Chrysler Workers Caught Drinking, Toking Up During Break

Last week, MyFoxDetroit showed footage it had secretly taped of at least 15 autoworkers at a Chrysler plant “drinking beer and smoking marijuana before heading to work.” Chrysler has told the television station that it has suspended the employees without pay pending an investigation, and that it will likely determine next actions today. Check out the video below.

At the Detroit Free Press, Mitch Albom says lots of people drink (and sometimes smoke) at lunchtime and maybe it’s not as huge a scandal as some are making it out to be.





“Chrysler Auto Workers Busted” [MyFoxDetroit] (Thanks to M!)
“Chrysler Suspends Workers” [AOL Autos]

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. Consumeristing says:

    Before they became nationalized, I would’ve shrugged it off. Now is a whole different world.

    • Zeniq says:

      What?

      • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

        He means nationalizing the auto industry. Which isn’t quite what happened. But you could argue its your tax dollars at work.

        • xxmichaelxx says:

          You mean the bailout that was already paid back with interest, and turned out to make the taxpayers money?

        • hansolo247 says:

          When the government makes a separate and NON-UNIFORM (read Article 1) bankruptcy process managed solely by the executive branch and their non-confirmed appointees (not a power in Article 2), what would you call it?

          Government confiscates private property and seizes it without compensation? Check.

          Government gives itself and its largest political contributors and allies preference? Check.

          Government ignores the uniform bankruptcy process and fast-tracks it with all the shots being called by someone who has no legal right to call them? BIG CHECK!

          Sorry, it was an outright Nationalization by every definition. The people who had claim to specific assets (secured bondholders) had that property stolen from them.

  2. Runner says:

    So what if they were smoking marijuana. Lots of people do (myself not included). Did they hurt anyone? Did they hurt themselves?

    Personally, I’d MUCH rather have them drink before they went to work, than if they were drinking then driving home after work. They were drinking at lunch? I used to work for a corporation that had the policy of not more than 2 drinks during lunch. Not that you couldn’t drink, just no more than 2. If vendors came in to take you to lunch, the 2 drink limit went away. (This was a Top 100 corporation, not a small one)

    So was news really slow enough that day to warrant this “investigation”?

    • TuxthePenguin says:

      You cannot have a joint and not be high – you can have a drink and not be drunk.

      That and these guys work with heavy machinery…

      • jimmyhl says:

        Th safety factor is huge here. If a guy with a desk job gets a little toasted, he can coast for the rest of the day. A guy on the floor, not so much.

        • FatLynn says:

          If you cause an accident, you are immediately sent for drug and alcohol testing. If it comes back positive, insurance may be void.

          • Runner says:

            Company insurance is still valid. Employee fired / banned for life. Workman comp denied. Worker can’t sue company. Worker can’t collect disability.

            They know the risks, they accept them by doing it. I think the old saying goes “You’ve made your own bed, now lay in it”.

            • Anne Marie says:

              And if they screw up in ways that aren’t immediately noticeable but lead to injuries for customers? Is that their bed that’s getting laid in?

              • Runner says:

                The average vehicle has over 20,000 parts in it, moving and not. Each person on the assembly line deals with 1 to 5 parts. (some stuff comes in pre-assembled from another assembly line in another plant).

                The possibility of one of these people installing a part incorrectly that would allow it to run for any given time then suddenly fail causing an injury. Well, let’s just say you better go buy a lotto ticket.

                You have a lot high chance of poor materials (Say bolts being made out of high sulfur content steel making them brittle).

                Hell, you have a higher chance of finding a coke can in your door. (Yes, I have actually found a few of these in vehicles).

                • MyLiLPony says:

                  so you’re saying that just because the chance is slim this is ok? Alcohol and marijuana both can impair judgement and can also alter your state of mind depending on how much you’ve drank/smoked. if it didn’t have some kind of effect on them, why bother doing it.

                  point is, i would not want to buy a car made by someone with impaired judgement. Do it in your own home. . fine. If we’re playing the odds game, i like my odds when it comes to buying a car from someone who’s sober than someone who is under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol.

            • shepd says:

              Yes, but the non-drugged, non-drunk people in the factory they may hurt will be compensated by insurance and workman’s comp, increasing the costs to company through increased insurance costs.

      • Blueberry Scone says:

        Yeah, that’s the part that really concerns me (although I’d be upset, too, if they were drinking and lighting up, then hopping in their cars to go home). I have a few relatives who work in big plants with heavy machinery – you do NOT operate that stuff while drunk or high.

      • Runner says:

        And if they have an accident, they are immediately tested. Standard for OSHA anytime there’s an accident.

        If they have been doing it for as long as they claim, they have yet to have any accidents. They were off the company grounds, and on their own time.

        Was it bad that they went to a public park, yeah, probably. But that’s the failure of Law Enforcement / Park Rangers (Federal offense for that!) to enforce the rules there. If it’s been going on so long, the police would have to know about it.

        The whole “It wasn’t even noon yet!” statement the reporter said, big deal. They start work at 6am, they’ve been up since sometime between 4 and 5am, it’s well past their “noon”. They’ve been working for an hour before most people’s alarm clocks have went off.

      • Sparty999 says:

        You can have a joint and not be high… same as your tolerance for drinking can become greater, so can your tolerance for Marijuana.

        I would say that I would rather have these people get high than drink.

    • TheFinalBoomer says:

      I can tell you from experience that the guys in the high vis vests are probably forklift drivers. Not exactly the person I want drinking or high in the factory I work in.

    • Anne Marie says:

      Drinking/getting high and working on cars, driving forklifts, et cetera is stupid and just begging for disaster. I don’t want an intoxicated person manufacturing cars. You’re acting like the options are drunk drive or drunk work but there’s another one: don’t get drunk (or high) during your work day.

    • u1itn0w2day says:

      So what…..??????

      Does anyone want to buy the car this crew is making after lunch? Do you trust the bolts they tightend, the blue prints they supposedly read or the parts they put together? Or do you want to pay unemployment or social security disability to the coworker they f up with heavy machinery or tools.

    • Clyde Barrow says:

      Your comments of complacency are beyond comprehension. No wonder our country is going to the dogs when we have citizens like you condoning this type of behavior. Thanks for helping us into the shit pile of no return. But I’ll know who to blame as the United States becomes more progressively dumber technologically incompetent through this century.

      But of course if you already feel this way, the ones like me that think differently will need to work harder for slackers like you. With no extra pay.

      • Runner says:

        And We’ll all know who to blame for why we have 5 law’s saying the exact same thing is illegal. People like you that have you have your noses up someone else’s rear end more worried about what someone else is doing than what you need to do.

        Over the last few years I’ve been getting more and more vocal about this kind of thing. It’s their own life, let them deal with it how they want to. If they screw up, we have law’s that will punish them.

        Stop trying to keep the idiot from harming themselves. 50 years ago, people would not have thought twice about people going out and doing this same behavior. Quit trying to nanny other people on the basis of “protecting them from themselves.”

        Were the police notified once? Nope. They took some story and then made it all about Chrysler. Would it stop me from buying one of their vehicles? Nope.

        • Mecharine says:

          And then said idiot sues and wins because they weren’t expressly forbidden from boozing and toking before operating heavy machinery. And win.

        • Anne Marie says:

          They’re not protecting them from themselves, they’re trying to protect other people from them. I wouldn’t take solace in losing a friend or relative to a high or drunk person using heavy machinery because, well, at least we didn’t play nanny!

        • DEVO says:

          DUDE. It’s not about protecting them only. There are other people there that can be fucked up by some assholes negligence in a factory like that. This isn’t cubicle work.

        • BobOki says:

          You guys are missing his point, if they actually cared they would have contacted the police instead of the news.
          As I see thus far no charges have been filed. Drinking, then driving is enough to get the cops there, but oh-so-evil weed too? That would have been swat.
          This comes off more of a publicity stunt then an actual event.

    • benh999 says:

      #1. Would you buy a car built by someone high and/or drunk?

      #2. Given how closely Chrysler’s finances are tied to our federal government, we all assume liability for any accidents that happen when these idiots go back to work with heavy machinery.

    • Eli the Ice Man says:

      You are suggesting drinking and getting high before operating heavy machinery is somehow ok. Really man, do I have to explain to you what’s wrong with that?

  3. ToKeN2k6 says:

    That’s why you gotta do that stuff on your lunch break people! actually get in your car, drive down the highway listening to radio programming of your choice. Travel for 15 miles, make U-Turn, head back..

  4. RandomHookup says:
    • fxsoap says:

      LOL i love the sarcasm and spin FOX puts on their stories.
      —They add stupid music and talk like they really cracked something huge…..

      THEN trying to tie in Obama into this some how……As if Obama had something to do with it. haha.
      —-“OBAMA thinks these guys need MORE money”

      God Fox you are a worthless news network.

  5. gqcarrick says:

    They belong to a union, sadly I bet they ALL get to keep their jobs with a minor slap on the wrist and a stern talking to.

    • sufreak says:

      Don’t be so sure. Unions (at least decent ones) don’t take this stuff kindly. Like an insurance company, they’ll support to an extent, but wrong is wrong. And they don’t protect illegal actions.
      (and no, I’m not in a union. Never have been.)

    • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

      Not a chance a union would be able to negotiate in allowing the employee to be drunk or high while using machinery.

    • ARP says:

      Nope. Union protect their workers from being fired for what they perceive to be minor infractions, pretext firings, etc.

      When their employees do stupid things, they tend to enforce that harshly as it damages their ability to prevent the other types of firings.

    • cryptique says:
  6. friendlynerd says:

    If this was going on in 1993 it would explain a lot about my Sundance.

    • u1itn0w2day says:

      It be a safe bet this was going on in 1993 and other in companies as well. It makes you wonder about some of the ‘lemons’ they call cars out there.

      Although many companies have had so called drug free work places since the 1980s the majority of the time that only means a test at the time your hired so they have proof they didn’t hire a known addict/alcholic. Unless you really get caught screwing up many will never be tested again. The ones I’ve known to get drug tested even in an union enviorment had an obvious/known drug and/or alcohol problem.

    • DariusC says:

      No need to que the chrysler jokes now.. lol… This does explain why Chrysler sucks! Kidding… the 300s are sweet!

  7. Pooterfish says:

    Pfffft. Probably protected in the UAW contract.

    • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

      Absolutely not. Being under the influence while using heavy and dangerous machinery is a major safety issue, and would never be allowed via contract.

    • u1itn0w2day says:

      You’re right they’ll probably get a chance or two or three. My guess is that they’ll get a suspension and/or sent to rehab if they want to keep their job.

      The whole thing of on their own time might have come into play if they weren’t on company property. Does this Chrysler Plant have an actual rule no drugs or alcohol on premises? Or is Chrysler a declared drug free work place? And the there’s the legal technicallity only-were they impaired/how impaired were they when they returned to work.

  8. sufreak says:

    I fully support legalization, and drinking. But not at work. These are jobs which build consumer devices which are very dangerous if not properly built. Its not a pen that won’t write if improperly assembled. Its a car.

    So drink and smoke at home.

    • chaesar says:

      I think smoking a little bit of low-grade pot isnt a big deal when youre talking about a repetitive assembly situation. My problem is when you cocktail it with alcohol. That’s when reaction time and judgment can become clouded to a dangerous level

      • chaesar says:

        legal issues aside, of course

      • sufreak says:

        When its your airbag, lug nut or seat belt screw, I disagree. If they are making candy dishes, I may not object.
        And I do have some knowledge of the topic. Not current though. Sadly.

      • sufreak says:

        When its your airbag, lug nut or seat belt screw, I disagree. If they are making candy dishes, I may not object.
        And I do have some knowledge of the topic. Not current though. Sadly.

  9. digital0verdose says:

    So is it actually against any rules that these guys are not allowed to drink at lunch when they are off the clock?

    • jimmyhl says:

      If you have a quart of beer and smoke a joint right before you punch in, the issue of off-the-clock, on-the-clock becomes meaningless. This guy won’t sober up in the two minutes it takes to walk into the plant.

    • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

      It’s within a company’s right to not allow alcohol on the premises. They can in no way legally prevent you from drinking off-site, except when you sign a contract giving up that right.

      But I think the real issue here isn’t that they are drinking, but that they are under the influence while using machinery. This is also something the company is disallow.

      And obviously, the marijuana use is just wrong anyway you look at it (until it becomes legalized for casual use).

      • Liam Kinkaid says:

        I usually agree with you on a lot of things, Loias, but marijuana use isn’t “wrong anyway you look at it.” It certainly is illegal, but that doesn’t automatically make it wrong. Legal vs. illegal is a matter of law, right vs. wrong (or at least not wrong vs. wrong) is a matter of ethics. If it’s not hurting anyone, what’s so wrong about it?

        • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

          I used “wrong” in the legal sense, not the moral sense. I wouldn’t dare get into a marijuana use debate here since it’s off subject. Sorry if I confused you.

          Since marijuana use violates the law, it’s not appropriate behavior at work, and every company will consider this being under the influence at work which is generally an automatically termination.

          I’m pretty sure even if it was legal, it would be the same situation at work (example: being drunk).

          • Liam Kinkaid says:

            Ahh, my bad. Then I think we’re in agreement. And all is once again right with the world. :)

            • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

              If you agree with me on most things, you should become my follower on Consumerist! I could use more friends : – (

    • u1itn0w2day says:

      Alot of companies have rules like not drinking 6-8 hours before your scheduled shift. Drink at lunch on your owntime would still violate a similar rule because you still have to go reSTART your shift after lunch.

  10. Macgyver says:

    And because of the f’ed up union, they all gonna keep their jobs.

    • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

      Snarky and fully inaccurate. Typically what I expect from Macgyver.

      • MyLiLPony says:

        snarky yes. true? maybe. you see that these workers have been suspended and not fired right now. this is obviously against company policy yet these people all still have their jobs.

        i’m definitely pro union when it actually fought for fair wages and fair benefits. when it comes to stuff like this? not cool. i know someone who fell asleep at their job and didn’t get fired because the union fought for them. why would they fight for someone who obviously doesn’t care about their job?

  11. humphrmi says:

    Back when I did blue collar work, drinking at lunch time was fairly normal. Not saying it was right, but that’s what happened everywhere. Although I’d think by now companies would have tightened up the rules, given our risk averse environment today.

  12. Straspey says:

    For those people who think it’s perfectly acceptable for the autoworkers to drink alcohol and smoke marijuana during their lunch break, while they’re “off the clock” as you put it…

    So okay…

    It’s now after lunch and they’re back “on the clock”, working on the assembly line, working on the car which you will eventually end up in a showroom in your town, and which you will buy and let your wife and kid use to drive around in.

    Hmmm….

    • Adam says:

      Hmm, and I’m really sure that they have enough time to get so smashed on their lunch break that it affects anything they do to the vehicle. In fact, I’ve had a couple of drinks at my lunch hour which has made me more enthusiastic about returning to work happy to complete the job instead of wanting to go home and just call it an early day.

      And the people that think that marijuana is bad need to fall off the face of the earth. Seriously.

      • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

        You CAN get pretty plastered in 30 minutes if you want to.

      • Anne Marie says:

        I can be all for legalizing marijuana and still not want people working on cars high.

      • Straspey says:

        I didn’t say marijuana is bad, and I’m glad it peaks your “enthusiasm” for doing your job.

        But if everybody thinks that way, then…

        The pharmacist who’s in charge of filling the proper dosage for your mother’s heart and blood pressure medication gets more enthusiastic after a joint on his lunch break.

        The guy who’s in charge of your stock portfolio and retirement fund enjoys making investments with your money after a few beers and a bowl of hash during lunch.

        The mechanic who’s fixing the faulty breaks on your wife’s car likes to “take the edge off” during the free time he gets on his lunch break by sharing a spliff with his co-worker.

        The woman who drives your kids’ school bus and likes to have a few bears and a doobie during her hours “off the clock” before driving the kids home in the afternoon.

        But, of course since you seem to be able to do your work high, that means everybody else should be able to as well.

    • kiltman says:

      Not me, I buy non-UAW vehicles!

  13. idx says:

    Let’s be honest here. Even with the workers being drunk and high, chrysler cars couldn’t get any worse.

    • broncobiker says:

      Dodge’s are perfectly fine, if they maybe tried making some new cars for the Chrysler line rather than rebranding Dodges maybe they could get somewhere. Jeep is built fine too.

      • idx says:

        Yeah, okay. Most dodges are fine. As far as jeeps, I don’t think any of them are as good as they used to be, and the only one that I think is still decent is the wrangler.

      • KyleOrton says:

        If you have Viper, then congrats but there’s no way Dodge as a whole is “fine.”

        I’d say it’s Dodge that rebadged a Chrysler Sebring as the Avenger and both are terrible cars. Dodge is one of few manufacturers that still has a package that doesn’t have standard ABS and stability control.

        Sure, people like the Charger. No one I know, but it’s probably the only non-Viper Dodge not reviewed with the phrase “cost cut to death.” Even so, they still make half of the safety features optional to bring down the advertised MSRP and squeeze a few people into cars lacking modern safety features because they couldn’t afford it.

  14. There's room to move as a fry cook says:

    Drunk lawyers can do much more damage. It was well known in my industry that if you wanted papers signed by company xxx then you visited their legal dept after lunch.

  15. Hobz says:

    BUSTED!!!

  16. Anne Marie says:

    “At the Detroit Free Press, Mitch Albom says lots of people drink (and sometimes smoke) at lunchtime and maybe it’s not as huge a scandal as some are making it out to be.”

    How does it make it less bad if “everybody’s doing it!”?

    • Yo Howdy says:

      Imagine the dangers of intoxicated writing. I think Albom misses the point here. Some jobs can obviously be done with some level of impairment…the guy at Subway can still make my sandwich after getting high without much risk, but I wouldn’t want to get on the plane piloted by Cheech or Chong. Somewhere there is a line, and it is probably best to err on the side of caution, for employers to not let employees be intoxicated on company time, period. People working in the construction of automobiles or around heavy machinery obviously fall on the side of the line, however, that should never be impaired. People in Albom’s line of work are what are referred to as sedentary workers, so there isn’t a risk (unless you work on the printing press itself, which would get messy).

  17. cmdr.sass says:

    You will see this at virtually every low/no skill job. When I managed factory workers, they would slip out for beers and joints during their lunch break. When I managed warehosue workers, same thing. As long as it didn’t happen in the building or noticeably affect the work or result in accidents, we just looked the other way. But let’s be honest, the work they were doing any monkey could do. Whether this kind of behavior is was led them to wind up in dead end jobs or was the result of working them, it didn’t matter much.

    • rodan1967 says:

      I guess all the poor uneducated people have nothing better to do that get high or drunk! Common getting high or drunk at work has nothing to do with someones education. You might be surprised at the education back ground of alot of people who work in UAW shops. There are many factory workers in auto plants with 4 year degrees working on a line. Auto company s have always been big proponents of tuition assistance for its employees and has a pretty educated work force because of it.

  18. Wang_Chung_Tonight says:

    really Fox is this what news is coming to?

    what’s next you catch a guy leaving a bar peeing on the side of a building.

    way to fail at reporting news.

    • Jeff_Number_3 says:

      You can become a registered sex offender if you do that.

    • Joseph S Ragman says:

      “what’s next you catch a guy leaving a bar peeing on the side of a building.”

      Fox 2 News has already done that … several years ago.

      City employees were fired for urinating on side of building.

  19. Jeff says: "WTF could you have been thinking?" says:

    S.O.P.
    Standard Operating Procedure
    Nothing to see here folks, move along…

  20. CherieBerry says:

    In other news, water is wet!

  21. SlappyFrog says:

    I used to work with a guy who’d take his break at 3:30pm and upon his return at 3:45pm, like clockwork, ask if anyone wanted to go in on a pizza with him.

    The lesson: dopeheads are everywhere.

  22. Sword_Chucks says:

    in other news, Fox Detroit is now facing wiretapping charges for video taping people without their consent…

  23. Dre' says:

    Other than the heavy machinery / nationalization aspect, this is a non-story. My company allows us to have up to 2 drinks at lunch.

  24. javert says:

    How much of a hindrance can this be to someone who’s job is to stand in one spot and screw the same screw for 8 hours a day. This is being blown way out of proportion.

  25. AllanG54 says:

    I’m just wondering if these guys are supposed to be building the best cars in the world, I’m sure there is going to be a lot of shoddy workmanship on the cars they’re building.

  26. chaesar says:

    if this isn’t such a big deal, why did all the workers scurry away and cover their faces with hats when the camera showed up?

  27. Kitten Mittens says:

    This is why I make my own cars at home.

  28. Nakko says:

    This is an ooooold story with union workers. My dad worked for a GE plant in Massachusetts back in the mid-80’s, and he said that other workers’ coffee thermoses would be filled with mostly whiskey or gin, their cigarettes were half marijuana, so that when a supervisor came around to investigate the smell, they’d say, what are ya talkin’ about, this is a regular cigarette.

    The best part was, according to union rules, if you were caught high or drunk at work, all you had to do was admit it, and for six weeks you would be paid to not work, and attend some rehab program, and then right back to work with you. He said he knew guys who had been through the rehab-vacation thing multiple times; clearly unrepentant. I’m all for unions. We owe our eight-hour workdays and two-week vacations to their efforts, but some of these morons get paid thirty bucks an hour to push a button 10 months a year while drunk and stoned.

  29. MikeF74 says:

    Off topic… I wonder if Fox2 Detroit licensed those 4 or 5 songs for use in their segment.

  30. keith4298 says:

    You forgot the taking it seriously tag!

  31. Armand1880 says:

    Alright Mitch, well I don’t buckle up my family inside your newspaper when we go out for a drive.

  32. u1itn0w2day says:

    Unfortunetly I can attest to the fact that other industries have had their employees and management have quite a few at lunch AND other times during their shift(union and non union)

    I’ve seen utility workers drinking during lunch and other times driving a UPS size van or full size bucket truck. I’ve also seen a car load of management in a bar then go drive a company vehicle around. I’ve also worked in other industries where management would routinely comeback from an extended lunch a little more than buzzed.

    These same individual tended espouse how “great” the job was-so why the F are you drinking on the job and risking loosing this supposedly ‘great’ job.

  33. Beppo says:

    Far from just installing parts incorrectly, there’s the professionalism angle too. You’re getting paid to do a job, not get drunk and stoned.
    Someone downthread mentioned Rivethead: Tales of the Assembly Line and boy, stuff hasn’t changed much, has it?

  34. redwing41 says:

    Maybe instead we should talk about how much of an idiot Mitch Albom is.

  35. Clyde Barrow says:

    I worked near the GM Tech Center in Warren, MI and those employees do this all the time. You can find them in nearby pubs and parking lots drinking their lunches everyday.

    The white guys are in the pubs drinking beers and shots, the black guys are in the liquor store parking lots with their buddies drinking such as shown in this video.

    So much for American ingenuity. These same folks cannot understand why our manufacturing base is lost to other countries.

  36. Hoss says:

    The headline should be: “15 Surviving Auto Workers in USA Celebrate Daily!”

  37. jeff_the_snake says:

    this happens everywhere. these guys will get fired, some of their replacements will abstain, some will get away with it and some will get caught and fired. why is this a scandal?

  38. thefearofgod says:

    You don’t have to be a Union member to go to rehab/counseling instead of being terminated. The difference is the Union knows to recommend this to it’s members. I worked at a company that had mandatory random drug testing (both hair and urine) and it was common practice for employees who failed to go to counseling instead of being fired. Drug and Alcohol addiction has successfully been argued to be a disability and it leaves the employer at risk of a discrimination lawsuit to fire someone who is arguing they need counseling.

  39. u1itn0w2day says:

    DFWP

    If you have ever read a help wanted or classified add that means Drug Free Work Place. And on most job applications now a days you usually sign a waiver or statement saying that you understand you are working in a ‘drug free work place’ or dfwp.

    The problem is with this incident without an actual drug test or a screw up by one those employees that day I don’t think they should or can be fired right away.

    DFWP or dfwp- read that fine print-it means something to somebody even if just the lawyers.

  40. Joseph S Ragman says:

    “what’s next you catch a guy leaving a bar peeing on the side of a building.”

    Fox 2 News has already done that … several years ago.

    City employees were fired for urinating on side of building, after visit to liquor store

  41. Telekinesis123 says:

    Why don’t you go investigate wall street and the govt instead of harassing everyday people FOX you hypocrites.

    • Anne Marie says:

      Yeah, those poor hard-working stoners and drinkers using heavy equipment and building cars are sooo persecuted!

  42. JoeS says:

    I saw the segment of Faux news and wondered if this was another Watergate! Imagine, some auto workers actually have a beer during lunchtime! I’ve seen workers in bars at lunchtime in DC, smoking and drinking, but no one ever seems to have investigated them, possibly because they were wearing white shirts and topcoats. Is there a double standard here? Did anyone analyze the hand rolled cigarettes and verify it was in fact marijuana? I don’t recall seeing that in the segment, but then again why spoil a good story with some facts?

  43. sopmodm14 says:

    isn’t made in America great ?

    i guess i love the way workaholic Asians make my products and car then !!

  44. byrooooo says:

    Maybe thats why american cars are built so poorly. Okay, it fine to be drunk and high when you’re not at work, but if you’re building cars which are meant to provide transport and safety to people, their kids and their families, IT’S A BIG DEAL. How anyone (ie, Mitch Albom) can try and justify this, is ludicrous.

    • rodan1967 says:

      My guess is only union people who get high and drunk on their lunch break? Never had a job where I didn’t see someone who either got drunk or high on the job or at lunch. Is it a good thing? Probably not. But to follow around some UAW guys and put it on tv is sensationalizing something that happens in all kinds of work environments. I think that was more to the point of what Album was getting at.

      • byrooooo says:

        in normal, non-union jobs, you would knowingly risk your job to be drunk at work. but with a union, they protect you like no other. so many incompetents get to stay in their union jobs because their unions defend actions that had it happened in a non union job environment, they would just be FIRED.

  45. jake.valentine says:

    Drunk and high morons working for a poorly run company. This is just another reason to not buy a vehicle from a manufacturer who received tax dollars. If you choose to buy American, stick with Ford. Too bad Cadillac is part of Government Motors…… the CTS looks promising.

  46. Phil Villakeepinitrreal says:

    I wish I could say I was surprised but I know this kind of shit is relatively normal at the Ford plant here. Along with employees who clocked in, went to the bar/grill down the street, and went back later to clock out. The union environment the UAW constructed makes it almost impossible for them to get fired.

  47. rodan1967 says:

    Much ado about nothing. Maybe someone should follow the news reports around and see if anyone has a drink at lunch. Probably a pretty common occurrence in alot of business environments.The union workers get demonized for something that alot of other people do in todays Fox News anti union world.

    • jake.valentine says:

      Drinking and driving on a public road or operating heavy equipment is NOT something most people do everyday. Your sympathies to unions are perhaps blinding your common sense as you seek to rationalize this behavior.

  48. Mr.Grieves says:

    I was most offended when the guy threw his empties away in the park. What an asshole.

  49. girly says:

    In Germany they have cans of beer in the vending machines at workplaces.

  50. Endgame says:

    People are retarded. Who the f sits in there car and smokes dope and drinks booze at lunch.
    LOL, You’re idiots and deserve to loose your job for being stupid.
    You’ve got a problem if you can’t wait til after work or even the weekend.
    Which means your probably impaired all the time, and I’m supposed to get in a car you built?

  51. thedude says:

    FYI, they were fired.

  52. webweazel says:

    I lived in a place a while back where ‘2-joints and a six-pack’ lunches were customary, expected, and openly discussed on the job. In a span of about 10 towns, not just one or two jobs.
    So, no surprise to me.

  53. chaelyc says:

    I don’t think it is a huge deal. Sure, it’s probably a liability issue for the company but as far as the public goes I don’t think there’s anything to be outraged or write news stories about. My coworkers have been known to tip back a few during business lunches so I don’t really see a difference except that the heaviest equipment they operate after lunch in my office is a laptop.

  54. THERAVEN says:

    Well Runner how about you let these drunk and high Chrysler employees install the brakes, air bag controls, and seat belts in your car and not mine. This could explain why Chrysler’s vehicles are absolute trash as they are assembled by intoxicated personnel. I doubt all employees at Chrysler do this which is sad. If you are a Chrysler employee I highly recommend you either stock pile some of you salary for when they go bankrupt AGAIN or try to find a job at a more respectable car company such as anyone except for Chrysler and Fiat. I have documented evidence that Chrysler makes the least dependable and lowest quality vehicles as my $36,000.00 car a brand new 2006 Chrysler 300C (Hemi) experienced a total engine failure while parked after just five years of ownership and 95,000 miles. Chrysler admitted it was a malfunction but would only assume 50% of the liabilities by making me pay $4,200.00 for a new engine. in case you are car savvy the problem turned out to be the valve seat in the engine head completely blew and sent metal fragments throughout my internal combustion chamber, I wonder if one of these guys in the video installs value seats in Chryslers. I wouldn’t be surprised one bit. They took billions of tax payer money and still can’t manage to make a reliable vehicle that is downright pitiful. I hope our next president doesn’t make the same mistake twice next time just let them fail and save humanity from their sorry excuses for vehicles. By the way after just 6,000 miles after the installation of my “new engine” the car completely shut off on me twice back to back last week while DRIVING!!! After the second start it remained on. I will be taking it in just to record it in my files for “When” but not “If” the engine dies prematurely “AGAIN”. One last thing, since the engine’s spontaneous shut off last week the incident blew out my headlights and fog lights. So if you live in Pasadena and you see a 2006 black Chrysler 300C driving at night with its high beams on I apologize as they are currently the only lights I have that function. I wonder if Chrysler will have the courtesy to at least replace them free of charge or if they will make me pay for half the cost “AGAIN”.