Walmart No Self-Defense Policy

[killerkarl]

Walmart really has an official policy that you have to do nothing and let someone beat the crap out of you while at work?

http://www.wxyz.com/dpp/news/walmar...g-to-help-woman-being-attacked-in-parking-log

 

[SVT]

wow...having worked in retail I'm familiar with the policy of not intervening with shoplifters, but I've never heard of a policy that prevents you from saving your own life.

Just another reason to not shop at walmart.

 

[oleheat]

Yeah, let's see.....Defending one's self from serious bodily harm (up to possible brain damage, death, etc) vs. losing a job.


Decisions, decisions....

 

[Jack]

While I obviously disagree with the firing, I don't see a policy against self defense anywhere.

 

[JNieman]

It's possible their rules-lawyering isn't addressing the act of defending himself, but rather inserting himself into a violent situation he had nothing to do with.

Not at all defending the policy, obviously. It's ****.

 

[SVT]

While I obviously disagree with the firing, I don't see a policy against self defense anywhere.

You could be right...I could be drawing assumptions from this clip from the article:

Oswald says Walmart has policies against workplace violence to prevent employees from assaulting co-workers or tackling a shoplifter, but that it appears that nothing allows for them to assist in situations of imminent danger and self-defense.

I'm guessing walmart's main reason for firing was that their employee went to help a lady who was in imminent danger.

 

[Jack]

I took that to say they don't hav any policy reguarding this type of incident at all.

 

[killerkarl]

Here is one from a few years ago. Apparently there is a policy in place to not even try and get a license plate number of a criminal.

http://www.wesh.com/Walmart-Greeter...ed/-/11788876/13158538/-/k2c6blz/-/index.html

 

[Bayoupiper]

They won't even allow their security people to chase a shoplifter into the parking lot.
And I will bet they have nothing in writing to back up this "company policy" violation.

Also, make note of the line "temporary assignment."

Walmart no longer hires full or part-time employees.
They only hire "temporary" workers.
They are also getting rid of as many full and part-time employees as they can in order to dodge the Obamacare mandate.

 

[Cochise]

Yeah, let's see.....Defending one's self from serious bodily harm (up to possible brain damage, death, etc) vs. losing a job.
Decisions, decisions...

But you're forgetting, you have to already be brain dead to work there in the first place. I am amazed daily that people still work for or shop with that company.
When you are dealing with the "Evil Empire" you really have to expect this sort of thing.

 

[JNieman]

Also, make note of the line "temporary assignment."

Walmart no longer hires full or part-time employees.
They only hire "temporary" workers.
They are also getting rid of as many full and part-time employees as they can in order to dodge the Obamacare mandate.

Dude was just hired. He was still in his probationary period. That's like, SOP for any place I've ever been hired. You are on a probationary period for 30, 60, 90, 180, (whatever) days and until then they can decide to tell you not to come back for any reason or none.

 

[AustinBR]

Many places have a policy that states you should hit back at someone if they hit you. It is a CYA so the business can't be held liable for an employee defending themselves. My place of work has a similar policy.

As I have said before...if someone hits me, I will look for another job. I don't see how anyone would actually take a hit and say nothing because they might loose their job over it.

 

[olivs260]

The policy against chasing shoplifters makes sense. If an employee winds up getting injured/killed, it's probably going to cost the company a lot more than the merchandise being stolen is worse. Especially if they had a policy to chase shoplifters (law$$$$$uit). Firing him for helping someone out that's being assaulted is BS though. But to be honest, it's probably worth it for him. He's only being fired from Walmart, after all.

 

[Emperor]

We have allowed lawyers and overzealous litigiousness to send our society to incivility. Very sad!

 

[Bayoupiper]

Dude was just hired. He was still in his probationary period. That's like, SOP for any place I've ever been hired. You are on a probationary period for 30, 60, 90, 180, (whatever) days and until then they can decide to tell you not to come back for any reason or none.

He was hired as a temporary and a temporary he would always have been.

 

[Skiney]

Walmark Workers Take heed.....

Beat down a customer and your the SNAKE

 

[Jack]

He was hired as a temporary and a temporary he would always have been.

Oswald only began working for Walmart about seven weeks ago and would not have been considered a permanent hire until a 180-day probation period ended.

Uhhhh.....

 

[Bayoupiper]

Uhhhh.....

You guys are all missing my point.

Regardless of what is in the article Walmart no longer hires full time workers.

 

[Jack]

But earlier you said they didn't hire part time either. I would've thought you meant they only hired part time(when you were talking about temporary employees only) and were being witty, except you specifically said they don't hire part time workers.

 

[Bayoupiper]

But earlier you said they didn't hire part time either. I would've thought you meant they only hired part time(when you were talking about temporary employees only) and were being witty, except you specifically said they don't hire part time workers.

Regardless of what is in the article Walmart no longer hires full time, or part-time workers.