Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Geez, and we wonder why stores lose so much money to shoplifters.
Shoplifting isn't just for people who want free stuff -- people steal from stores and sell the stuff on ebay. Shoplifting is their job, and it's tax-free, too!
If I ran a store, I would allow my employees to go after shoplifters, if and only if, the stealing is obvious enough to be able to testify to that under oath (like in this case, notice that no one is defending the alleged shoplifter). Think about it -- shoplifters don't sue!
My store would quickly be known in the shoplifter circles as the place NOT to steal. Go steal from Wal-Mart where they fire the employee so you can get away with it.
The only problem with that is , what if he has a huge sharp knife in his waist pants and he stabs the employee ?
I would tell my employees to let em go and if I could afford it , hire a security guard to do the chasing out of the store...
Wrongful termination.
Injury at the workplace.
Stress.
Just to stick it to WalMart.
Take your pick.
I see a settlement on the horizon.
This must be your opinion because you are clearly not speaking from experience. She has no grounds, whatsoever, to sue Wal-mart. She was informed, BY COMPANY POLICY,to not interfere with shoplifters. She choose to violate policy so out the door she goes. End of story. Tsk- it's ridiculous how many people don't read their handy dandy employee manuals. And I'll also bet (in good HR form), they have her signature stating that she received, read and agreed to this policy, too.
She violated company policy in a very serious way. She put herself at risk of being injured--in fact she was injured--doing something that was a direct violation of company policy. She deserved to be fired. This was not a minor offense. Had the thief had a gun and shot her, the workers comp bills could have been in the millions over a lousy $400 computer. I'm not a Wal-Mart fan by any means, but this time I've got to agree with them.
I can't believe I'm saying this annerk, but for once I agree with you. Following company policy is crucial in this situation, as the risk of something bad happening and them being sued is too great. That's why they appoint a loss prevention agent, i.e. a security guard or only authorized personnel to handle these matters.
First mistake: Working for WalMart
Second mistake: Not immediately retaining a lawyer after termination.
Third mistake: Talking to the press BEFORE you retain a lawyer
Sue them...collect a settlement...move on w/ your life.
Oh yeah,,,and get out of retail...LOL
Geez, and we wonder why stores lose so much money to shoplifters.
Shoplifting isn't just for people who want free stuff -- people steal from stores and sell the stuff on ebay. Shoplifting is their job, and it's tax-free, too!
If I ran a store, I would allow my employees to go after shoplifters, if and only if, the stealing is obvious enough to be able to testify to that under oath (like in this case, notice that no one is defending the alleged shoplifter). Think about it -- shoplifters don't sue!
My store would quickly be known in the shoplifter circles as the place NOT to steal. Go steal from Wal-Mart where they fire the employee so you can get away with it.
By the same token, what if the person HAD bought the computer and DID have a receipt and didn't stop because they were deaf? And then all of a sudden this crazy person is in their face outside and they reacted by punching because they thought they were being robbed? Talk about a lawsuit--by the innocent customer! THAT is why retailers have VERY strict policies about apprehension of shoplifters.
By the same token, what if the person HAD bought the computer and DID have a receipt and didn't stop because they were deaf? And then all of a sudden this crazy person is in their face outside and they reacted by punching because they thought they were being robbed? Talk about a lawsuit--by the innocent customer! THAT is why retailers have VERY strict policies about apprehension of shoplifters.
That's not what happened. Enough with the hypotheticals (getting stabbed, getting sued, blah blah blah).
Businesses who deal in reality and face real liability issues don't get to ignore hypotheticals. They have to prepare for every reasonably conceivable contingency and implement policies to mitigate against them -- such as a "don't intervene against shoplifters without authorization" policy. If you want to be a hero, that's fine. But if you do it in a way that exposes someone else to financial losses far greater than the object being shoplifted, then expect to get fired.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
