Gregory Morrow wrote:
> [the most "interesting" part of this particular drama is that the dude
> stashed away almost ___$350.00___ worth of vittles in a shopping
> bag...but it IS Whole Paycheck, after all...]
>
>
> http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/...for_stopp.html
>
> Grocery worker fired for stopping shoplifter
>
> by Dave Gershman | The Ann Arbor News
> Thursday December 27, 2007, 8:15 AM

......snip

> Schultz said he was called to the store's office the next day, on
> Christmas Eve, and was fired because he violated a company policy
> prohibiting employees from having any physical contact with a
> customer.
>
> Kate Klotz, a company spokesperson, said the policy is clear and
> listed in a booklet that all employees have to acknowledge that they
> received before they can start work.
>
> "The fact that he touched him, period, is means for termination," said
> Klotz.

Since when is a thief considered a 'customer'? Schultz was affecting the
apprehension of a criminal, he wasn't manhandling grandma selecting the best
bunch of bannanas in the fruit aisle. I wonder what kind of settlement
Schultze's attorneys will go for. I'm sure happy that we ain't got an
AssWhole Foods around here.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

Gregory Morrow wrote:

> Schultz, 35, of Ypsilanti Township, had worked at the store for five years,
> most recently as a fishmonger. He wants his job back.
>
> "The fact that I worked at the store at (the time of the robbery) is
> coincidental," he said. "If I had went over to the book store on my break
> and they were being ripped off, I would have helped them."
>
> </>
>
>
Unfortunately the first thing you have to consider in operating a
business is not doing something that may allow John Edwards or one of
his friends to transfer huge wealth to themselves.

You can be assured that "Mr Thief" if identified will get dozens of
calls with offers to "help him" obtain large monetary compensation for
the terrible ordeal of someone trying to stop him.

[the most "interesting" part of this particular drama is that the dude
stashed away almost ___$350.00___ worth of vittles in a shopping bag...but
it IS Whole Paycheck, after all...]


http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/...for_stopp.html

Grocery worker fired for stopping shoplifter

by Dave Gershman | The Ann Arbor News
Thursday December 27, 2007, 8:15 AM

BY DAVE GERSHMAN
The Ann Arbor News

"John Schultz says he lost his job at Whole Foods Market in Ann Arbor after
he tried to stop a shoplifter from making a getaway. But the company says he
went too far and violated a policy that prohibits employees from physically
touching a customer - even if that person is carrying a bag of stolen goods.

Schultz says he had just punched out for a break at 7 p.m. on Sunday when he
heard a commotion at the front door of the store, 3135 Washtenaw Ave. He
said he came to the aid of the manager who yelled for help in stopping a
shoplifter. Schultz, the manager and another employee cornered the
shoplifter between two cars in the parking lot.

Schultz said he told the shoplifter he was making a citizens arrest and to
wait for the police to arrive, but the shoplifter broke away from the group
and ran across Washtenaw Avenue and toward a gas station at the corner of
Huron Parkway.

Before the man could cross Huron Parkway, Schultz caught up and grabbed the
man's jacket and put his leg behind the man's legs. When the manager arrived
at the intersection, Schultz said, the manager told him to release the
shoplifter, and he complied, and the shoplifter got away.

Schultz said he was called to the store's office the next day, on Christmas
Eve, and was fired because he violated a company policy prohibiting
employees from having any physical contact with a customer.

Kate Klotz, a company spokesperson, said the policy is clear and listed in a
booklet that all employees have to acknowledge that they received before
they can start work.

"The fact that he touched him, period, is means for termination," said
Klotz.

Schultz said he acted as a private citizen on property that isn't owned by
Whole Foods, but Klotz said where the incident happened doesn't change the
policy.

"He is still considered an employee of Whole Foods Market regardless of
where he was and what was happening," she said.

The police report of the incident doesn't mention Schultz's
involvement. It says police responded to the call of retail fraud at7:09
p.m. and could not locate the shoplifter.

The thief was described as a thin white male, 5-foot-10, in his mid-20s,
wearing a black jacket, tan pants and carrying a backpack.

The report says store employees were suspicious when the man walked into the
store and they watched as he filled up a basket and then took it into a
bathroom. When he came out, his basket was empty, but his backpack looked
full. Then he filled up a canvas store tote bag with
groceries, and walked out the door.

The manager and the other employee told police they caught up to the
shoplifter at the corner of Washtenaw and Huron Parkway. It says one of them
grabbed the tote bag away from the shoplifter, and the suspect walked away.
The bag contained $346 worth of food and other products.

Schultz, 35, of Ypsilanti Township, had worked at the store for five years,
most recently as a fishmonger. He wants his job back.

"The fact that I worked at the store at (the time of the robbery) is
coincidental," he said. "If I had went over to the book store on my break
and they were being ripped off, I would have helped them."

</>

Sqwertz wrote:
>
> On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 12:42:00 -0600, Gregory Morrow wrote:
>
> > "John Schultz says he lost his job at Whole Foods Market in Ann Arbor after
> > he tried to stop a shoplifter from making a getaway. But the company says he
> > went too far and violated a policy that prohibits employees from physically
> > touching a customer - even if that person is carrying a bag of stolen goods.
>
> The employee does have a case for wrongful termination (depending
> on the state). He was off the clock and off the premises when
> the supposed violation occurred.

Maybe he has them on a technicality. A customer is a person who purchases
goods or services. The shoplifter was purchasing neither. He was stealing,
therefore a thief and not a customer.


> This is also why most grocery companies outsource theft
> prevention services and security. Liability.

I worked in a department store for a while when I was in high school. The
store had a small security crew who were notorious for busting kids, but
rarely caught adult shoplifters. They were such jerks that we never
bothered to tell them when we saw people stealing. However they did once
catch a good one.... the sleazy assistant manager. They caught him one
night loading up his car at the truck loading ramp.

Sqwertz wrote:

> On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 12:42:00 -0600, Gregory Morrow wrote:
> > "John Schultz says he lost his job at Whole Foods Market in Ann Arbor after
> > he tried to stop a shoplifter from making a getaway. But the company says he
> > went too far and violated a policy that prohibits employees from physically
> > touching a customer - even if that person is carrying a bag of stolen goods.
>
> The employee does have a case for wrongful termination (depending
> on the state). *He was off the clock and off the premises when
> the supposed violation occurred.


Yep...does a company "own" their employees when they are off the clock
and off the property...???



> This is also why most grocery companies outsource theft
> prevention services and security. *Liability.


Banks too, IIRC...


--
Best
Greg

George wrote:
> Gregory Morrow wrote:
>
>> Schultz, 35, of Ypsilanti Township, had worked at the store for five
>> years, most recently as a fishmonger. He wants his job back.
>>
>> "The fact that I worked at the store at (the time of the robbery) is
>> coincidental," he said. "If I had went over to the book store on my
>> break and they were being ripped off, I would have helped them."
>>
>> </>
>>
>>
> Unfortunately the first thing you have to consider in operating a
> business is not doing something that may allow John Edwards or one of
> his friends to transfer huge wealth to themselves.
>
> You can be assured that "Mr Thief" if identified will get dozens of
> calls with offers to "help him" obtain large monetary compensation for
> the terrible ordeal of someone trying to stop him.

I doubt it. No attorney in their right mind would expose themselves to the
ridicule of a dismisaal of the lawsuit from the bench.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

"Gregory Morrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> [the most "interesting" part of this particular drama is that the dude
> stashed away almost ___$350.00___ worth of vittles in a shopping bag...but
> it IS Whole Paycheck, after all...]
>
>
> http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/...for_stopp.html
>
> Grocery worker fired for stopping shoplifter
>
> by Dave Gershman | The Ann Arbor News
> Thursday December 27, 2007, 8:15 AM
>
> BY DAVE GERSHMAN
> The Ann Arbor News
>
> "John Schultz says he lost his job at Whole Foods Market in Ann Arbor
> after
> he tried to stop a shoplifter from making a getaway. But the company says
> he
> went too far and violated a policy that prohibits employees from
> physically
> touching a customer - even if that person is carrying a bag of stolen
> goods.
>
> Schultz says he had just punched out for a break at 7 p.m. on Sunday when
> he
> heard a commotion at the front door of the store, 3135 Washtenaw Ave. He
> said he came to the aid of the manager who yelled for help in stopping a
> shoplifter. Schultz, the manager and another employee cornered the
> shoplifter between two cars in the parking lot.
>
> Schultz said he told the shoplifter he was making a citizens arrest and to
> wait for the police to arrive, but the shoplifter broke away from the
> group
> and ran across Washtenaw Avenue and toward a gas station at the corner of
> Huron Parkway.
>
> Before the man could cross Huron Parkway, Schultz caught up and grabbed
> the
> man's jacket and put his leg behind the man's legs. When the manager
> arrived
> at the intersection, Schultz said, the manager told him to release the
> shoplifter, and he complied, and the shoplifter got away.
>
> Schultz said he was called to the store's office the next day, on
> Christmas
> Eve, and was fired because he violated a company policy prohibiting
> employees from having any physical contact with a customer.
>
> Kate Klotz, a company spokesperson, said the policy is clear and listed in
> a
> booklet that all employees have to acknowledge that they received before
> they can start work.
>
> "The fact that he touched him, period, is means for termination," said
> Klotz.
>
> Schultz said he acted as a private citizen on property that isn't owned by
> Whole Foods, but Klotz said where the incident happened doesn't change the
> policy.
>
> "He is still considered an employee of Whole Foods Market regardless of
> where he was and what was happening," she said.
>
> The police report of the incident doesn't mention Schultz's
> involvement. It says police responded to the call of retail fraud at7:09
> p.m. and could not locate the shoplifter.
>
> The thief was described as a thin white male, 5-foot-10, in his mid-20s,
> wearing a black jacket, tan pants and carrying a backpack.
>
> The report says store employees were suspicious when the man walked into
> the
> store and they watched as he filled up a basket and then took it into a
> bathroom. When he came out, his basket was empty, but his backpack looked
> full. Then he filled up a canvas store tote bag with
> groceries, and walked out the door.
>
> The manager and the other employee told police they caught up to the
> shoplifter at the corner of Washtenaw and Huron Parkway. It says one of
> them
> grabbed the tote bag away from the shoplifter, and the suspect walked
> away.
> The bag contained $346 worth of food and other products.
>
> Schultz, 35, of Ypsilanti Township, had worked at the store for five
> years,
> most recently as a fishmonger. He wants his job back.
>
> "The fact that I worked at the store at (the time of the robbery) is
> coincidental," he said. "If I had went over to the book store on my break
> and they were being ripped off, I would have helped them."
>
> </>
>
>

When I worked for Walmart as a Customer Service Manager (mid level
management) I was told that we could physically 'observe' someone stuff
goods into a bag and walk out with it but could do nothing. Corporate
policy was that an "Assistant Manager" or higher had to see them steal
before they could be stopped. Find an assistant manager on the floor at any
time.....Good luck. So it got to a point that in the break room the
cashiers and the floor associates kept a tally of who saw how many people
steal. But come bonus time, there wasn't one because 'we allowed
shrink'.......go figure. Oh, and the biggest heist from the store I worked
at ....an Assistant Manager found the lapse in the security tape in the cash
room (7 minutes at midnight to reset all the registers in the store) and
made off with over $30k in small incriments during those lapses.
-ginny

On Dec 29, 12:39*pm, "Dave Bugg" > wrote:
> Gregory Morrow wrote:
> > [the most "interesting" part of this particular drama is that the dude
> > stashed away almost ___$350.00___ worth of vittles in a shopping
> > bag...but it IS Whole Paycheck, after all...]
>
> >http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/...ker_fired_for_...
>
> > Grocery worker fired for stopping shoplifter
>
> > by Dave Gershman | The Ann Arbor News
> > Thursday December 27, 2007, 8:15 AM
>
> .....snip
>
> > Schultz said he was called to the store's office the next day, on
> > Christmas Eve, and was fired because he violated a company policy
> > prohibiting employees from having any physical contact with a
> > customer.
>
> > Kate Klotz, a company spokesperson, said the policy is clear and
> > listed in a booklet that all employees have to acknowledge that they
> > received before they can start work.
>
> > "The fact that he touched him, period, is means for termination," said
> > Klotz.
>
> Since when is a thief considered a 'customer'? Schultz was affecting the
> apprehension of a criminal, he wasn't manhandling grandma selecting the best
> bunch of bannanas in the fruit aisle.

Or manhandling grandDAUGHTER trying to choose among the various fair
trade chocolate bars in the candy aisle.
>
> --
> Davewww.davebbq.com

--Bryan

On Dec 29, 12:40*pm, George > wrote:
> Gregory Morrow wrote:
> > Schultz, 35, of Ypsilanti Township, had worked at the store for five years,
> > most recently as a fishmonger. He wants his job back.
>
> > "The fact that I worked at the store at (the time of the robbery) is
> > coincidental," he said. "If I had went over to the book store on my break
> > and they were being ripped off, I would have helped them."
>
> > </>
>
> Unfortunately the first thing you have to consider in operating a
> business is not doing something that may allow John Edwards or one of
> his friends to transfer huge wealth to themselves.

Listen Mr. Shit-for-Brains, it is juries who award damages.
>
> You can be assured that "Mr Thief" if identified will get dozens of
> calls with offers to "help him" obtain large monetary compensation for
> * the terrible ordeal of someone trying to stop him.

Do you think that a jury would award damages in a case like that?
Sure, there have been a very small percentage of cases where
exorbitant sums were paid to the undeserving. Most of those get
thrown out on appeal. More often, the rich and powerful shove it up
the rectums of average folks and get away with it.

I guess you're the kind of guy who worships the corporations like
they're gods.

--Bryan

On Dec 29, 1:45*pm, "Dave Bugg" > wrote:
> George wrote:
> > Gregory Morrow wrote:
>
> >> Schultz, 35, of Ypsilanti Township, had worked at the store for five
> >> years, most recently as a fishmonger. He wants his job back.
>
> >> "The fact that I worked at the store at (the time of the robbery) is
> >> coincidental," he said. "If I had went over to the book store on my
> >> break and they were being ripped off, I would have helped them."
>
> >> </>
>
> > Unfortunately the first thing you have to consider in operating a
> > business is not doing something that may allow John Edwards or one of
> > his friends to transfer huge wealth to themselves.
>
> > You can be assured that "Mr Thief" if identified will get dozens of
> > calls with offers to "help him" obtain large monetary compensation for
> > *the terrible ordeal of someone trying to stop him.
>
> I doubt it. No attorney in their right mind would expose themselves to the
> ridicule of a dismisaal of the lawsuit from the bench.

Of corse not, but George is obviously a Right-wing ****wad trying to
make a bogus political point.

When I worked at a discount store in my 20s, I was buffing the floor
when store security walked by and told me to unplug my machine and
follow him. We went into the security office, he with a very scared
looking teenage male shoplifter. He told the guy to sit down, said
that he was going up front to meet the police, handed me a miniature
baseball bat and told me, "If he so much as moves, hit him as many
times as you feel like."

Since I was the housekeeping dept. manager, he knew that I knew that
if the guy got up and bolted, I could not do a single thing beyond
picking up the phone and making a PA announcement, but this terrified
kid didn't know that. I looked at the security guy and said, very
convincingly, in a very "make my day" way, "Yes, sir." The guy sat
perfectly still until the security guy got back with the cop.

The funny part is that he said, "...as many times as you feel like."
Not as you need to. For all the kid knew, I was being given
permission to brutalize him.
>
> --
> Davewww.davebbq.com

--Bryan

Michael "Dog3" wrote:
> George > dropped this
> : in rec.food.cooking
>
>> Unfortunately the first thing you have to consider in operating a
>> business is not doing something that may allow John Edwards or one of
>> his friends to transfer huge wealth to themselves.
>>
>> You can be assured that "Mr Thief" if identified will get dozens of
>> calls with offers to "help him" obtain large monetary compensation for
>> the terrible ordeal of someone trying to stop him.
>
> And exactly what point are you trying to make? If it's political you're
> doing a **** poor job of it.
>
> Michael

Not political. Edwards happens to come to mind as a lawyer who moved
large amounts of wealth (28,000 sf house etc) to himself by "helping"
people.

There is one in another town but you likely wouldn't recognize his name
(he has a 16,000 sf house with a 12 car drive through garage) but his
picture is on many buses, billboards and phone directories telling us he
is ready to "help"...

My point is that avoiding legal issues is a major part of any commercial
enterprise. I have been involved in some product liability suits as a
company representative and it is totaling amazing what litigation some
lawyers will bring.

Sometimes I visit a friend whose office is in the same building as a law
firm and one of the partners constantly tells me I should tell him about
things I see because they were almost the principle firm on a class
action and had the case stolen by another firm and can't wait to put
themselves on the map with a big suit.

Virginia Tadrzynski wrote:

>
> When I worked for Walmart as a Customer Service Manager (mid level
> management) I was told that we could physically 'observe' someone stuff
> goods into a bag and walk out with it but could do nothing. Corporate
> policy was that an "Assistant Manager" or higher had to see them steal
> before they could be stopped. Find an assistant manager on the floor at any
> time.....Good luck. So it got to a point that in the break room the
> cashiers and the floor associates kept a tally of who saw how many people
> steal. But come bonus time, there wasn't one because 'we allowed
> shrink'.......go figure.


Big box stores know that with the deep pockets they have it is cheaper
to let someone walk away with $100 worth of stuff than to be involved
even in token litigation for say $12,000 which I understand is the
current amount your "council" can pretty much ask for and you will get a
part of simply to go away.


Oh, and the biggest heist from the store I worked
> at ....an Assistant Manager found the lapse in the security tape in the cash
> room (7 minutes at midnight to reset all the registers in the store) and
> made off with over $30k in small incriments during those lapses.
> -ginny
>
>

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 13:40:54 -0500, George >
wrote:

>Gregory Morrow wrote:
>
>> Schultz, 35, of Ypsilanti Township, had worked at the store for five years,
>> most recently as a fishmonger. He wants his job back.
>>
>> "The fact that I worked at the store at (the time of the robbery) is
>> coincidental," he said. "If I had went over to the book store on my break
>> and they were being ripped off, I would have helped them."
>>
>> </>
>>
>>
>Unfortunately the first thing you have to consider in operating a
>business is not doing something that may allow John Edwards or one of
>his friends to transfer huge wealth to themselves.
>
>You can be assured that "Mr Thief" if identified will get dozens of
>calls with offers to "help him" obtain large monetary compensation for
> the terrible ordeal of someone trying to stop him.

i would try to cut down on the glue-sniffing if i were you, george...

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 11:45:21 -0800, "Dave Bugg" >
wrote:

>George wrote:
>> Gregory Morrow wrote:
>>
>>> Schultz, 35, of Ypsilanti Township, had worked at the store for five
>>> years, most recently as a fishmonger. He wants his job back.
>>>
>>> "The fact that I worked at the store at (the time of the robbery) is
>>> coincidental," he said. "If I had went over to the book store on my
>>> break and they were being ripped off, I would have helped them."
>>>
>>> </>
>>>
>>>
>> Unfortunately the first thing you have to consider in operating a
>> business is not doing something that may allow John Edwards or one of
>> his friends to transfer huge wealth to themselves.
>>
>> You can be assured that "Mr Thief" if identified will get dozens of
>> calls with offers to "help him" obtain large monetary compensation for
>> the terrible ordeal of someone trying to stop him.
>
>I doubt it. No attorney in their right mind would expose themselves to the
>ridicule of a dismisaal of the lawsuit from the bench.

don't you know that all us liberals have as our primary goal aiding
the downtrodden shoplifter? don't you listen to rush?

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 00:23:54 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\""
> wrote:

>George > dropped this
: in rec.food.cooking
>
>> Unfortunately the first thing you have to consider in operating a
>> business is not doing something that may allow John Edwards or one of
>> his friends to transfer huge wealth to themselves.
>>
>> You can be assured that "Mr Thief" if identified will get dozens of
>> calls with offers to "help him" obtain large monetary compensation for
>> the terrible ordeal of someone trying to stop him.
>
>And exactly what point are you trying to make? If it's political you're
>doing a **** poor job of it.
>
>Michael

he made his point: thieves should lift themselves up by their own
bootstraps, like all good republicans.

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 20:19:03 -0500, George >
wrote:

>Virginia Tadrzynski wrote:
>
>>
>> When I worked for Walmart as a Customer Service Manager (mid level
>> management) I was told that we could physically 'observe' someone stuff
>> goods into a bag and walk out with it but could do nothing. Corporate
>> policy was that an "Assistant Manager" or higher had to see them steal
>> before they could be stopped. Find an assistant manager on the floor at any
>> time.....Good luck. So it got to a point that in the break room the
>> cashiers and the floor associates kept a tally of who saw how many people
>> steal. But come bonus time, there wasn't one because 'we allowed
>> shrink'.......go figure.
>
>
>Big box stores know that with the deep pockets they have it is cheaper
>to let someone walk away with $100 worth of stuff than to be involved
>even in token litigation for say $12,000 which I understand is the
>current amount your "council" can pretty much ask for and you will get a
>part of simply to go away.
>

bullshit, george. how about a cite?

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 20:19:03 -0500, George >
> wrote:
>
>> Virginia Tadrzynski wrote:
>>
>>> When I worked for Walmart as a Customer Service Manager (mid level
>>> management) I was told that we could physically 'observe' someone stuff
>>> goods into a bag and walk out with it but could do nothing. Corporate
>>> policy was that an "Assistant Manager" or higher had to see them steal
>>> before they could be stopped. Find an assistant manager on the floor at any
>>> time.....Good luck. So it got to a point that in the break room the
>>> cashiers and the floor associates kept a tally of who saw how many people
>>> steal. But come bonus time, there wasn't one because 'we allowed
>>> shrink'.......go figure.
>>
>> Big box stores know that with the deep pockets they have it is cheaper
>> to let someone walk away with $100 worth of stuff than to be involved
>> even in token litigation for say $12,000 which I understand is the
>> current amount your "council" can pretty much ask for and you will get a
>> part of simply to go away.
>>
>
> bullshit, george. how about a cite?
>
> your pal,
> blake

It is an everyday thing that businesses do that isn't published for
obvious reasons. There is a cost to defend any suit or for that matter
investigate any claim. Since ultimately it comes down to how much
something will cost it makes sense for a deep pocketed business to
simply make a deal and pay a token amount to make it go away rather than
proceed with litigation.

There are lawyers that thrive on this kind of stuff. It isn't
multi-million dollar get your face on the front page deals but it is a
constant income. My cousins husband is a local lawyer (honest guy, just
makes an average income) who started out working for a firm that had
their partners pictures on the city buses telling everyone that they
would help them. He said there was a constant parade of people who knew
the possibilities coming to the firm and the junior staff would get
those cases. He said it is common knowledge in those circles how much
can be demanded.

My buddies wife is a paralegal and actually works for the same firm my
cousins husband worked for (we all bust her about getting an honest
job). She doesn't name names but always has lots of stories about these
types of cases that they handle.

Same thing with insurance companies. There is a certain threshold where
they don't even look at a claim because the cost of an investigator is
more than the claim.

As Virginia said the big box stores know all of this and that it is a no
win situation to even try and stop or pursue people because of possible
litigation because of their deep pockets so they choose to write it off
as shrinkage. I am friendly with the police chief of a nearby town where
most of the local big box stores are located. I was in his office a few
months back and he showed me a DVD of a shoplifter and we got into a
discussion about how they handle it. He said a mom & pop shop might do
something on their own (which I think is right) and detain the person
but the big box places simply call the police after the fact and bring
them into the room where the DVRs are located, show them what happened
and burn them a copy.

"George" > wrote in message
...
> blake murphy wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 20:19:03 -0500, George >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Virginia Tadrzynski wrote:
>>>
>>>> When I worked for Walmart as a Customer Service Manager (mid level
>>>> management) I was told that we could physically 'observe' someone stuff
>>>> goods into a bag and walk out with it but could do nothing. Corporate
>>>> policy was that an "Assistant Manager" or higher had to see them steal
>>>> before they could be stopped. Find an assistant manager on the floor
>>>> at any time.....Good luck. So it got to a point that in the break room
>>>> the cashiers and the floor associates kept a tally of who saw how many
>>>> people steal. But come bonus time, there wasn't one because 'we
>>>> allowed shrink'.......go figure.
>>>
>>> Big box stores know that with the deep pockets they have it is cheaper
>>> to let someone walk away with $100 worth of stuff than to be involved
>>> even in token litigation for say $12,000 which I understand is the
>>> current amount your "council" can pretty much ask for and you will get a
>>> part of simply to go away.
>>>
>>
>> bullshit, george. how about a cite?
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
> It is an everyday thing that businesses do that isn't published for
> obvious reasons. There is a cost to defend any suit or for that matter
> investigate any claim. Since ultimately it comes down to how much
> something will cost it makes sense for a deep pocketed business to simply
> make a deal and pay a token amount to make it go away rather than proceed
> with litigation.
>
> There are lawyers that thrive on this kind of stuff. It isn't
> multi-million dollar get your face on the front page deals but it is a
> constant income. My cousins husband is a local lawyer (honest guy, just
> makes an average income) who started out working for a firm that had their
> partners pictures on the city buses telling everyone that they would help
> them. He said there was a constant parade of people who knew the
> possibilities coming to the firm and the junior staff would get those
> cases. He said it is common knowledge in those circles how much can be
> demanded.
>
> My buddies wife is a paralegal and actually works for the same firm my
> cousins husband worked for (we all bust her about getting an honest job).
> She doesn't name names but always has lots of stories about these types of
> cases that they handle.
>
> Same thing with insurance companies. There is a certain threshold where
> they don't even look at a claim because the cost of an investigator is
> more than the claim.

This is absolutely true. When I had one of my major surgeries, the bill from
the hospital was more than $60,000. The insurance company sent a little note
that any overcharges we identified and reported to the insurance company was
worth a reward. I don't remember how much. But it certainly saves them from
hiring auditors. The patient audits the bill for free on their time, if a
mistake is found they get a small compensation. Very cost saving for the
insurance company.

Cindi


>
> As Virginia said the big box stores know all of this and that it is a no
> win situation to even try and stop or pursue people because of possible
> litigation because of their deep pockets so they choose to write it off as
> shrinkage. I am friendly with the police chief of a nearby town where most
> of the local big box stores are located. I was in his office a few months
> back and he showed me a DVD of a shoplifter and we got into a discussion
> about how they handle it. He said a mom & pop shop might do something on
> their own (which I think is right) and detain the person but the big box
> places simply call the police after the fact and bring them into the room
> where the DVRs are located, show them what happened and burn them a copy.

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
>
> Moist shoplifting cases are pretty cut and dried. You're also
> setting an example to prevent them, and others, from ripping of
> the store day after day after day.
>
> -sw

Are they moist or dried? Make up your mind.

Mitch

In article >,
George > wrote:

> Virginia Tadrzynski wrote:
>
> >
> > When I worked for Walmart as a Customer Service Manager (mid level
> > management) I was told that we could physically 'observe' someone stuff
> > goods into a bag and walk out with it but could do nothing. Corporate
> > policy was that an "Assistant Manager" or higher had to see them steal
> > before they could be stopped. Find an assistant manager on the floor at
> > any
> > time.....Good luck. So it got to a point that in the break room the
> > cashiers and the floor associates kept a tally of who saw how many people
> > steal. But come bonus time, there wasn't one because 'we allowed
> > shrink'.......go figure.
>
>
> Big box stores know that with the deep pockets they have it is cheaper
> to let someone walk away with $100 worth of stuff than to be involved
> even in token litigation for say $12,000 which I understand is the
> current amount your "council" can pretty much ask for and you will get a
> part of simply to go away.

Its a matter of risk and insurance. If that man who stopped the thief
was injured, who do you think he would sue? Yup, Whole Foods. I used to
work in a tiny convenience store. The entire store was a fraction of the
size of a Whole Foods store. Management there had the same policy. I was
robbed there once and I followed policy not to resist in any way. As a
result, I am alive and the thief made off with only around $30 because I
also followed management's policy of stuffing excess cash in the till
into the safe every chance I got.

On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 13:57:38 -0500, George >
wrote:

>blake murphy wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 20:19:03 -0500, George >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Virginia Tadrzynski wrote:
>>>
>>>> When I worked for Walmart as a Customer Service Manager (mid level
>>>> management) I was told that we could physically 'observe' someone stuff
>>>> goods into a bag and walk out with it but could do nothing. Corporate
>>>> policy was that an "Assistant Manager" or higher had to see them steal
>>>> before they could be stopped. Find an assistant manager on the floor at any
>>>> time.....Good luck. So it got to a point that in the break room the
>>>> cashiers and the floor associates kept a tally of who saw how many people
>>>> steal. But come bonus time, there wasn't one because 'we allowed
>>>> shrink'.......go figure.
>>>
>>> Big box stores know that with the deep pockets they have it is cheaper
>>> to let someone walk away with $100 worth of stuff than to be involved
>>> even in token litigation for say $12,000 which I understand is the
>>> current amount your "council" can pretty much ask for and you will get a
>>> part of simply to go away.
>>>
>>
>> bullshit, george. how about a cite?
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
>It is an everyday thing that businesses do that isn't published for
>obvious reasons. There is a cost to defend any suit or for that matter
>investigate any claim. Since ultimately it comes down to how much
>something will cost it makes sense for a deep pocketed business to
>simply make a deal and pay a token amount to make it go away rather than
>proceed with litigation.
>
>There are lawyers that thrive on this kind of stuff. It isn't
>multi-million dollar get your face on the front page deals but it is a
>constant income. My cousins husband is a local lawyer (honest guy, just
>makes an average income) who started out working for a firm that had
>their partners pictures on the city buses telling everyone that they
>would help them. He said there was a constant parade of people who knew
>the possibilities coming to the firm and the junior staff would get
>those cases. He said it is common knowledge in those circles how much
>can be demanded.
>
>My buddies wife is a paralegal and actually works for the same firm my
>cousins husband worked for (we all bust her about getting an honest
>job). She doesn't name names but always has lots of stories about these
>types of cases that they handle.
>
>Same thing with insurance companies. There is a certain threshold where
>they don't even look at a claim because the cost of an investigator is
>more than the claim.
>
>As Virginia said the big box stores know all of this and that it is a no
>win situation to even try and stop or pursue people because of possible
>litigation because of their deep pockets so they choose to write it off
>as shrinkage. I am friendly with the police chief of a nearby town where
>most of the local big box stores are located. I was in his office a few
>months back and he showed me a DVD of a shoplifter and we got into a
>discussion about how they handle it. He said a mom & pop shop might do
>something on their own (which I think is right) and detain the person
>but the big box places simply call the police after the fact and bring
>them into the room where the DVRs are located, show them what happened
>and burn them a copy.

sorry, george. your cousin's husband's 'buddies' wife doesn't count
as a cite except on alt.rightwing.kook.

i'm not saying that some retailers aren't lax about corralling
shoplifters, but it's more concern for employee safety - they don't
want them conked on the head or worse (and possible lawsuits arising
from that) - not from fear of suits by thieves from the vicious
'council' they all have on retainer.

you also seem to be seriously deluded about the number of people who
win their suits against large corporations. hint: it ain't many.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 13:57:38 -0500, George >
> wrote:
>
>> blake murphy wrote:
>>> On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 20:19:03 -0500, George >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Virginia Tadrzynski wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> When I worked for Walmart as a Customer Service Manager (mid level
>>>>> management) I was told that we could physically 'observe' someone stuff
>>>>> goods into a bag and walk out with it but could do nothing. Corporate
>>>>> policy was that an "Assistant Manager" or higher had to see them steal
>>>>> before they could be stopped. Find an assistant manager on the floor at any
>>>>> time.....Good luck. So it got to a point that in the break room the
>>>>> cashiers and the floor associates kept a tally of who saw how many people
>>>>> steal. But come bonus time, there wasn't one because 'we allowed
>>>>> shrink'.......go figure.
>>>> Big box stores know that with the deep pockets they have it is cheaper
>>>> to let someone walk away with $100 worth of stuff than to be involved
>>>> even in token litigation for say $12,000 which I understand is the
>>>> current amount your "council" can pretty much ask for and you will get a
>>>> part of simply to go away.
>>>>
>>> bullshit, george. how about a cite?
>>>
>>> your pal,
>>> blake
>> It is an everyday thing that businesses do that isn't published for
>> obvious reasons. There is a cost to defend any suit or for that matter
>> investigate any claim. Since ultimately it comes down to how much
>> something will cost it makes sense for a deep pocketed business to
>> simply make a deal and pay a token amount to make it go away rather than
>> proceed with litigation.
>>
>> There are lawyers that thrive on this kind of stuff. It isn't
>> multi-million dollar get your face on the front page deals but it is a
>> constant income. My cousins husband is a local lawyer (honest guy, just
>> makes an average income) who started out working for a firm that had
>> their partners pictures on the city buses telling everyone that they
>> would help them. He said there was a constant parade of people who knew
>> the possibilities coming to the firm and the junior staff would get
>> those cases. He said it is common knowledge in those circles how much
>> can be demanded.
>>
>> My buddies wife is a paralegal and actually works for the same firm my
>> cousins husband worked for (we all bust her about getting an honest
>> job). She doesn't name names but always has lots of stories about these
>> types of cases that they handle.
>>
>> Same thing with insurance companies. There is a certain threshold where
>> they don't even look at a claim because the cost of an investigator is
>> more than the claim.
>>
>> As Virginia said the big box stores know all of this and that it is a no
>> win situation to even try and stop or pursue people because of possible
>> litigation because of their deep pockets so they choose to write it off
>> as shrinkage. I am friendly with the police chief of a nearby town where
>> most of the local big box stores are located. I was in his office a few
>> months back and he showed me a DVD of a shoplifter and we got into a
>> discussion about how they handle it. He said a mom & pop shop might do
>> something on their own (which I think is right) and detain the person
>> but the big box places simply call the police after the fact and bring
>> them into the room where the DVRs are located, show them what happened
>> and burn them a copy.
>
> sorry, george. your cousin's husband's 'buddies' wife doesn't count
> as a cite except on alt.rightwing.kook.
>
> i'm not saying that some retailers aren't lax about corralling
> shoplifters, but it's more concern for employee safety - they don't
> want them conked on the head or worse (and possible lawsuits arising
> from that) - not from fear of suits by thieves from the vicious
> 'council' they all have on retainer.
>
> you also seem to be seriously deluded about the number of people who
> win their suits against large corporations. hint: it ain't many.
>
> your pal,
> blake

I didn't claim it was a citation. Just because you don't have direct
experience with something I know doesn't make me a kook.

Lets just agree to disagree.

Your pal,

George

>
> http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/...for_stopp.html
>
> Grocery worker fired for stopping shoplifter
>
> by Dave Gershman | The Ann Arbor News
> Thursday December 27, 2007, 8:15 AM
>
> BY DAVE GERSHMAN
> The Ann Arbor News
>
> "John Schultz says he lost his job at Whole Foods Market in Ann Arbor after
> he tried to stop a shoplifter from making a getaway. But the company says he
> went too far and violated a policy that prohibits employees from physically
> touching a customer - even if that person is carrying a bag of stolen goods.
>


I guess that means it's OK to steal stuff from Whole Paycheck as long as
you can outrun the manager....

They must just jack up the prices for those who pay in order to make up
for the theft.

gloria p