Kegcaps 64 mm, Brown 154 Sankey S-type (EU) (1000/papkasse)
Tilføj kurv
CC29mm TFS-PVC Free, White with oxygen scav.(7000/papkasse)
Tilføj kurv
Kegcaps 64 mm, Gold 116 Sankey S-type (EU) (1000/papkasse)
Tilføj kurv
Kegcaps 64 mm, White 86 Sankey S-type (EU) (1000/papkasse)
Tilføj kurv
Kegcaps 69 mm, Grøn 147 Grundey G-type (850/papkasse)
Tilføj kurv
Fagron Spices, IFSFood Certificate 16089, EN 2024
Organic Certificate ENG: Malt, Hops, Spices and Sugar - Jul 2025-Mar 2028
Castle Malting Malt Non Ionization Certificate FR
Hops Hopfenveredlung St.Johann, Certificate ISO 22000:2005 2021-2024
Malt Attestation of Conformity for pesticides and contaminants 2024 (ENG)
USA: Anheuser-Busch loses appeal of ruling over hidden-camera use
Beer maker Anheuser-Busch Companies may have to reinstate several employees fired for using illegal drugs at work because the company used hidden cameras without informing the employees' union, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday, July 6, according to Associated Press.
The brewer fired five workers in 1998 after hidden cameras showed them smoking marijuana in an area where employees sometimes take breaks at one of its St. Louis brewing facilities.
Four additional workers were suspended for leaving their work areas. Seven others, observed sleeping or urinating on the building's roof, had to sign "last-chance" agreements saying they could be fired for any further violation of company rules.
A panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld in a 2-1 decision a finding that the brewer committed an unfair labor practice when it installed the cameras in 1998 before bargaining with Brewers and Maltsters Local Union No. 6, as required under federal law.
The decision by Judge Judith Rogers sends the case back to the National Labor Relations Board in Washington to determine what, if any, remedies the disciplined employees are entitled to, including the possibility of reinstatement for those fired.
The NLRB had ruled that the employees were not entitled to reinstatement or back pay because Anheuser-Busch had good cause to discipline them. But the court held that the company would not have known about the misconduct without viewing the unlawful hidden-camera tapes.
Judge David Sentelle dissented, saying the employees still could be disciplined for misconduct, even if the cameras were unlawfully installed.