So he used her name and credit card, fraud as he is 19, and the company fires her. Now unless she was complicit in the scheme, why fire her?
There are several scenarios under which she would be held complicit.
My guess would be that he either used her employee discount or a priority access to limited editions. Or more likely they canned her because he used her secure access to internal resources.
I read the story at the link. According to it, she wasn’t fired:
“Nike in a statement said Hebert had made the decision to resign.”
Of course, under corporate speak, it could mean that they gave her an option to resign, or some much worse alternative.
I worked there and I have seen people fired for unauthorized charges - non-Nike = on their credit cards.
One idiot lost her job because she used her Nike c/c to pay a utility bill. Some others were let go because of a gift card problem which I never totally understood but they were a good hardworking team and they were gone.
she supposedly resigned...
Probably exploited his relationship to her to get access to that many pairs of the limited edition shoes.
“Do you know who my mother is?”
Not any more.
Actually, this is just another entry in my “the only true thing you can say about the wealthy is that they have a lot of money” collection of events.
There is absolutely no (as in “zero”) correlation between wealth and any attribute usually associated with good character. Many times, the initial proof is provided by their children.