It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Best Buy Employee Fired for Stopping Laptop Thief

page: 3
24
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:25 PM
link   
You guys who claim people should fight off robbers to protect their MINIMUM WAGE JOB dont' have to work minimum wage jobs.

Why the heck should anyone protect the profits of the elite?

Don't confuse being on a plane with being a grocery store sacker. On a plane its dog eat dog situations. Some nut saying he's going to blow up the plane leaves little options. If I'm checking out a nut in Best Buy then my chances are better he won't do jack if I just let him go.




posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:25 PM
link   
I work for a cvs pharmacy, southwest CT..16 years so far. Every year, we go through a quiz, an LP quiz, loss prevention. Its the companys policy, to not run after, apprehend or even touch a shoplifter. you can and will loose your job doing so. You must deter the incident from happening in the first place, either make yuor presence known, and quitely push them out the store, then call the other stores to alert them, or even better..call the police down before the suspect leaves the store. so they catch him/her in the store. we had a problem for a few years, on and off, people most likely from the bronx and brooklyn areas, coming in, and stealing the high end shampoos or rogaine stuff, or gillettte shaving refills. thiers pricey* theyd come in with a hallmark bag, or take one off the shelfs when no employee was apying attetnion, fill em n book. one, even filled a shopping cart of shampoo!!! but never made it out the door. an employee, female, blocked the door, turned it off, stood in front and said you aint goin no where* the thief ran out the other door, but left the carriage behind. she was never terminated of job position. another time, this guy came in, i knew he was sketchy, with 2 beutiful tall model looking women...that was the distraction..one goes one way, the other another way, while the 3rd fills n books really quick out the door..so as we go looking for the others, the other 2 perpitrators quietly fast walk around another isel, bypassing us till they too get out. they sell these products at BOdeega shops in the bronx, brokklyn area* so chances are, those bodeega shops, if shopping thier, yuor buying shoplifted items*
a story an assistant once told me..regarding cvs's policy on apprention, goes back to late 90's in boston MA area. one day, a guuy stole a snickers bar, some drug useer or drunk. assistnat went out the door...the thief was waiting out, pulled a knife,a nd stabbed him 5 times, then ran off. he was never caught ever. the assistant died later* thats why they dont want you to run after the bad person..they may have a knife or weapon, and your life is certainly NOT worth loosing over a snickers bar* and they want to cut down on the lawsuites too..becuase sometimes, an employee doing good and injured, in such a manner, might turn around and sue now, to get money to pay for the hospitol bills* thats why, we have this policy*



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:35 PM
link   
I think this has gotten more complicated than it needs to be.

Bestbuy says do not tackle shoplifters or you will be fired.
Bestbuy is the boss. If that is what Bestbuy wants, why buck it?
Those laptops are not coming out of your check and you are going to get them if you nab the guy either. So why would you tackle the guy? The boss hires you to do what the boss wants you to do. If the boss wants you to let those two laptops walk out the door, that is what he pays you for. Go back to work.

Am I wrong? I could understand if there was some great moral imperative but shrinkage is accounted for and built into the price. Circuit city did not die because of shrinkage, they died in competition.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sinnthia
I think this has gotten more complicated than it needs to be.

Bestbuy says do not tackle shoplifters or you will be fired.
.


Great point! People get mad if the government says don't tackle shoplifters. However, they never get mad if private business says don't tackle shoplifters.

I mean really, what is the difference who says it?

I bet private business gets paid more in shoplifting rebate checks than sales revenue.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


why buck it? it's the right thing to do. we're told all our lives "do the right thing" " evil is allowed to exist because good men do nothing" . yet curiously doing the right thing often leads to negative consequences, losing your job among them. no one should ever be punished for doing the right thing. stopping thieves is the right thing.


as an aside, why are you and los lobos so against people doing the right thing?



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by optimus primal
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


actually that's probably not entirely true. if best buy's corporate policies work in a similar fashion to other retailers, the home improvement store i work at has no loss prevention person. it has to do with store performance and yearly budgets. so in reality this store in question may have had a loss prevention person, but it's not true that every retail store does.



The majority of Best Buy stores have a loss prevention agent on shift at all times. I never said every store does. I said most.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by IPILYA

Originally posted by LosLobos

Originally posted by IPILYA
Here we seem to have a moral versus law issue. For the majority of people he would be considered a hero but to the company he broke the law. A shoplifter is not truly shoplifting until they leave the store and in some cases property. .


What is the point of having insurance if employees are going to go all Rambo on people? No one can predict what a criminal would do or not do. But employees taking matters into their own hands escalates the situation. We could go from a robbery to a murder in a heart beat.

THEY HAVE INSURANCE! People can 't take the law into their own hands without collaterall damage.


Apparently you didn't read my whole post. would you rather the people of fight 93 done nothing because it wasn't their job or they worried about insurance?

There are times when the right thing should be done regardless


To compare what this guy did, which, if done inside the store was actually assault, to the people on flight 93 is an insult to those brave people who stepped up on that plane.

Disgusting.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by jjkenobi
 


They DO have loss prevention agents in the store, whose only job is to prevent shrinkage. What would have happened if this shoplifter had pulled a knife and stabbed this employee who was doing something outside of his job description? The store would be open for lawsuits. Unfortunately, in the sue happy society we live in, businesses have to protect themselves.

I rarely defend corporate america, but they are right in this one.



while you didn't outright say all, you certainly never said most. the tone of your post implies you mean all stores. as someone who works in the retail environment i was correcting that misconception.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by optimus primal
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


why buck it? it's the right thing to do. we're told all our lives "do the right thing" " evil is allowed to exist because good men do nothing" . yet curiously doing the right thing often leads to negative consequences, losing your job among them. no one should ever be punished for doing the right thing. stopping thieves is the right thing.


as an aside, why are you and los lobos so against people doing the right thing?


You left something out: some of us are "against people doing the right thing", in your opinion. It appears that their opinions, & my own, differ from yours on what is the right thing to do in a situation such as this one. Each of us already gave clearly stated reasons for this, no need for a personal attack.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by BuzzCory
 


it's not a personal attack, you've quite clearly advocated to allow criminal behaviour if you see it. it's " someone elses problem" correct? i don't see how that can possibly be construed as being for doing the right thing. can you?



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by optimus primal
 


I think what I already wrote is clear enough.... for most people.
Your opinion is your own, mine is mine. I fail to see why differing opinions bother you to the point that you feel a need to attack others.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by BuzzCory
 


it's not an attack. answer the question. i think you are saying it is an attack because you can't defend your position and would like to paint me in a negative light to those reading your words.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by optimus primal
 


Go back & re-read what I wrote, it's very clear already; or claim yourself one (1) Official Internet Message Board Victory. Past a certain point in an online discussion (& we appear to have passed it), it's all the same to me.

ETA: Okay, fair enough. You seem to be looking at "do the right thing" as a blanket philosophy in strict black-and-white terms, good for all situations. I'm coming from a place where things are more conditional, & personal safety takes precedence over the filching of store merchandise from an establishment which I don't even own.
You want me to say that I'd be "allowing crime to happen?" Yeah, sure I would. Why should I get hurt on behalf of Best Buy?
edit on 5/5/11 by BuzzCory because: Clarification

edit on 5/5/11 by BuzzCory because: Grammar this time



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 07:01 PM
link   
I used to work at Best Buy, so I'd like to offer my perspective:

I worked in the Home Theater department, and like all other departments, we were constantly being asked to do sweeps for any sign of theft/shoplifting, such as empty packaging stuffed behind product on shelves, price tags that had been removed from product and left in random places etc. If anything like that was found, we were to report it immediately to Loss Prevention (the guys in the yellow shirts that check receipts at the front of the store). Now, at the store I worked at, the LP guys had a little monitor at their podium where they could watch what was happening on a number of different security cameras, and they were ALWAYS watching. They caught people trying to steal all the time.

For a regular employee to tackle a suspected shoplifter kind of falls in a gray area, in my opinion. After reading the article, it doesn't sound as if anything was reported to LP, which is kind of strange. In a normal scenario, a yellow shirt is right there at the front doors, and when a dude is running towards those doors with laptops in hand, you can bet your bottom dollar that the yellow shirt is going to stop him (forcefully or otherwise). Said yellow shirt probably would have watched the guy try the back doors on camera before making a break for the front doors.

Alas, this doesn't sound like a normal scenario. Sometimes, when there is only one LP officer on duty, a senior salesperson or a manager/supervisor will cover the front door while the LP officer goes for a smoke or takes his/her lunch break. At the store in which I worked, this was fairly common, because everyone's hours were always getting cut and manpower was spread pretty thin overall.

In this case, I'll bet that the employee was covering the LP post for a little while (seeing as he was a three-year employee and described himself as "one of the highest-regarded employees there"), and this incident occurred while he was the 'acting' LP officer.

Now, just because he's covering the LP post doesn't mean he can start tackling people. Loss Prevention (from what I understand) are trained extensively on how to handle these cases, so this employee was lacking the knowledge of how they do things. Unfortunately, I don't quite remember what their protocol is, so I can't say exactly what SHOULD have happened. I can completely understand his logic in tackling the guy, and in the end, it paid off for the company, so I don't think firing him was the right thing to do. I think they should have held a training session for all blue-shirts on how to handle these situations, discussed the incident, and then taught everyone the correct action plan for future incidents. They should have allowed this guy to keep his job (maybe on a probationary period, if it made the corporate office feel better). Just firing the guy doesn't correct the problem. He saved the company a couple thousand dollars, and considering his squeaky-clean record, he should have been thanked and then given further instruction/training so he doesn't violate their policies again.

Then again, from my experience working at Best Buy, all of the managers are either major idiots or major idiots, so I'm not surprised that this guy was canned. And yes, you read that last sentence correctly.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by BuzzCory
 


because it's the right thing to do, or is that only good enough when it's not scary? the right thing is pretty black and white in most situations. thieving not only hurts the business but the employee as well. the more thieves know they can do what they want basically with impunity because the employees are all scared little chicadees the more they'll do it. that cuts into profits, which cuts into employee salaries,benefits, and jobs in general.

because you might get hurt, should never be a reason not to do good. that's the morality of a coward. present company excluded of course, as we're speaking in general , not about each other.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by optimus primal
 


Let's just agree to disagree then. What we have here is basically only a difference of opinion on this particular set of circumstances. And please do exercise all possible caution if you ever do find yourself in a situation wherein you feel you must take that kind of action.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0

Obviously Best Buy has certain rules in place to protect them from a lawsuit. At the same time, the theif was caught red handed, and I'm sure they have video footage to back it up.

I think it's sad how the system is designed to protect criminals, both large and small, from the wall street bankers down to the petty shop lifters...

www.tomsguide.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 5-5-2011 by v1rtu0s0 because: (no reason given)


Also isnt there a little thing called Citizens arrest where you can do anything in your power aslong as it is within the law (Eg. No knocking them out, Only blocking a door or as this man did a tackle to keep him away from a door!) then you call the police and they take him in custody and charge him WITH you! as the guy said he felt that he was stealing from him too...Thats how Resteraunts Like to work...having it so everyone feels like its there place even if its not, Shouldnt all workplaces work this way? Shouldnt everyone feel that there boss' store is part of there job to protect and keep items from being stolen so they can make money so you can make money...In my opinion the guy was doing his job...



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by LosLobos

Originally posted by IPILYA
Here we seem to have a moral versus law issue. For the majority of people he would be considered a hero but to the company he broke the law. A shoplifter is not truly shoplifting until they leave the store and in some cases property. .


What is the point of having insurance if employees are going to go all Rambo on people? No one can predict what a criminal would do or not do. But employees taking matters into their own hands escalates the situation. We could go from a robbery to a murder in a heart beat.

THEY HAVE INSURANCE! People can 't take the law into their own hands without collaterall damage.


You are right LosLobos...Best Buy does have insurance...and that is why I DO NOT shop there anymore because I believe their prices and store policy are ridiculous because of their attitude that "Insurance will deal with it." Best Buy is nothing more than a thief as well.

The employee was an honest man and he is at least able to remain honest by no longer working for such a criminal business.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 08:00 PM
link   
I skipped page 2 of this thread, so if it's been covered . . . excuse please.

From 93 until 01, I worked loss prevention for Best Buy. I can verify that it is WELL communicated to employees not to chase, touch, etc, shoplifters. General policy is: if they make it through the doors . . . they're gone. Further complicating matters is the fact that the majority of LEA's won't consider a person a shoplifter unless they make walk past the registers without paying. If you haven't been in a BB store, the registers are about 10-20ft from the front door. That is why the BB LP's stand, office, and monitor cameras at the front entrance. Best Buy, by policy, does not have "plain clothed" LP agents. It is up to the employees on the floor to alert LP of suspicious activity . . . The LP agent will let the employee know if and what type of help they may require. The "help" is to usually shadow and "bug" the perp until they drop the goods and exit . . . No theif wants to get caught and the best deterient is showing the perp attention.

Every BB store has a budgeted figure, based on total sales/size of store, for yearly shrink. In the past (maybe still), employees would get bonus split amongst them for the amount the store came in under budget . . . i.e. Store 250 is budgeted to lose 18% of revenue to shrink . . . only lose 10% at inventory time . . . employees share a split of remaining 8%. So, the store is forgoeing the money anyway . . . it was already in the budget to be lost, but this way employees have incentive to be proactive in loss prevention.

The other stupid thing about employees playing supercop, as anyone who's managed retail can tell you . . . only about 10% of a store's losses are due to outside theft and fraud (credit, check). The other 90% is internal, whether through employee theft, paperwork errors, misships, damage, etc.



posted on May, 5 2011 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by optimus primal
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


actually that's probably not entirely true. if best buy's corporate policies work in a similar fashion to other retailers, the home improvement store i work at has no loss prevention person. it has to do with store performance and yearly budgets. so in reality this store in question may have had a loss prevention person, but it's not true that every retail store does.



The majority of Best Buy stores have a loss prevention agent on shift at all times. I never said every store does. I said most.


Best Buy ALWAYS has at least one LP agent on during store operating hours . . . it's the guy in the yellow shirt at the front of the store. Sometimes a floor employee or manager will man the front to cover breaks and such, if only one LP agent is on staff.







 
24
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join