Any insinuation by Mr. Chase that Brothers’ products were defective is patently false. Food quality and safety is of paramount importance to Brothers and the company has always maintained the highest quality and safety control standards. There has never been any finding of any kind of defective products by any regulatory body. In fact, after Mr. Chase expressed his alleged concerns, Brothers sent the products in question to be tested at an independent laboratory, which confirmed that the products were entirely safe for consumption. This report was provided to the United States Department of Labor (DOL) during its investigation of Mr. Chase’s termination complaint. Even his allegations about “expiration dates” are completely false, as Brothers does not put ‘expiration dates’ on any of its products; Brothers only uses ‘best by’ dates. Significantly, after conducting a thorough investigation of Mr. Chase’s claims, the DOL issued no finding that Mr. Chase’s termination was retaliatory.
Mr. Chase’s true objective in filing the lawsuit is apparent from the initial demand letter sent by his attorney to Brothers. In this demand letter, Mr. Chase does not request that Brothers re-test any products or discontinue their sale. Rather, he demanded over $100,000 from Brothers in exchange for a release of his potential ‘claims.’ Mr. Chase’s attorney also threatened that her client would “go public” (which she has now done) with his allegations unless the case settled. Brothers refuses to capitulate to this kind of legalized extortion.
Brothers has also filed a federal lawsuit against Chase (several months before Mr. Chase filed his lawsuit in federal court) for misappropriating proprietary company data. As the former eCommerce Director, Mr. Chase had access to such information, and sadly admits to taking this data. Mr. Chase is now bound by a federal court order not to use this proprietary data in any way (upon request, we will supply a copy of the court order). We also believe he attempted to sabotage the company website by blocking it from search engines.”
On July 15, Food Quality & Safety received the following statement from Elizabeth Cordello, Esq. , of Underberg & Kessler LLP, as Counsel for Chase, as a response to Brothers’ statement above dated July 9:
“Mr. Chase can fully corroborate his claims that he complained to Brothers co-CEO Travis Betters regarding Brothers practice of redating expired best buy dates (internally referred to as ‘exp. Dates’) on its products. Brothers does not and cannot deny this claim. Mr. Chase can also fully corroborate that he complained regarding the continued sale of improperly rehydrated Brothers All Natural Fuji Apple Fruit Crisps. Brothers does not and cannot deny this claim. Mr. Chase can prove that he reasonably believed these products were not safe for consumption and that he was retaliated against and ultimately terminated due to these protected complaints.
During the course of Mr. Chase’s employment, Brothers displayed no interest in testing any products or discontinuing the sale of the products in question. Thus, Mr. Chase had no reason to believe such a request would be entertained by Brothers after his termination. Brothers states ‘after Mr. Chase expressed his alleged concerns’ that it had the ‘products in question’ tested. That food safety test was not conducted until after Mr. Chase was terminated for voicing his food safety concerns and after legal action regarding same was imminent.
The Department of Labor did not conduct a ‘thorough investigation’ of Mr. Chase’s claims. Due to a backlog of cases, Mr. Chase was advised that the DOL would not be able complete an investigation and render any determination soon. Thus after the minimum 210 day waiting period required by law, Mr. Chase exercised his right to file a federal lawsuit.
Leave a Reply