(Untitled)

[ashnimehal]

Home Depot Fires Men Who Stopped Thieves

MIDWEST CITY, Okla. -- A former Home Depot employee said the company fired him and three other workers because they helped police catch several suspected shoplifters in May.Midwest City Police said the men helped officers catch suspected shoplifters as they tried to run from a store with lawn equipment

Comments

[guen_the_cat]

Yeah. I mean, I can see how a company would put the policy in place to protect themselves from lawsuit if an employee gets hurt, but I don't understand why they would want to enforce it if no one was hurt. That's just silly. Oh well, if I was an employer, I'd not bat an eye to offer any of them a job. I'm sure they won't be unemployed for long.

My take having worked Loss Prevention...

[smokin_man]

Unfortunately as dumb as this sounds its because somewhere in the US, an employee sued their own store for enforcing the no-shoplifting procedures that USED to be in effect in the early 80s.

Coming from a long Loss Prevention background I can understand the Depot's logic even though the outcome of this incident was a positive one.

We go through some pretty extensive training these days to be able to catch the bad guys, but at a modicom of NON-loss to the company we represent. Certain aspects of the crime HAVE to be in place before an apprehension can be made.
If ANY of those are not in place, nothing can be done by law. Anything that happens with ANY of those not in place means the store in question can be sued.
Believe me when I say that the bad guys WILL sue whenever possible.
Some groups of what we call "Gypsies"(not related to our good family at faire) set stores up for this very purpose.
Its all part of that glorious shit-sandwich that attorneys have gladly created for us all to take a bite.

Hope that helps a little
MIck

also...

[smokin_man]

{The loss-prevention guy at our Shields (Boulevard) store turned around and told me all we need to do is tell the shoplifter to have a good day as they leave the store. I said that just doesn't make sense," former employee Bob Stewart said.}

This is EXACTLY correct. The Loss Prevention officer was the one who could have legally kept the store from any liability. Its because the REGULAR associates took action without the authority of being in LP that they were fired.

Can't really say as to the validity of the previous help that Bob offered and was comended for, but all stores seem to have a "choose the case as you go" mentality when it comes to legal issues.
Mick