Walmart fires four workers who disarm gunman after caught shoplifting

I guess they were supposed to just stand there and let the guy shoot em all first then go turn the barrel on the customers. This is just plain insane. I'm sure their phones are ringing off the hook from lawyers calling.

LAYTON -- The shoplifter smashed Gabriel Stewart up against a wall. It didn't take him long to realize that pressure against his lower back was from a loaded gun held by a desperate man who didn't want to go to jail. The gunman had a firm grip on Stewart's shoulder, telling him and three of his Walmart co-workers, "Don't make me do this." The Walmart store in Layton "Absolutely, time stopped," Stewart told KSL News. "I didn't know what to do." Instantly, Shawn Ray and Justin Richins kicked into gear, spinning the gunman around. Lori Poulsen ripped the gun away and secured it. They all held onto the man until police arrived minutes later. The four Layton Walmart employees felt it was mission accomplished. Police officers told them they had done everything right. But a week later, all four were fired from their jobs. Walmart said their actions had violated company policy and put their fellow workers and shoppers at risk.

This is the policy they violated according to wallyworld..............

Workers still can't believe what happened the next week. "She said, 'You're fired,'" Richins recalled, of the person brought in to let him go. "You're being terminated for a violation of AP09." AP09 is Walmart's policy on dealing with shoplifters. A copy obtained by KSL shows employees are allowed to use "reasonable force" to limit movements of struggling suspects. If a weapon comes out, however, associates must "disengage" and "withdraw," the policy states. The workers say they don't know where they would have withdrawn to, with the door behind them closed in a small room and the man charging at them. They contend they had no other real option.

If I'm a walmart employee and I see I shoplifter I just look the other way after this stupidity.

Link

I use to work at major companies such as Wal mark. Until i finally saw the total disregard for human life. It's money and rules with these guys. Sadly, nobody is willing to mass quit it.

bet old sams club is fearing a suit from the shoplifter..

Yet another reason i dont shop there

apparently it is not kosher to subdue
a wally world customer with a gun

but when done to hijackers on
a plane, they're heroes.

go figure

I agree with you- this is plain craziness, and it sickens me a little bit. These people should be congratulated, and a massive corporation like Walmart could easily afford to give them a small bonus- a means of thanking them. Absolutely disgusting, and something I'm surprised would be allowed to occur in the USA. Here in the UK, it'd be no surprise- if you confront a criminal, you may have to use force, and using force is in breach of their "human rights". The world has gone crazy, and it would be a much better place if it were full of more people like these heroes turned victims.

If Walmart fires you, they are doing you a huge favor.

Happens all the time at other stores too. Home Depot springs to mind. They don't want employee's to be hero's because they can quickly make a situation worse for them and those around them. But in this case I see it justified to apprehend this guy as he had a gun to the back of one of the employee's.

Way to go Wal-Mart!! Woo Hoo!! That's the way to treat those misbehaving employees who probably saved more than one persons life that day. Criminalizing normal behaviour folks, that's what it's all about to these poor excuses for human beings.

Being a hero is one thing but fighting for your life while a gunman shoves a pistol in your back is quite another. Even the cops said they did the right thing and they are usually the ones against the citizen "heroes" fighting off bad guys.

Walmart does have the best little chocolate donuts around though. I guess I'll have to buy the Hy Vee ones from now on.

another failed massacre (possibly set up) idk why but it eerily reminded me of the kid who droppen the gun in a preschool that no other news came out on


see something say something. but remeber, if you see a gun on your coworkers back just run away and let him be on his way, right?

Walmart is making a political statement to its other 100,000 employees. If their policy gets somebody hurt or killed, then it will cost them millions. They are making an example of these 4 as a message to everyone else to not get hurt or killed at work.

It is pretty stupid, but understandable.

Besides, these 4 are surely going to have job offers coming out of the woodwork now! I would hire them!

Originally posted by getreadyalready
Walmart is making a political statement to its other 100,000 employees. If their policy gets somebody hurt or killed, then it will cost them millions. They are making an example of these 4 as a message to everyone else to not get hurt or killed at work.

It is pretty stupid, but understandable.

Besides, these 4 are surely going to have job offers coming out of the woodwork now! I would hire them!

and how would this be worse i always thought that a few dead people would be worse than a walmart employee laying their life on the line to protect at least ten others. i know my life isnt worth so much that the innocent shoppers would be on their own

Someone should ask the Loss Prevention about Code 500: All Male Employees To The Front To Apprehend Violent Shop Lifter. I worked for Wal-Mart for 3 years and I was good friends with our LP associate. She had knives pulled on her, was beaten severely twice and who knows what else. She made certain we knew to get to her fast if something went wrong. I even saw her get thrown down a set of stairs by an angry woman who decided to shoplift.

I say these employees did the right thing. There was no choice for them. However, Wal-Mart doesn't really care about anyone anymore. It's far from the company Sam started many years ago.

Aren't these guys in charge of catching shoplifters trained to some extent? Aren't they allowed more leeway when dealing with these individuals? One would think so but I have no clue. Is the kid stocking the shelves supposed to apprehend shoplifters too?

reply to post by GenerationXisMarching


It could be worse if these guys were touted as heroes, and Walmart suddenly had 2500 wannabe heroes tackling shoplifters all across the nation. Shoppers suing, employees suing, everybody suing, and Walmart paying the bills.

I am not a fan of Walmart, I am just saying I understand their need to make an overarching political statement on this issue.

I used to work at Walmart, and I was always amazed and a little jealous at what the "loss prevention" guys got away with. It was fairly common to see them run down and tackle a shoplifter in the parking lot and forcefully retain them while police were on the way. They also observe and police the employees at the stores. It is rare for a Walmart employee to know who the loss prevention guys are. Part of their job is to look for pilferage, tag changing, inappropriate markdowns, etc. They have a lot of leeway in performing their jobs, and it always seemed like a recipe for disaster to me.

reply to post by HoldTheBeans


They don't care about heroics.

They don't want the liability.

reply to post by HoldTheBeans


It's actually a perfectly reasonable policy, one you'll find throughout much of the service industry.

Basically, Wal-Mart, McDonalds, et al, realize that you are not paid enough to be expected to put your safety at risk. Nothing taken from the store, or from the till, is worth putting yourself in danger. Company policy is for employees to just sit back and let the police do it, since the police ARE paid to put their safety on the line. And I, personally, think these non-involvement policies make perfect sense.

And before you go all soft-and-fuzzy on these corporations, the main reason for these policies is because without them, the company could be held liable and the insurance would be a nightmare. You are thus expressly told that you are not store security, just to prevent extra cost and hassle for the managers and headquarters.

Should these guys have been fired? I don't think so. But that's what happens when you work in a non-union shop. Think about that, next time you guys go to pick up some $2 flip-flops and marvel at the low, low prices. Four heroes got fired so you could save a nickel

WM must have been afraid of a liability if one of the four got hurt or innocent bystanders. But what they forget is that the guy could have killed as many as in Tucson. Bet he bought his ammo there also.

what total b.s.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! These guys should have been treated like hero's, not fired.

I guess it really depends who and where you work. I worked for a major retailer in college, and it was also our policy to not interfere with thefts, robberies, etc. The first store I worked at operated this way...and had a theft rate to show for it.

I was later transferred to another store in the same company but the neighborhood was a little rougher. The employees at this store had no problem with stopping theft themselves. One guy tried taking a swing at an employee during a minor theft and got his ass kicked. The robber tried to sue the store, the company actually sent a lawyer for the employees involved and the judge was smart enough to throw the guys case out. This store, however, had a very low crime rate despite being in a higher crime rate area.

Screw Walmart one more reason to hate them.

reply to post by getreadyalready


a good reply, thank you. well thought out too, not used to that here. all good points, i just wish people were a little more inclined to help when they can, and to know their limitations when they cannot. no good deed goes unpunished