A Ford electrician, who lost his job after being wrongfully accused of stealing $1.95 cookies, is gearing up for a legal battle against Ford and its cafeteria operator, Aramark, according to reports.
Kurt Krom, 60, had spent 11 years working on robots and automated equipment at Ford’s Kentucky Truck Plant in Louisville. He claims he was unjustly labeled a thief when he attempted to check out at a self-service kiosk after inadvertently failing to pay for two packs of Grandma’s chocolate chip cookies during his night shift back in May.
Ford eventually reinstated Krom, compensating him around $33,000 in back wages and offering him his job back once he provided bank statements demonstrating that the $1.95 transaction had indeed gone through.
However, Krom declined the offer, explaining to the Post last month, “I can’t work for a company that dismissed me in that way and didn’t give me the chance to prove my innocence.”
Now, Krom has enlisted the help of Kentucky attorney J. Will Huber, who intends to send demand letters to both Ford and Aramark this week.
“The theft charges levied against him were entirely unfounded,” Huber stated in a communication with the Post.
He emphasized that evidence supporting Krom’s innocence was readily available to both Aramark and Ford from the outset. Huber noted that Krom, after dedicating 11 years of service, was abruptly branded a thief and dismissed, despite having paid for the cookies. He criticized the company’s reaction as “unacceptable,” asserting that the facts present significant legal claims that Krom plans to pursue exhaustively.
A Ford spokesperson informed the Post that they do not comment on ongoing litigation but are looking into the few instances of issues associated with Aramark kiosks that have been reported.
Krom, who is diabetic, explained to the Post that his blood sugar dipped to 60 around 3:30 a.m. on May 9, prompting him to buy cookies at the kiosk inside the plant. He recounted that when he ran his debit card, a red error message appeared, and while swiping again didn’t yield a clear approval, he assumed it had been successful.
“I thought maybe it would have worked,” Krom shared. “It wasn’t a big deal to me for $1.95. I thought I paid it.”
A week later, he received a call from his supervisor informing him of his termination for allegedly stealing cookies. Krom recalled, “The negotiator said, ‘This is bad.’ I asked, ‘What for?’ They said, ‘We want to fire you for ingesting cookies.’ I was like, ‘What are you talking about?’”
He reported being escorted out of the factory immediately and not allowed to collect his belongings. Soon after, he sought a former colleague to photograph a kiosk showing the correct price for the cookies, which matched the transaction noted in his bank statement. After submitting a screenshot to Ford and union officials, the company required a notarized bank statement before reinstating him with full pay.
Although Krom has recovered in financial terms, he stated he cannot return to Ford. “There was no apology. No meaningful acknowledgment like, ‘I’m sorry.’ I planned to work there until retirement… This has been extremely difficult, but I just can’t go back,” he conveyed.
Opinions among legal experts regarding Krom’s prospects vary. Imran Ansari, a civil litigation lawyer from New York, argued that Krom could potentially win a wrongful termination case against Ford, with a particularly strong defamation claim due to the false theft allegation impacting his reputation. He also noted that if Aramark incorrectly claimed Krom hadn’t paid, they could share liability.
Conversely, Chicago trial lawyer Andrew Stoltman expressed skepticism, suggesting that the case may have weaker grounds. “I wouldn’t label it frivolous, but it’s getting close,” he remarked, adding that while Krom could technically prevail, the potential financial gain might not be significant. Stoltman pointed out that Ford’s reinstatement of Krom and his current sound financial position could limit damages relevant to a wrongful termination suit.
Although Krom might argue that the theft accusation tarnished his reputation, Stoltman indicated that the company’s choice to reinstate him likely reduces much of that harm. The newspaper has reached out to Krom, Aramark, and the United Auto Workers union for their perspectives.
