View Full Version : Any comment on the Home Depot deal in MWC?
TheHumanAlphabet
6/4/2007, 10:43 AM
The Mrs. said something about Home Depot firing 4 employees that helped apprehend shoplifters?
Don't know if this had been discussed previously. Tried to do a search, it failed - internet/server issues?
Here ya go.
Sat June 2, 2007
Home Depot workers claim unfair firing (http://newsok.com/article/3061324/)
MIDWEST CITY — Four former Home Depot employees claim they were unfairly fired from their jobs for helping police snag suspected shoplifters.
Bob Stewart, 52, Nathan Wilhoit, 46, Steve Richard, 51, and Kyle Foust, 24, all of Midwest City, were terminated this week from The Home Depot, 1600 S Sooner Road. Their termination notifications stated they were fired for violating the company's loss prevention and safety conduct guidelines when they assisted police in apprehending three suspected shoplifters May 17.
"It's like we're being punished for doing a good deed,” Stewart said. "I didn't know part of our job was to let merchandise leave the store without it being paid for.”
The terminations are a personnel matter that officials with The Home Depot cannot comment on, company spokeswoman Sheriee S. Bowman said.
Bowman said a loss prevention policy is in place to ensure the safety of employees and customers, and protect the company against lawsuits should someone get hurt.
"Somebody's life isn't worth anything in the store,” Bowman said.
She said each store has a specially trained loss prevention officer to handle thefts.
The four men claim there was no loss prevention officer working in the store when the alleged thefts occurred.
Wilhoit said he was returning from lunch when he saw a suspicious car idling near an exit. He said he called Stewart on a store telephone to report his concerns and gave him a description of the three men in the car.
Stewart said two men entered the store and he watched them grab three chainsaws and a weed cutter and head for the door. He then called police, he said.
As the men attempted to leave, Richard said he asked to see a receipt. One of the suspects dropped the items and ran into the parking lot.
Foust said the other man punched him in the shoulder, prompting Wilhoit and a customer to wrestle him to the ground.
That man was arrested immediately after police arrived, Wilhoit said.
Wilhoit said he rode with an officer to find the other suspects. They found one of the men in a trash bin, he said.
The third suspect was apprehended in the parking lot, police reported.
Midwest City Police Chief Brandon Clabes said he is considering giving the four men commendations for their quick thinking and assistance that day. Without them, police may not have made the three arrests or recovered the stolen vehicle the suspects were in, Clabes said.
Foust said he had worked for The Home Depot for more than four years with a good work record.
The other three say they had all been with the company more than a year and had never been reprimanded.
jk the sooner fan
6/4/2007, 11:01 AM
one of the ladies i work with - her husband worked for home depot and never had anything nice to say about them as a company
however - there's a reason you forbid your employee's from chasing shoplifters out the door - if you violate company policy you are subject to termination
sooner_born_1960
6/4/2007, 11:11 AM
It sounds like they just fired everyone that knew a robbery was taking place.
SoonerInKCMO
6/4/2007, 11:19 AM
Bowman said a loss prevention policy is in place to ensure the safety of employees and customers, and protect the company against lawsuits should someone get hurt.
Foust said the other man punched him in the shoulder, prompting Wilhoit and a customer to wrestle him to the ground.
They (mostly Wilhoit) gave the criminal and an unscrupulous lawyer a chance to sue Home Depot for big money. It's a shame that it could come to that; but it could and, therefore, HD is right to have their policy in place and right to fire the employees (at least Wilhoit - maybe not the others) for violating said policy.
85Sooner
6/4/2007, 11:37 AM
They (mostly Wilhoit) gave the criminal and an unscrupulous lawyer a chance to sue Home Depot for big money. It's a shame that it could come to that; but it could and, therefore, HD is right to have their policy in place and right to fire the employees (at least Wilhoit - maybe not the others) for violating said policy.
It appears one of the employees was assaulted. No store can adopt a policy which would prevent an employee from defending themselves or others.
I would sue HD for wrongful termination and make sure they got a few million dollars worth of bad press.
Hamhock
6/4/2007, 11:40 AM
it's happened at several major chains. KMARt and Target that i can think of off hand.
some hero employee tackles a customer because they have stolen something. Said tacklee manages to ditch the goods or otherwise prevent the police from proving they had stolen something.
chain store gets sued for a brazillion dollar for picking on some unsuspecting patron, causing all kinds of physical harm and emotional distress.
jk the sooner fan
6/4/2007, 11:41 AM
It appears one of the employees was assaulted. No store can adopt a policy which would prevent an employee from defending themselves or others.
I would sue HD for wrongful termination and make sure they got a few million dollars worth of bad press.
thats a lawsuit i'd bet you'd lose!
royalfan5
6/4/2007, 12:03 PM
That policy is pretty common to almost all big box retailers. If you don't want to lose your job, follow store policy.
soonerinabilene
6/4/2007, 12:13 PM
The walmart in abilene fired a guy for trying to stop someone that stole a BABY out of a lady's cart a couple of years ago.
85Sooner
6/4/2007, 12:18 PM
Its a shame this country has come to that. We need a good flushing!
Lock and load Baby
So the general message a retail store employee should take away from this, as I see it, is this:
If you suspect some wrongdoing occuring at your store, please consult your employee handbook before doing anything.
jk the sooner fan
6/4/2007, 12:40 PM
i think they let you read that when your'e first hired, and you're probably expected to know all the rules and policies of the company while you are actually doing the job
part of that whole "new hire orientation" thing.....the general message there is "pay attention to the rules, we have them for a reason"
sooner_born_1960
6/4/2007, 12:40 PM
If all four employees had simply said "F*ck it", and let them walk out with anything they could carry, they's still have jobs.
i think they let you read that when your'e first hired, and you're probably expected to know all the rules and policies of the company while you are actually doing the job
part of that whole "new hire orientation" thing.....the general message there is "pay attention to the rules, we have them for a reason"
My point though is, that if you've been working for a company for X years, the parts of the employee handbook that contain rules for situations that don't pop up very often (like when you see a shoplifter with your very eyes)...the rules governering those situations are often not recalled very well. Especially if the employee handbook is either lengthy, written in legaleese or both.
NormanPride
6/4/2007, 12:50 PM
The idea behind this is that there's a huge risk in letting your employees do this kind of stuff. They can get injured and incur health costs. They can make incorrect assumptions and cause lawsuits. They can screw the company over and cost it millions of dollars. So it's either lose ~$500 worth of merchandise or lose millions in court costs and settlements.
Pretty easy decision, really. It sucks for the people doing the right thing, but maybe they should go in for law enforcement instead of what they were doing.
jk the sooner fan
6/4/2007, 12:53 PM
most retail chains like home depot have regular meetings, where they reiterate policy
its not like they dont have a loss prevention department devoted to the problem of daily shoplifting, so i'd think that since shoplifters are a daily problem, remembering the company policy on them shouldnt be too hard
maybe im over thinking it
Pricetag
6/4/2007, 01:01 PM
Didn't a clerk at an Albertson's in Tulsa get shot in the head for chasing a guy who had stolen a couple of cases of beer out of the store?
Like the Home Depot guy said, it's just not worth it. The risk is too great for the potential return.
royalfan5
6/4/2007, 01:08 PM
My point though is, that if you've been working for a company for X years, the parts of the employee handbook that contain rules for situations that don't pop up very often (like when you see a shoplifter with your very eyes)...the rules governering those situations are often not recalled very well. Especially if the employee handbook is either lengthy, written in legaleese or both.
When I worked in retail, the shoplifting policy was hammered into your head. I really doubt that they were unaware of the policy. They chose to violate policy.
JohnnyMack
6/4/2007, 01:13 PM
Didn't a clerk at an Albertson's in Tulsa get shot in the head for chasing a guy who had stolen a couple of cases of beer out of the store?
Like the Home Depot guy said, it's just not worth it. The risk is too great for the potential return.
Yep. 41st & Peoria.
When I was in High School I worked at what was then Jewel/Osco and is now Albertson's at 51st & Harvard. I was working late that night and that was when they still had cigarettes in the locked case in the center of the store. About midnight when the stockmen were unloading pallets a d00d comes in, grabs as many cartons of cigarettes as he can and takes off on foot across a mostly empty parking lot. One of the stockmen sees this and takes off after him. The stockman catches the guy on the other side of the parking lot, tackles the shoplifter causing the smokes to go everywhere. The shoplifter pops up and takes off with no cigarettes. The stockman walks back into the store with two bloody forearms from tackling the guy on concrete and a handful of cartons. Guy's got a big smile on his face. Totally not worth it, IMHO. If the d00d has a getaway driver with a gun, it could have ended very badly.
it's happened at several major chains. KMARt and Target that i can think of off hand.
some hero employee tackles a customer because they have stolen something. Said tacklee manages to ditch the goods or otherwise prevent the police from proving they had stolen something.
chain store gets sued for a brazillion dollar for picking on some unsuspecting patron, causing all kinds of physical harm and emotional distress.
that's the thing though, he was tackled after he hit the guy.
it does make total sense though, a few thousand dollars in losses vs. a LOT more for getting sued by the alleged shoplifter or having to pay for the employee that got shot, beat up, etc... just having the no resistance policy seems like it keeps them out of trouble
the problem is that if enough people know about this kinda thing, people will just start stealing crap all the time ;)
btw, i'm thinking about getting a chainsaw, who wants to drive me to Home Depot?
Petro-Sooner
6/4/2007, 01:26 PM
As long as you grab me a new garden hose you have a deal.
47straight
6/4/2007, 03:14 PM
Just because it's "policy" or even the correct policy doesn't mean that the manager doesn't have authority to not fire them. Fine, make it the standard policy.
Any **** employer that says I can't defend myself can go **** themselves.
But hey, at least I know that next time I am in Midwest City, I can go relieve some stress at the Home Depot by punching the manager dead in the face and kicking him where his balls used to be, and then running out of the store. If he yells at me back he'll get fired.
olevetonahill
6/4/2007, 04:11 PM
Im lining up a Convoy as we type !
TUSooner
6/4/2007, 04:21 PM
"Wrongful termination lawsuits" are maybe the biggest mythical beasts since Sasquatch.
Unless you have rights provided by contract, or by specific state law, your "at will" employer can fire you for any reason, a bad reason, or no reason EXCEPT for unlawful discrimination (race, gender, etc.) If more people knew that, they'd probably keep their mouths shut when they get pistoff at their bosses.
It can't help Home Depot's PR though, when they are firing people for the same reason the cops are giving out public commendations. <shakes head>
AlbqSooner
6/4/2007, 08:43 PM
TU Sooner makes the point well. However, the other side of the coin is this. Let us pretend that the employees in question, being well versed in the intricacies of the Employee Handbook and stood at the door watching two guys get out of an idling car, help themselves to chainsaws and such, and watched them exit the store into the idling, (and as it is reported, stolen car.) Let us further assume that Home Depot has surveillance cameras covering the entry where this occurred. I have to believe that upon reviewing the tape of the incident the manager would say something to the effect of - "Who TF are those employees just standing there watching all this?!! They must be in on it!!" I have heard similar statements from Casino managers in similar situations.
r5TPsooner
6/4/2007, 09:02 PM
Isn't this the same company that barred a customer from there stores for walking out of a store accidentally with one of their carpenter pencils?
well, if it was a chainsaw, he'd be golden
C&CDean
6/4/2007, 09:08 PM
This is exactly why I shoot thieves.
TheHumanAlphabet
6/5/2007, 08:45 AM
Interesting comments...
I am torn, company rules and all, the guys were doing the "right" thing, IMO. May not have been "correct" but I think it was "right".
This only is more reinforcement for me not to shop at the Depot, beside their employees are always soooo helpful...
Understand the need for rules, then you should have the appropriate personnel on duty at all times to handle the deal. If a Loss Prevention Officer was there, perhaps the guys wouldn't have "helped" out.
They have to follow their policy and terminate. It shows that the employees were acting outside the scope of their responsibility and will help protect HD from a lawsuit by the guy that was wrestled to the ground.
If you don't enforce this policy, what other policies in your handbook will be violated and found subsequently meaningless due to lack of uniformity in enforcement?
HD better be able to find documents signed by the four employees showing that they received their handbooks and/or attended orientation where this specific conduct was addressed.
TheHumanAlphabet
6/5/2007, 01:55 PM
Sad when we need to concern ourselves about the legalilty of our actions versus the morality of the actions.
royalfan5
6/5/2007, 01:56 PM
Sad when we need to concern ourselves about the legalilty of our actions versus the morality of the actions.
It will be that way until it's legal to shoot lawyers on sight with a blanket self-defense justification.
Apparently, those of us who actually pay for things are big fools.
jk the sooner fan
6/5/2007, 02:04 PM
Sad when we need to concern ourselves about the legalilty of our actions versus the morality of the actions.
as an employer, which would you rather defend? a wrongful death lawsuit because you let your employee follow a thief out into the parking lot where they were shot/killed? or a wrongful termination lawsuit because they chose to obey the company policy designed to protect their safety?
r5TPsooner
6/5/2007, 03:11 PM
Sometimes rules are not very good in the grand scheme of things and are meant to be broken/adjusted. IMHO this is one of those times.
Personally, I think it stinks what happened to the guys and it just so happens, that I have a few pricey things that I purchased from there a week ago that I haven't used. They're going back and I'll just start shopping at Lowe's in the future. I know that in the grand scheme of things it isn't much, but I don't care to do business with a company whose own policies seem so cluster f**ked.
SoonerInKCMO
6/5/2007, 03:17 PM
Sometimes rules are not very good in the grand scheme of things and are meant to be broken/adjusted. IMHO this is one of those times.
Personally, I think it stinks what happened to the guys and it just so happens, that I have a few pricey things that I purchased from there a week ago that I haven't used. They're going back and I'll just start shopping at Lowe's in the future. I know that in the grand scheme of things it isn't much, but I don't care to do business with a company whose own policies seem so cluster f**ked.
Do you really think Lowe's doesn't have the same policy?
Hamhock
6/5/2007, 03:20 PM
Do you really think every major retail company in the whole country doesn't have the same policy?
fixed
r5TPsooner
6/5/2007, 10:28 PM
Do you really think Lowe's doesn't have the same policy?
I really don't know because I'm not a Lowe's employee and I've never heard of this type of thing from them as a company.
Now, I have heard a lot of negatives about Home depot as a company.
jk the sooner fan
6/5/2007, 10:30 PM
I really don't know because I'm not a Lowe's employee and I've never heard of this type of thing from them as a company.
Now, I have heard a lot of negatives about Home depot as a company.
its a fairly standard policy for all of the major retail chains
not to mention banks, convenience stores, etc...
TheHumanAlphabet
6/6/2007, 07:57 AM
Oh, I understand the rules, etc. But those are there primarily to protect the company, not necessarily a bad thing. Its just a sad day in our culture when people have to be concerned about the legality of an act, rather than its morality. Supposedly our criminal laws are based on Judeo-Christian morales, but we have to deal with civil suits that can be frivilous.
jk the sooner fan
6/6/2007, 08:01 AM
they are there to protect the employees!!! lord folks, you've got people driving around shooting people because they get cut off.....we live in different times, you never know when some lunatic runs out into the parking lot with an employee on his tail might reach into his car and pull out a gun
whatever piece of merchandise was stolen is NOT worth somebody getting hurt or killed
if one of your own children were working at a place like that, would you recommend they run out into the parking lot chasing a thief? you're nuts if you do
TheHumanAlphabet
6/6/2007, 08:10 AM
Oh I understand about the times we live in...
Here in Houston, there is somewhat of an uproar today, because a concealed carry person was no-billed yesterday. What did he do? While riding a Metro bus (according to the press reports) he accidently bumped into another guy while boarding. The other guy decided he had been "dis-ed" and decided to walk the entire length of the bus to get the conceal-carry guy while talking loudly he was going to get him. The conceal-carry guy starts to fear for himself as he is trapped in the back of the bus. The other guys appears to show fists and conceal-carry guy shows a knife, which he drops as the other guy didn't flinch. So conceal-carry guy pulls out his gun and shoots the other guy as he was going to swing at him. Other guy falls down dead. Conceal-carry guy places gun on floor and remains seated with hands raised until police arrives. After investigation, the police and DA determine now dead other guy had a long rap sheet that included violent attacks and drug charges. So I get what you mean jk...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.1 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.