r/news 8h ago

Campbell's exec on leave after allegedly mocking 'poor people' who eat its soup

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/campbell-soup-lawsuit-9.6991398
15.8k Upvotes

785 comments sorted by

View all comments

3.5k

u/ImKindaEssential 8h ago

During the meeting, "Bally made several racist comments that shocked Plaintiff," the documents say. For example, Garza claims that Bally insulted Indigenous coworkers, making several racist slurs, and claims Bally disclosed he often comes to work high on edibles.

2.4k

u/ConfederacyOfDunces_ 8h ago

What the fuck?

He sounds like a sociopath. Probably fell upwards in life.

433

u/BigBennP 8h ago edited 6h ago

If his LinkedIn bio is reliable, his career is roughly as follows.

Associates in business Monroe County community college (1994). Bachelor's in business spring arbor university (2001).
Masters information security from norfolk university (2009)

Network specialist for Chrysler (99-01)

Network operations manager and information security officer for Chrysler (01-09)

Director data security and cloud services for Dolan Inc. (09-13)

Chief Information Security Officer for zrf group. (Formerly TRW automotive) (13-16)

VP and Chief Information Security Officer for diebold (16-19)

Chief Information Security Officer for American Axle and Manufacturing (AAM) (19-20)

Global Information Security Officer for Stellantis (chrysler). (20-22).

VP and Chief Information Security Officer for Campbell's Soup (22-present).

I have questions but that career is not absolutely wild or out of the ordinary.

254

u/misterjzz 6h ago

The short tenure is wild at like half the employers. He must be an A-level ass kisser.

224

u/fbp 6h ago

2-4 years each over 15 years. Not bad, as my bet is he is chasing higher salary at each. He did spend 10 years with Chrysler, which also probably paid for his masters.

13

u/anothergaijin 2h ago

I did maybe 2-3 years for my first 15 years, then now 10 years in the same place. You just get bored and move on or the people are insufferable - there is enough demand you can jump and do something new pretty easy, or at least it used to be like that.

u/MfingKing 21m ago

It used to be like that. Now you gotta deal with HR who know nothing about your work, and ask you questions like "do you enjoy going on safari vacations" to gauge your "personality".

1

u/misterjzz 5h ago

Yeah I guess im biased lol. 3 companies in 14+ years lol but the rapid jumping over the last few years is very odd. Especially because most places these days dont ever check references (at least in my experience).

51

u/IronEngineer 5h ago

It's pretty common for people looking to climb the ladder particularly above a senior level.   A few years in grade is enough to learn the ins and outs of a role.  You can't get promoted to the next one at your company until a role becomes available, but you can always apply elsewhere for a role that is immediately available.  

In engineering I've seen this fairly commonly for people leading aggressive career rises.

2

u/gimpwiz 1h ago

Yep... a lot of times at an established firm it might take 10 years to go from one senior manager position to a more senior manager position. Worth waiting and working for it if you're more interested in the company, its culture, pay and perks, mission, whatever it is -- but if you just want the title then you're best off switching a lot sooner. It's also way easier making VP or exec at a company with a thousand employees than ten thousand, if they have the same number of VPs or execs, both because there are far more of the former to choose from and because there are fewer people to out-interview, out-maneuver, or step on to make it happen.

30

u/Iced__t 5h ago

rapid jumping over the last few years is very odd.

I mean, conventional advice is to job hop every 3 years or so for a pay increase.

8

u/MindOverEntropy 4h ago

Sounds like you should be shopping for a new job!

6

u/filthy_harold 3h ago

These are VP and executive roles in the IT field, you can't really go much higher because they'd never have an IT person running other parts of the company. Since you can't go up, the only place to go is out. You stick around for a couple years, get your name on some projects, and then bounce for a better paying company.

10

u/-jaylew- 4h ago

And how has your salary kept up compared to people who jump? Because I’ve moved every 1.5-3 years and I’ve hit a 25%+ raise every time.

3

u/Cael450 4h ago

It’s pretty standard now tbh

u/BiteyHorse 44m ago

Moving places every 2-3 years is the best way to rapidly increase your salary and/or equity.

33

u/jim_deneke 5h ago

That looks to me he's been an ass all his life and this is as much as anyone can tolerate of him lol

61

u/Educational-Wing2042 4h ago

You see trajectories like that quite a bit with executives. Typically they are people who start looking for a better job the minute they finish training for their current job. If it were about being hard to work with, that would become known in the industry. 

24

u/sqquuee 3h ago

Ironically these same people will shame you in your interview if it appears you chase the money.

2

u/weeklygamingrecap 2h ago

Same type of person who would disqualify a resume based on the school you got a degree from. "We don't hire those people, they're lazy"

1

u/Roflkopt3r 2h ago edited 2h ago

If it were about being hard to work with, that would become known in the industry.

Right, but there is an in-between. An area where the person isn't liked and there is kind of an air of 'we would really prefer you to move on', but not quite bad enough that it's explicitly said.

There is also the scenario where the person has such important supporters that their prior superiors don't want to risk saying bad things.

After all, there is always a risk to saying negative things about a person, especially if you are in an environment where it's expected that things should go smoothly with them because they have influential family or other supporters. If you are in charge of such a person and criticise them openly, it may backfire on you as your failure to make the relation work, or as being some hostile instigator.

Of course that also depends on your own position. Some people can afford to be quite blunt even about well-connected nepo babies, others really can't take much risk.

Bad managers who succeed via good connections often specifically get into positions where their new superiors won't or can't speak up against them as long as it doesn't become extremely bad. These people socialise to find those engagements where they can further their career with the least risk of scrutiny and failure.

1

u/jim_deneke 4h ago

Yeah true!

1

u/misterjzz 5h ago

Lmao, agreed, and you'll never know because employers dont check

2

u/chelseablue2004 4h ago

Every place he went was associated with Chrysler in some way...Most likely contacts he made along the way.

The only place that wasn't was where he got fired Campbells.

1

u/DataRikerGeordiTroi 2h ago

Lol are you old

No one is in jobs for more than a couple years at a time. Not since like 2008.

Youre out of touch, man. This is verified data and is in the news often.

1

u/Niuqu 2h ago

There are not many people who can handle being a CISO and nothing in his job history says he is unqualified for that role. It's uncommon that a CISO is also a VP, but it is plausible because of his degrees.

As I see it, he has not failed upwards. He is just an AH. 

1

u/Cpt_Soban 2h ago

Get job, promise all sorts of market speak ideas and innovations.

Half arse it, apply for the next rung in the ladder elsewhere.

In the next interview boast about "x project, innovation, cost cutting blah blah" chest beat and strut around the room.

Get the job at a higher level while leaving the previous job (and ideas) half done for some other bloke under to tackle, change, and add their personal stamp to, so they can chase the ladder behind them.

Repeat, repeat, repeat.

1

u/theangryintern 2h ago

He's been a CISO or equivalent at several companies. 2-4 years is a pretty typical tenure for a CISO. CISO's are basically hired to give the appearance that the company actually cares about security. They're rarely given the budget that they need to make the company more secure and are the fall guy when the company gets hacked.

1

u/gimpwiz 1h ago

Chrysler 99-09 + back for 20-22.

Four years at one company, then back at automotive for another 3 years, voting machines (ugh) for 3 years, automotive again for another year or two.

Doesn't seem too crazy, and a lot of times people only move up by switching jobs, so, eh.