Incident at Academy

[critter69]

Welcome to the jungle.. We are living in the twilight zone folks.. Not much is making sense these days...
But a correction is coming. You can bank on that..

When ? It may be to late by then !

[SmTx]

Lol. Uh.. why on earth is this such a trigger for you?

lol because if it wasn't for all the theft I could just stand in a normal check out line like we used to be able to do.

[Geezy Rider]

Sounds like you also narrowly avoided a murder charge, although I'm sure times were different back then it was likely still not advised to shoot someone fleeing a crime in the back.

You are probably right. That was 1974 and I had no idea what the law would have said about that but the responding Leo didn’t say anything against it when I told him.

Justice was still served when they caught the guy two days later and I got to testify against him. He was an old man if and when he got out.

[Greenheadless]

Why would you hope that and on what grounds? She violated company policy and was terminated for it.

Being sue happy is not the answer.

Edit: I didn’t realize there were so many sheep amongst us…….

[tvc184]

Why would you hope that and on what grounds? She violated company policy and was terminated for it.

Being sue happy is not the answer.

Yes, you don’t have to like the rules but you have to follow them.

Companies and managers sometimes have discretion though. I don’t think anyone would be mad if Academy said, okay you broke the rules but we will give you a week off without pay or maybe just put a letter in your file.

The legal problem with that is, when the next person gets in the same situation and is not given the same lenient treatment, it then opens them up for a lawsuit if that person can make a case for a different age, race, sex, national origin, etc.

Ahhhh….. you gave the white Christian lady a pass and I did the same thing as a black Muslim woman and I got terminated.

THAT…. is when the lawsuit will come.

In my opinion ….


.

[Arrowslinger1]

Not defending academy but that’s exactly the reason they have that policy. To prevent employees from getting injured, and it’s blatantly stated when you work for them.

I understand your point and not disagreeing but that is exactly why there is so many smash and grab thefts happening throughout this country. The criminals become more bold and know that no one will stop them. If they want to let these useless pieces of crap steal their store blind then thats on them.

[softpoint]

Most stores have that policy. I have a personal friend that got fired from Home Depot in Florida for following a thief outside and confronting him over stealing. There wasn't any kind of altercation, but the store's policy is that they don't want either an employee or a bystander to get hurt and the company might become liable. There are lawyers waiting on 16 inch centers for a chance to extort a big company...

[tvc184]

Whatever happened to undercover loss prevention personnel in these places?

Either way. Academy lost my business a long time ago for multiple reasons.

State laws that allow lawsuits against the store, no matter how justified the force by the employee. And if it was not justified… Oh my gosh…..

There was a case from Walmart maybe 25 years ago. Some of the Walmart stores used to hire police officers for routine security and one of them used deadly force against a shoplifter. I don’t remember if the deadly force was justified or not. I believe they ended up in a pretty big lawsuit potentially in the millions but I never saw the outcome. I’m sure it would cost a couple hundred thousand dollars even to win such a case.

From a business sense, is it justified and worth risking a couple of million dollars against losing a $20 pack of ribeyes? I believe they changed the policy significantly back then as we used to work some of their security. I don’t know if it has changed again in the last 20 or 25 years but I know they still arrest shoplifters. Their policy like Academy, probably says they can stop a shoplifter but once it turns to violence, they are supposed to back away.

[Grant2]

Because the employee agreed to that policy when they were hired. Employee broke the rules. Pretty simple

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

The policy was only broken when she was assaulted and was defending herself. Academy is weak and if they agree this was the best decision to fire the employee she should sue them for not having security to protect them at the workplace.

[tvc184]

Why was the employee fired? The low life should be in jail for assault charges and the employee should be congratulated for doing the right thing. Pretty sad when a company takes this crap and blames the employee.

Actually in Texas and probably in that state also, it would be robbery and not (only) an assault. If you injure someone while trying to gain or maintain control over property, in Texas it is up to 20 years in prison.

To make arrests like that at Academy and Walmart is not uncommon and the district attorney usually takes the robbery charge. If the shoplifter accidentally runs into someone while fleeing from the store and the person is 65 years of age or older and gets an injury (as little as pain), it becomes aggravated robbery and up to 99 years in prison. Yes that does happen on occasion.

[tvc184]

My home state is a sue happy state. Lawyers dominate bill boards state wide. Something I have never liked but in this situation I hope it helps this lady sue the hell out of Academy and gets a ton of money. Corporate America is becoming so liberal biased it is disgusting. Protocols that promote thieves to target and steal is supporting the criminals.in my opinion. Sad times in America 🙏🇺🇸

There are several such comments as yours in this thread. Sue the heck out of Academy and get tons of money…..

I believe some of the same people saying it, probably make comments (correctly) in other threads about being in an “at will” employment state and a person can be terminated for any reason or no reason unless it violates federal discrimination laws such a sex, race, national origin, etc.

I just checked with Dr. Google and he said Louisiana is an at will state.

From what I read, in Louisiana like Texas, you could be terminated at the will of the employer. In this case it appears as though the employee actually violated policy and was terminated for violating that policy.

Out of curiosity in an at will state, what are the grounds for such a lawsuit?

[bbbuck]

Bullsheet I say.

[RLB]

If people know they’re going to get fired for being attacked by these democrat savages, I say they need to start beatin these mother ****ers to within an inch of their life.

[jdg13]

I don't see where she violated company policy? Article says the animal "got loud" with what I'm assuming is another employee by the door. I don't know, article just says something happened. She tells said animal to leave and gets assaulted for her trouble. Grabs a bag that was swung at her then gets punched. I guess engaging the pos at all might be a violation? Either way, a .22 behind the ear would have been appropriate in this case.

[Horsefly]

Same occurrence happened in 2017 at a Home Depot in Pearland. It was a 70 yr old veteran who confronted thieves in that case. He was also fired. Here in Baytown, like many other places a Home Depot is not far from a Lowe’s. Since I heard of the incident in Pearland, I’ve made Lowe’s my first stop when needing something. But not as in the name of boycotting, yet due to Home Depot’s “no confrontation” policy. I figure the theives are fully aware of the policies and know it’s as simple as walking out with a buggy full and my chances of exposure to this element is lower at Lowe’s. I could be wrong. Regardless, i salute the actions of the Academy employee.