IMO, the guy is too good an employee and was wasted on an establishment like that, anyway. With a policies like that, it’s hard to believe a buyout isn’t coming soon.
Shoplifter makes off with $100-$1,000 worth of goods: It's a shame, but it's no real loss.
Shoplifter is injured during apprehension, sues retailer for $100,000-$1,000,000: Genuine loss.
Guess which scenario is more likely to raise prices, folks? In retail, it's ALL about profit and loss. Retailers expect, and even PLAN for, a certain amount of loss through sticky fingers, dishonest employees, mishandling of merchandise, etc. In the biz, it's known as "shrink." Most retailers keep their shrink to under 5% of their annual gross. One lawsuit could blow your entire annual profit. Retailers can make up for the loss in a number of ways:
>Cutback in payroll hours
>Staff layoffs
>Higher prices
>Store closure
Sure, the "hands off" policy sounds stupid. It goes against what most of us believe to be the correct course of action--righting a wrong as it is occurring. From a financial standpoint, however, the policy not only protects the retailer but also protects consumers from the higher prices which invariably follow a lawsuit.
I think it's stupid this guy lost his job, primarily because he was off the clock. He's a shoo-in for any security or assets protection job he might want, however.
They make better money than fishmongers, anyway.