AutoZone Fires Worker Who Stopped Robbery
- Thread starter sir1900
- Start date
- Status
Welp, one more reason to not shop at autozone. I'll probably sign the boycott later on.
Last edited:
Many businesses have a strict ban on weapons.Knives,guns..etc.I guess the idea is if the weapon is not within someone's grasp,it cannot be used against a fellow employee/boss or even customer.Why play the hero anyway? Would AZ or any other business really stand by an employee thru any problem? Why should an employee risk their own life for an unthankful conglomerate? Remember Wal Mart taking out insurance in case an employee drops dead? Thats thinking of themselves,not the worker.Loyalty only goes so far.
Not sure where I read the article about this but in the one I read about it, the part that bothered me the most was the fact he was obeying by their rules, he did not even have his firearm on him, he went out to his vehicle and came back in to resolve the situation.
It's not like the gun was in his belt or under the counter, it was in his own vehicle until the problem arose.
Sucks!
It's not like the gun was in his belt or under the counter, it was in his own vehicle until the problem arose.
Sucks!
And while people vow to never darken AZs door again,better check out VIP,Advance Auto,Pep Boys,Bond and probably NAPA as well.I would imagine they all have employee handbooks that consider weapons Verboten on their premesis.And in a vehicle thats parked on owned territory and then carried into the building is certainly frowned upon.I know,I have worked at a business for over a decade that has this policy.
That is a bummer. But I think I might side with the company on this one: they have insurance for this sort of thing. While I'm sure they view their employees as cattle, they (and if I was the owner too) would rather replace lots of parts & $$$$ than deal with even just one employee injury. Let alone a death. Or God forbid, any issue with bystanders.
I wonder what his future job prospects are like. I mean, it's not something you'd put onto a resume; I'm not sure if it follows one around like a bad rumor. [I say that as a supporter of the 2nd admendment, please don't read me wrong.]
I wonder what his future job prospects are like. I mean, it's not something you'd put onto a resume; I'm not sure if it follows one around like a bad rumor. [I say that as a supporter of the 2nd admendment, please don't read me wrong.]
So he gets fired because he went back for his boss who was opening the safe at gunpoint?
So it's okay with AutoZone if you stand by and let your coworkers get executed? But NOT okay when you attempt to do something about it?
So when you attempt to use your constitutionally granted rights (if you believe that the constitution is correct or not, it is still a granted right), therefore choosing an action that is morally justifiable (saving innocent life), it's not OKAY?
How is going back to save a life not okay?
I signed the petition.
This is another case of ridiculousness at the hands of lawyers and corporations.
So it's okay with AutoZone if you stand by and let your coworkers get executed? But NOT okay when you attempt to do something about it?
So when you attempt to use your constitutionally granted rights (if you believe that the constitution is correct or not, it is still a granted right), therefore choosing an action that is morally justifiable (saving innocent life), it's not OKAY?
How is going back to save a life not okay?
I signed the petition.
This is another case of ridiculousness at the hands of lawyers and corporations.
JHZR2
Staff member
Im not digging on vetrans in any way, but Im not seeing what being a vetran has to do with any bit of the "injustice" in this story.
The thing is, he theoretically did the right thing -to most people. To a business though?
Businesses put a dollar value on human life. So if a human life is worth, say, $6M dollars, and the petty cash at Autozone is $2000, Im not so sure it is bad corporate policy to just let the thief run off with it. This scenario was only at closing time... But imagine if the firefight ended up with the manager dead? What about both employees dead? What if there was a customer in the store or in the parking lot?
Its a horrible dual-edged sword. Private citizen justice is great when it works, but if it backfires, its doubly bad.
For the junk that Autozone sells, they probably figure its not worth it. What was the chance that the manager would be killed if he just gave away the cash?
Now where the matter of him being a vetran does come into play, is that there are few that have better or more firearms training, so you can be assured that he can handle his weapon, as opposed to some of the goofballs that get CC approvals.
Still, canning the employee for doing what he felt was right to me is a bad move. Does AZ have a zero firearms policy? If a private customer came in carrying, would they be asked to leave? If not, the employee did everything right because he left his firearm in his truck (NOT something I agree with as I think this is stupid and HIGHLY unsafe, and why criminals get guns) and not on his person at work.
I will express my dissatisfaction with AZ by writing to them, so they will make this right; as I want to be able to get things from there on occasion, since there is one with half sales tax near me...
The thing is, he theoretically did the right thing -to most people. To a business though?
Businesses put a dollar value on human life. So if a human life is worth, say, $6M dollars, and the petty cash at Autozone is $2000, Im not so sure it is bad corporate policy to just let the thief run off with it. This scenario was only at closing time... But imagine if the firefight ended up with the manager dead? What about both employees dead? What if there was a customer in the store or in the parking lot?
Its a horrible dual-edged sword. Private citizen justice is great when it works, but if it backfires, its doubly bad.
For the junk that Autozone sells, they probably figure its not worth it. What was the chance that the manager would be killed if he just gave away the cash?
Now where the matter of him being a vetran does come into play, is that there are few that have better or more firearms training, so you can be assured that he can handle his weapon, as opposed to some of the goofballs that get CC approvals.
Still, canning the employee for doing what he felt was right to me is a bad move. Does AZ have a zero firearms policy? If a private customer came in carrying, would they be asked to leave? If not, the employee did everything right because he left his firearm in his truck (NOT something I agree with as I think this is stupid and HIGHLY unsafe, and why criminals get guns) and not on his person at work.
I will express my dissatisfaction with AZ by writing to them, so they will make this right; as I want to be able to get things from there on occasion, since there is one with half sales tax near me...
Originally Posted By: NHGUY
And while people vow to never darken AZs door again,better check out VIP,Advance Auto,Pep Boys,Bond and probably NAPA as well.I would imagine they all have employee handbooks that consider weapons Verboten on their premesis. And in a vehicle thats parked on owned territory and then carried into the building is certainly frowned upon.I know,I have worked at a business for over a decade that has this policy.
I'll bet all corporate-owned auto parts stores have policies against employees bringing weapons inside - every employer I've worked for has a similar no weapons policy. But the young man who was fired was complying with the policy by leaving his firearm in his vehicle while at work.
The problem is that AutoZone exercised poor judgment but putting their corporate policy ahead of the life of one of their employees. This guy stopped the robbery, yes - but in the article he makes it clear that he was acting to protect his coworker/friend from the bandit.
Sure, perhaps the guy should have been disciplined for violating company policy - but fired?!?! No way.
Bad move by AutoZone. I'll shop elsewhere unless they offer to re-hire the guy and release a public apology.
And while people vow to never darken AZs door again,better check out VIP,Advance Auto,Pep Boys,Bond and probably NAPA as well.I would imagine they all have employee handbooks that consider weapons Verboten on their premesis. And in a vehicle thats parked on owned territory and then carried into the building is certainly frowned upon.I know,I have worked at a business for over a decade that has this policy.
I'll bet all corporate-owned auto parts stores have policies against employees bringing weapons inside - every employer I've worked for has a similar no weapons policy. But the young man who was fired was complying with the policy by leaving his firearm in his vehicle while at work.
The problem is that AutoZone exercised poor judgment but putting their corporate policy ahead of the life of one of their employees. This guy stopped the robbery, yes - but in the article he makes it clear that he was acting to protect his coworker/friend from the bandit.
Sure, perhaps the guy should have been disciplined for violating company policy - but fired?!?! No way.
Bad move by AutoZone. I'll shop elsewhere unless they offer to re-hire the guy and release a public apology.
When I worked at Walmart one of my coworkers helped stop a guy stealing electronics. The thief ran out of the store and my coworker stopped him (with the assistance of the police) in the parking lot. A week later my coworker got fired. Companies would rather let the thief go and loose some money than have an employee get hurt and have a huge lawsuit on their hands. Its a shame but thats how companies are these days.
Originally Posted By: supton
I wonder what his future job prospects are like. I mean, it's not something you'd put onto a resume; I'm not sure if it follows one around like a bad rumor. [I say that as a supporter of the 2nd admendment, please don't read me wrong.]
Because of his actions and the ensuing publicity surrounding his firing, my bet is that he will have absolutely no problem finding another job, and probably a better one, to boot.
I wonder what his future job prospects are like. I mean, it's not something you'd put onto a resume; I'm not sure if it follows one around like a bad rumor. [I say that as a supporter of the 2nd admendment, please don't read me wrong.]
Because of his actions and the ensuing publicity surrounding his firing, my bet is that he will have absolutely no problem finding another job, and probably a better one, to boot.
I wonder if it would be better if employees were told the policy was along the lines of this:
"We don't allow you to stop theives, vandals, robberies, etc. Should you violate this policy you or your heirs will have no recourse against us. Any actions in violation of this policy will be your sole responsibility including legal action from the accused or their heirs."
Seems that would remove their liability and still let people do what they feel is appropriate.
"We don't allow you to stop theives, vandals, robberies, etc. Should you violate this policy you or your heirs will have no recourse against us. Any actions in violation of this policy will be your sole responsibility including legal action from the accused or their heirs."
Seems that would remove their liability and still let people do what they feel is appropriate.
Originally Posted By: Gabe
He should have clocked out first....
Best response yet!
He should have clocked out first....
Best response yet!
If you're going to boycott one you may as well boycott all. Advanced Auto, Pep Boys, etc. have the same policy. And why didn't he call the police first? I agree that firing him was too severe though. It should be on a case by case basis.
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2010
- Messages
- 2,451
Originally Posted By: KlooksKleek
Originally Posted By: supton
I wonder what his future job prospects are like. I mean, it's not something you'd put onto a resume; I'm not sure if it follows one around like a bad rumor. [I say that as a supporter of the 2nd admendment, please don't read me wrong.]
Because of his actions and the ensuing publicity surrounding his firing, my bet is that he will have absolutely no problem finding another job, and probably a better one, to boot.
I bet he will get a better job from the publicity, he did the right thing and will be rewarded some how.
Originally Posted By: supton
I wonder what his future job prospects are like. I mean, it's not something you'd put onto a resume; I'm not sure if it follows one around like a bad rumor. [I say that as a supporter of the 2nd admendment, please don't read me wrong.]
Because of his actions and the ensuing publicity surrounding his firing, my bet is that he will have absolutely no problem finding another job, and probably a better one, to boot.
I bet he will get a better job from the publicity, he did the right thing and will be rewarded some how.
Originally Posted By: Lillikai
When I worked at Walmart one of my coworkers helped stop a guy stealing electronics. The thief ran out of the store and my coworker stopped him (with the assistance of the police) in the parking lot. A week later my coworker got fired. Companies would rather let the thief go and loose some money than have an employee get hurt and have a huge lawsuit on their hands. Its a shame but thats how companies are these days.
That reminds me of a past experience - A few years ago, I watched three Wal-Mart Loss Prevention employees apprehend a thief in front of a store in Lewisville, Texas. They shoved the guy into the side of my wife's car (with my wife and I in the car, watching the scene unfold) and handcuffed him while he was hunched over on the trunk lid... It left a small dent in the side of my wife's car. Initially we didn't know what was going on, but after watching the three plain-clothes guys walk the guy back into the store, into a side room, we parked and went in to complain about the dent and find out what was going on. They apparently found over $100 of stolen merchandise in the thief's pockets.
Every now and then I'd see one of the plain-clothes Loss Prevention guys watching customers (sometimes me!).
We filed a complaint due to the dent and were going to have Wal-Mart cover the damage (since the Wal-Mart employees shoved the guy into the side of our car), but my wife totalled the car a few weeks later, letting Wal-Mart off the hook.
When I worked at Walmart one of my coworkers helped stop a guy stealing electronics. The thief ran out of the store and my coworker stopped him (with the assistance of the police) in the parking lot. A week later my coworker got fired. Companies would rather let the thief go and loose some money than have an employee get hurt and have a huge lawsuit on their hands. Its a shame but thats how companies are these days.
That reminds me of a past experience - A few years ago, I watched three Wal-Mart Loss Prevention employees apprehend a thief in front of a store in Lewisville, Texas. They shoved the guy into the side of my wife's car (with my wife and I in the car, watching the scene unfold) and handcuffed him while he was hunched over on the trunk lid... It left a small dent in the side of my wife's car. Initially we didn't know what was going on, but after watching the three plain-clothes guys walk the guy back into the store, into a side room, we parked and went in to complain about the dent and find out what was going on. They apparently found over $100 of stolen merchandise in the thief's pockets.
Every now and then I'd see one of the plain-clothes Loss Prevention guys watching customers (sometimes me!).
We filed a complaint due to the dent and were going to have Wal-Mart cover the damage (since the Wal-Mart employees shoved the guy into the side of our car), but my wife totalled the car a few weeks later, letting Wal-Mart off the hook.
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: danthaman1980
but in the article he makes it clear that he was acting to protect his coworker/friend from the bandit.
So you can verify that the manager would 100% have been shot, had this guy not come to the rescue?
Ill bet the statistics say otherwise. Give the guy the $2000 in cash, let him leave, and have far less of a headache.
That's my only real problem. Did the guy do the right thing? I guess so, but he was protecting property that wasnt his, against that property owner's wishes.
Was firing too severe? Definitely.
but in the article he makes it clear that he was acting to protect his coworker/friend from the bandit.
So you can verify that the manager would 100% have been shot, had this guy not come to the rescue?
Ill bet the statistics say otherwise. Give the guy the $2000 in cash, let him leave, and have far less of a headache.
That's my only real problem. Did the guy do the right thing? I guess so, but he was protecting property that wasnt his, against that property owner's wishes.
Was firing too severe? Definitely.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
