Skip to comments.
Store worker fired for grabbing shoplifter
Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^
| 12/29/07
| Dave Gershman
Posted on 12/29/2007 6:08:47 AM PST by madprof98
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-112 next last
The PC doctrine of nonjudgmentalism strikes again as a thief is transformed into a "customer." Figures it would be Whole Foods.
1
posted on
12/29/2007 6:08:48 AM PST
by
madprof98
To: madprof98
I bet he was wearing a multicolored knit cap and had a goatee.
To: madprof98
I would wonder what the proof is that the thief was a customer? Did he have a store receipt?
To: madprof98
The shoplifter was NOT a customer. He clearly violated the ‘custom’ of the economic exchange of value for value. He was a thief.
To: johniegrad
The thief or the fishmonger? (At Whole Foods, probably both.)
5
posted on
12/29/2007 6:12:15 AM PST
by
madprof98
("moritur et ridet" - salvianus)
To: madprof98
Meanwhile, the real customers pay for this stupidity in the form of higher prices. Why would anyone shop there?
6
posted on
12/29/2007 6:14:03 AM PST
by
LilAngel
(FReeping on a cell phone is like making Christmas dinner in an Easy Bake Oven)
To: madprof98
The thief or the fishmonger?Yes.
To: madprof98
working for Whole Foods would be like working for the DNCC branch of starbucks inside a borders bookstore... Just not a good “life choice”
8
posted on
12/29/2007 6:15:53 AM PST
by
xcamel
(FDT/2008)
To: madprof98
Now Now, we can’t be hurting shoplifters’ feelings. It’s all Bush’s fault that they’re poor and have to steal. If only the government gave them a safety net...
9
posted on
12/29/2007 6:15:55 AM PST
by
varyouga
("Rove is some mysterious God of politics & mind control" - DU 10-24-06)
To: varyouga
I was nearly killed in August by an employee trying to stop a shoplifter. I was walking PAST the store, when the shoplifter ran out. He plowed into me and threw me several feet, then the employee trying to stop him ran over me and I was tossed into a busy intersection. First time that I can recall that there were NO cars in that intersection! Thank you, Lord, or I’d have been killed. As it is, I spent some serious time recovering. I understand this policy and applaud it. DO NOT CHASE SHOPLIFTERS!
To: madprof98
As much as I think this worker should not have lost his job, I still can’t help but wonder why someone would put his life on the line for such a job.
11
posted on
12/29/2007 6:19:57 AM PST
by
pnh102
To: nonsporting
"The shoplifter was NOT a customer. He clearly violated the custom of the economic exchange of value for value. He was a thief." Precisely, hope he gets a better job and stops by for a visit to his former employer.
I know what I'd tell u'm.
12
posted on
12/29/2007 6:23:10 AM PST
by
#1CTYankee
(That's right, I have no proof. So what of it??)
To: madprof98
"But the company says he went too far and violated a policy that prohibits employees from physically touching a customer - even if that person is carrying a bag of stolen goods."First, a thief is not a "customer". Second, the employee is with his legal rights to apprehend said thief. Third, this policy will have the expected effect - many employees will remember this incident and will ignore acts of theft. Why bother doing anything about it when the store policy grants higher status to the thief than to the employee?
13
posted on
12/29/2007 6:29:02 AM PST
by
meyer
(Illegal Immigration - The profits are privatized, the costs are socialized.)
To: madprof98
He said he came to the aid of the manager who yelled for help in stopping a shoplifter. The companany can't have it both ways.
It cannot have company management "yelling for help in stopping a shoplifter" and then firing the employee who responds to that request because the employee did not make the mental leap that the company would still consider a shoplifter a "customer".
14
posted on
12/29/2007 6:30:40 AM PST
by
Polybius
To: freepertoo
Good reason for a no chase policy for police too.
15
posted on
12/29/2007 6:34:32 AM PST
by
Balding_Eagle
(If America falls, darkness will cover the face of the earth for a thousand years.)
To: madprof98
I would assume the policy is in place to prevent lawsuits against the store. It's fairly wise...why risk injuring a shoplifter who might have at most a few hundred bucks worth of merchandise versus having him sue you for thousands or millions?
Reform the legal system and make it so people in acts of crime can't sue and this too would go away.
To: madprof98
"The fact that he touched him, period, is means for termination," said Klotz.Ah, Mr. Klotz, you will eat those words. Better learn a little about the political/PR side of your job. Firing an employee on Christmas Eve for being a good Samaritan, well....good luck with that.
17
posted on
12/29/2007 6:35:09 AM PST
by
randog
(What the...?!)
To: nonsporting
The shoplifter was NOT a customer.
Couldn't you argue it the other way too? He punched out, so technically he wasn't an employee at the time.
To argue that the company can control your conduct 24-7, even off-work, is equivalent to slavery.
To: madprof98
Kate KlotzYa can't make this stuff up.
19
posted on
12/29/2007 6:40:11 AM PST
by
facedown
(Armed in the Heartland)
To: madprof98
Wow, a story like this is enough to make an honest person consider shoplifting...
20
posted on
12/29/2007 6:44:21 AM PST
by
cake_crumb
(Merry Christmas to all, wherever you are; God bless our troops.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-112 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson