Partial truth?
A female Coke employee was dating a male Coke employee who left for Pepsi. At some point the two became engaged.
The Female Coke employee was fired by Coke.
She ALLEGED in a lawsuit against the company that her supervisor instructed her to quit, get her fiancé to come work for Coke again, or end the relationship.
The matter never went to trial and was settled out of court. The settlement details were found by confidentiality for both Coke and the plaintiff.
So we don’t actually know why she was fired.
The woman said she was very happy with the settlement, and Coke said they were very happy with the settlement.
A settlement doesn’t always mean guilt, it often just means the cost of a payout is less cost than a trial, or that a trial might release often related but not directly relevant details a party wants to keep secret, or there are matters of brand image etc.
The fact the woman said she was happy might imply to some that she was vindicated, but it is equally true that most people would also be happy to receive a likely ample settlement if they had made something up or had a weak case too.
Likewise the fact Coke said they were happy could be seen as either they are happy to put the matter behind them, they’re just being civil in public, or that they are happy they covered up wrong doing and avoided a larger payout and getting dragged in court.
You can make your own conclusions about what happened but it is only accurate to say Coke ALLEGEDLY fired a woman for being with a Pepsi employee.
A female Coke employee was dating a male Coke employee who left for Pepsi. At some point the two became engaged.
The Female Coke employee was fired by Coke.
She ALLEGED in a lawsuit against the company that her supervisor instructed her to quit, get her fiancé to come work for Coke again, or end the relationship.
The matter never went to trial and was settled out of court. The settlement details were found by confidentiality for both Coke and the plaintiff.
So we don’t actually know why she was fired.
The woman said she was very happy with the settlement, and Coke said they were very happy with the settlement.
A settlement doesn’t always mean guilt, it often just means the cost of a payout is less cost than a trial, or that a trial might release often related but not directly relevant details a party wants to keep secret, or there are matters of brand image etc.
Likewise the fact Coke said they were happy could be seen as either they are happy to put the matter behind them, they’re just being civil in public, or that they are happy they covered up wrong doing and avoided a larger payout and getting dragged in court.
You can make your own conclusions about what happened but it is only accurate to say Coke ALLEGEDLY fired a woman for being with a Pepsi employee.