Jump to content



Photo

Walmart Greeter Grabs Customer, Then Fired

good deed florida

  • Please log in to reply
72 replies to this topic

#16 moloko

moloko

    Neowinian Senior

  • 2,699 posts
  • Joined: 28-December 02

Posted 10 July 2012 - 06:25

I personally dont know the purpose walmart had her do that to begin with, if customer ignored her, she isnt allowed to do anything, and walmart isnt going to do anything either. The only thing the greeters are allowed to do is collect carts near the door, and say hello and goodbye, thats pretty much it. A customer can even deny a bag search.


yeah same thing. A greeter cannot touch you to stop you. This sucks but she should of just gave the lady two verbal warnings then let her through. If there was a problem call a superviser.


#17 Shiranui

Shiranui

    Iconoclast

  • 3,759 posts
  • Joined: 24-December 03

Posted 10 July 2012 - 06:37

What is she doing working at 73 anyway?

#18 rfirth

rfirth

    Software Engineer

  • 4,135 posts
  • Joined: 11-September 09
  • Location: Baton Rouge, Louisiana
  • OS: Windows 8
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 620

Posted 10 July 2012 - 07:55

What is she doing working at 73 anyway?


I know people working at 80... it helps supplement their fixed income and gives them something to do. You won't live very long if you just sit around all day.

#19 *RedBull*

*RedBull*

    skippy de do da

  • 4,640 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 06
  • Location: Everywhere and No where
  • OS: Windows 8 professional
  • Phone: Android

Posted 10 July 2012 - 08:48

Well Walmart was making a wise financial decision to avoid paying retirement and unemployment.

Now I hope some lawyer helps her sue the **** out of em.

#20 OP Hum

Hum

    totally wAcKed

  • 62,137 posts
  • Joined: 05-October 03
  • Location: Odder Space
  • OS: Windows XP, 7

Posted 10 July 2012 - 14:50

What is she doing working at 73 anyway?


Yeah -- she ought to be a millionaire by now. :rolleyes:

#21 ILikeTobacco

ILikeTobacco

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,789 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 10

Posted 10 July 2012 - 14:55

What is more valuable, a dedicated employee or a customer who assaults your employees?

The customer who can sue for millions. The employee at most could sue for the injury, maybe disability and workers comp, which is a few thousand a year. Unless you are security, you NEVER touch a customer for any reason. Regular employees aren't even allowed to attempt to stop someone that is shoplifting using physical means unless they are security.

#22 ILikeTobacco

ILikeTobacco

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,789 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 10

Posted 10 July 2012 - 14:58

Since the customer shoved her first, and she just grabbed out in a natural reaction to falling, that would seem more like self defense or even an accident. She should have charged the customer with assault.

Unlawful detainment is a suable offense in the United States which is what would be thrown back at Walmart. However, I think you are right in that she should have charged the customer and let Walmart take the unlawful detainment charge since Walmart left her out to dry.

#23 ILikeTobacco

ILikeTobacco

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,789 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 10

Posted 10 July 2012 - 15:01

I'm sure some slack would be given if it was clear she would have fallen without grabbing the person. As old as she is, more damage would be done to herself if she hadn't grabbed the customer than any damage done to the customer, it only seems right that she grabbed something to prevent herself from falling......though given what has happened, she would have been better off taking the fall, breaking her hip, and going on unemployment on walmarts bill.

You cant give someone slack just because she's old and she could have been hurt. Walmart faces daily lawsuits over less than an obvious case of age discriminiation that would come from her getting some slack just because she's old. There is a reason big corperations don't show slack and stick to the letter with their policies.

#24 Nagisan

Nagisan

    Neowinian Senior

  • 5,137 posts
  • Joined: 02-June 06

Posted 10 July 2012 - 15:02

yeah same thing. A greeter cannot touch you to stop you. This sucks but she should of just gave the lady two verbal warnings then let her through. If there was a problem call a superviser.

She didn't touch the customer to stop her, the customer nearly pushed her over and she grabbed onto the nearest object to attempt to balance herself.

Next time I see someone starting to fall I'm going to go out of my way to let them balance themselves on me, then sue them for assault.

You cant give someone slack just because she's old and she could have been hurt. Walmart faces daily lawsuits over less than an obvious case of age discriminiation that would come from her getting some slack just because she's old. There is a reason big corperations don't show slack and stick to the letter with their policies.

Grabbing something when you feel you are going to fall is a natural, it just so happens that the customer who pushed up against her was the closest thing to grab onto. The customer started the incident, the employee didn't do anything anyone else wouldn't do if put in the same situation.

Go ahead, stand there and let someone push you over, if you even attempt to grab a hold of anything nearby, they are not responsible for the damages caused, you are.

#25 ILikeTobacco

ILikeTobacco

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,789 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 10

Posted 10 July 2012 - 15:07

She didn't touch the customer to stop her, the customer nearly pushed her over and she grabbed onto the nearest object to attempt to balance herself.

Next time I see someone starting to fall I'm going to go out of my way to let them balance themselves on me, then sue them for assault.

It doesn't matter why the reason is she is touched the customer. All Walmart cares about is that she touched the customer which is strickly forbidden under their policies. Break any rule in a large corporation, and you can expect to be promptly fired. They are strick about the no touching policy because it leads to major lawsuits.

#26 Nagisan

Nagisan

    Neowinian Senior

  • 5,137 posts
  • Joined: 02-June 06

Posted 10 July 2012 - 15:11

It doesn't matter why the reason is she is touched the customer. All Walmart cares about is that she touched the customer which is strickly forbidden under their policies. Break any rule in a large corporation, and you can expect to be promptly fired. They are strick about the no touching policy because it leads to major lawsuits.

So if someone bumped into you (and you were an employee), pushing you into a customer, Walmart would fire you?

Sounds like they need to rework their policies.

#27 ILikeTobacco

ILikeTobacco

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,789 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 10

Posted 10 July 2012 - 15:14

So if someone bumped into you (and you were an employee), pushing you into a customer, Walmart would fire you?

Sounds like they need to rework their policies.

If you get into a simple non heated argument with a customer, and the customer complains, they will fire you. Walmart is as cold as it gets when it comes to a corporation. They avoid litigation at all costs. By putting it in their policies, they can fire you for it and you have no way to argue against it.

Think about the likely progress of those events. It would require for the person the employee bumps into to complain. At that point, they are mad and enough time has passed that the first person that pushed the employee is no longer around to take the blame. The customer, however unreasonable, wants blood if they are to the point of complaining to management. The customer is always right.

#28 Xilo

Xilo

    Neowinian Senior

  • 5,311 posts
  • Joined: 28-May 04
  • Location: Austin, TX

Posted 10 July 2012 - 15:44

Walmart is probably one of the worst corporations to work for.

#29 Nagisan

Nagisan

    Neowinian Senior

  • 5,137 posts
  • Joined: 02-June 06

Posted 10 July 2012 - 15:44

If you get into a simple non heated argument with a customer, and the customer complains, they will fire you. Walmart is as cold as it gets when it comes to a corporation. They avoid litigation at all costs. By putting it in their policies, they can fire you for it and you have no way to argue against it.

Think about the likely progress of those events. It would require for the person the employee bumps into to complain. At that point, they are mad and enough time has passed that the first person that pushed the employee is no longer around to take the blame. The customer, however unreasonable, wants blood if they are to the point of complaining to management. The customer is always right.

That's why they have security cameras. Given the situation I mentioned above, I would sue Walmart for loss of wages, and use the security footage as proof that I did nothing wrong. They would either have to supply the security footage or lose the case anyway.....either way the point is if Walmart is that adamant on firing employees with no good/fair reason, the ex-employees can fight and win cases against them using their own security footage against them.

Honestly, you sit here and argue that the customer is always right, well no, when security footage proves the customer wrong, they are not right. I don't care about Walmart policies, what you are saying is basically it is Walmarts policy to get rid of employees just because a customer came into the store upset, even then the employee did nothing wrong.....if that's the case, no wonder Walmart is one of the worst companies to work for.

#30 ILikeTobacco

ILikeTobacco

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,789 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 10

Posted 10 July 2012 - 15:48

That's why they have security cameras. Given the situation I mentioned above, I would sue Walmart for loss of wages, and use the security footage as proof that I did nothing wrong. They would either have to supply the security footage or lose the case anyway.....either way the point is if Walmart is that adamant on firing employees with no good/fair reason, the ex-employees can fight and win cases against them using their own security footage against them.

Honestly, you sit here and argue that the customer is always right, well no, when security footage proves the customer wrong, they are not right. I don't care about Walmart policies, what you are saying is basically it is Walmarts policy to get rid of employees just because a customer came into the store upset, even then the employee did nothing wrong.....if that's the case, no wonder Walmart is one of the worst companies to work for.

If the policy says don't touch the customer for any reason, and you do, its grounds for being fired such as this case. There is nothing to sue for because the women clearly disobeyed the policy. It sucks but thats just how it is when you work for anything larger than a mom and pop shop. You are nothing more than a statistic. If the customer had been hurt, the customer would have had the right to sue Walmart and won. The security footage wouldn't change any of this because it would have shown her grabbing the customer, which again, is against the policy and terms of employment. She broke her contract and go fired for it.