall Street
