A Campbell’s Exec Is on Leave After Allegedly Mocking People Who Buy Their Soup
If the astronomer CEO scandal felt like peak corporate chaos, Campbell’s found a way to compete for attention. An executive allegedly made horrible remarks about customers in a private meeting that set off serious backlash once they surfaced through a lawsuit. Reaction spread quickly across social platforms, Campbell’s released statements within hours, and the situation moved into an internal investigation.
How The Recording Surfaced
Image via Canva/alexlmx
The entire ordeal began with a lawsuit filed in Michigan by former cybersecurity analyst Robert Garza. He said a meeting in November 2024, originally meant for a salary discussion, took a sharp turn when he met with Campbell’s vice president of information security, Martin Bally. Garza recorded the conversation and later shared the audio with media outlets.
The voice on the tape criticized the company’s canned soup, insulted customers, dismissed certain coworkers, and made claims about showing up to work after using edibles. The most viral portion of the audio involved comments about the products being food for people with limited options and claims that the chicken in certain soups came from technology no one at Campbell’s has actually used.
Garza said he told a supervisor in early January 2025 that he wanted to report the comments to human resources. Weeks later, he was out of a job. His lawsuit now argues that his termination was retaliatory and that the workplace had become hostile before he was dismissed.
Campbell’s Reaction
Image via Getty Images/Morakot Kawinchan
Campbell’s acknowledged the recording within a day of the lawsuit becoming public. The company said it reviewed the audio, believed the voice belonged to Bally, and placed him on leave while investigating. By midweek, he was no longer employed there.
The company’s statements were direct. Campbell’s said the remarks about its ingredients were inaccurate and out of step with its standards. It also reaffirmed that its soups use chicken supplied by long-established USDA-approved partners. It published an additional note online to address the specific claim about “3D-printed” meat, calling the accusation false.
Leadership emphasized that millions of households rely on Campbell’s products and that the company takes pride in the work of its teams across all departments.
What Garza Says Happened
Garza describes the recording as something he kept private at first. He told local media that he wanted the company to address the behavior internally and expected support from management when he tried to bring it forward.
According to the lawsuit, his supervisor discouraged him from escalating the matter. Garza said the fallout left him unemployed for months and dealing with mounting stress. The lawsuit seeks financial compensation for lost wages, legal costs, and harm to his reputation.
The Broader Stakes For Campbell’s
Between anger over grocery prices and the timing so close to holiday shopping, the comments sparked a wave of frustration. Campbell’s social pages were filled with remarks within hours of the audio circulating. Even unrelated posts drew responses from people demanding accountability or calling the comments insulting to shoppers already navigating tight budgets.
Discussions about food affordability dominate news cycles. Surveys across North America show rising concern over grocery bills, meal planning, and access to affordable staples. That made the leaked audio hit even harder.
Campbell’s continues to address questions about its ingredients and quality standards. It also faces scrutiny regarding how complaints are handled internally, especially with Garza claiming he attempted to report the issue long before filing his lawsuit.
Where Things Stand Now
Bally’s departure closed one part of the drama, but the legal case continues. Garza is pursuing damages, Campbell’s is running its internal review, and the online reaction remains intense. The company has not publicly commented on the specifics of Garza’s firing, but it has repeated that the claims about its food do not match reality.
At this stage, the situation is moving through legal channels, and the brand is working to manage its reputation.