Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Is there anything too shitty
That Wal-Mart won't do it to one of its employees? Given all we know up to now, there is yet no bottom to the dark pit that is Wal-Mart's ethical behavior. Their latest stunt:
Friday night around 10:20, she was standing near some registers when she saw a man with a computer coming up the main walkway of the store.Wal-Mart, where they rollback everything decent and admirable in life just to make a little more profit.
“Action Alley is what they call it,” she says.
“He was walking rather fast, so it caught my eye.”
Ravenstein says the man kept walking and set off an alarm. She went after him.
“Let me see your receipt, and then I’ll take this off for you,” she told the man, referring to a sensor on the computer.
Ravenstein says the man refused and kicked her.
“And then he punched me in my shoulder, and then he finally gave up and just let go of the computer.”
Ravenstein walked back into the store and sat on the floor.
“I was shaking pretty bad,” she says.
Assistant store managers immediately checked on her.
“They all came out and made sure I was OK,” Ravenstein says. “They thanked me.”
The next day, about two hours before her shift was over, Ravenstein says an assistant manager asked to speak with her. He then told her it’s against Wal-Mart policy for anyone but a manager or someone in asset protection to try to stop a customer from stealing.
“He said there’s really no gray area,” Ravenstein says. “It just goes straight to termination.”
She was told to turn in her badges and keys.
Comments:
<< Home
I'm sorry, but I'm with Wal-Mart on this one. I know from personal experience that Wal-Mart employees, like most employees of retail stores, are explicitly told in their training materials when they are hired to *not* attempt to interfere with shoplifting, but, rather, to call a manager. Employees have to sign their names on a piece of paper saying that they read the policy and understood it. This woman clearly neither read the policy nor understood it, but I'll bet you $100 that Wal-Mart will be able to produce that piece of paper with her signature on it if this firing ever appears in a court of law.
The reason for this policy is that there are certain legal issues involved here that regular employees are not equipped to handle. The courts have strict guidelines as to what constitutes acceptable proof of shoplifting and what constitutes acceptable force to use for stopping shoplifting, and furthermore, if an employee is harmed while trying to stop a shoplifter, the employee could sue the employer for an "unsafe working environment". This woman put herself into harm's way to play hero, risking herself and risking a lawsuit for the store if she stopped someone who had a legitimate reason to exit with that computer, and there is no reason to believe that her poor judgment would not persist into the future. Frankly, I'd fire her too -- I need employees who aren't going to get my ass sued, not employees who go out and play hero and drive up my worker's comp and refuse to follow policies even though they signed that they read and understood them.
So you want to diss Wal-Mart for something, diss them for how they treat workers who *don't* do stupid shit. But if you're going to diss Wal-Mart for this, you'll have to diss me too -- because I would have fired this stupid bint's butt just as quickly as Wal-mart did. Life's too short for me to end up in front of a jury because one of my employees is an effin' moron, yo.
- Badtux the Business Penguin
The reason for this policy is that there are certain legal issues involved here that regular employees are not equipped to handle. The courts have strict guidelines as to what constitutes acceptable proof of shoplifting and what constitutes acceptable force to use for stopping shoplifting, and furthermore, if an employee is harmed while trying to stop a shoplifter, the employee could sue the employer for an "unsafe working environment". This woman put herself into harm's way to play hero, risking herself and risking a lawsuit for the store if she stopped someone who had a legitimate reason to exit with that computer, and there is no reason to believe that her poor judgment would not persist into the future. Frankly, I'd fire her too -- I need employees who aren't going to get my ass sued, not employees who go out and play hero and drive up my worker's comp and refuse to follow policies even though they signed that they read and understood them.
So you want to diss Wal-Mart for something, diss them for how they treat workers who *don't* do stupid shit. But if you're going to diss Wal-Mart for this, you'll have to diss me too -- because I would have fired this stupid bint's butt just as quickly as Wal-mart did. Life's too short for me to end up in front of a jury because one of my employees is an effin' moron, yo.
- Badtux the Business Penguin
I am going to gently disagree with Tux. An employee that shows up when scheduled and who will not steal from you can be a rare bird. I would think it would be worth it to go the "explain - punish - retrain" route. Give her 3 two hour training days and no other hours for a week or two, taking the time to explain -as you did so well- the reason for the policy and that any future violations of said policy will result in immediate termination.
Maybe Wally world can afford to get rid employees willy nilly but really, can you?
Maybe Wally world can afford to get rid employees willy nilly but really, can you?
so why hire someone to check reciepts of people leaving to begin with? i thought they were there to prevent shoplifting.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
Post a Comment