Comments on: Employee fired after fighting off robber

By: Rule Bound

Rule Bound — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 18:36:33 +0000

It seems that politically correct is coming into play here. Though for the wrong reasons, Mr. Beverly did the right thing. We shouldn’t care what the policy is. When another human being is in trouble, we should help. I write policies all of the time, but when enforcing them I always try to take into consideration common sense and the golden rule. How would I have wanted my co-worker to react? I would have tried to knock the perp’s head off.

By: mw

mw — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 15:24:12 +0000

The policy and the tapes are really irrelevent here. If Mr. Beverly truly thought his co-worker was being attacked, then he should have interceded. Obviously, he couldn’t review tapes then make a decision! Can you imagine if she was really being attacked and he just stood there because of company policy? Especially if she was injured or killed? Seems to me the policy said “Hands off and cooperate” in the event of a robbery, not a physical attack.

By: Harry Benion

Harry Benion — Fri, 30 May 2008 18:41:22 +0000

No good deed goes unpunished.

By: Jody Eschler

Jody Eschler — Fri, 30 May 2008 15:19:24 +0000

When reviewing Mr. Shantz response I would agree from an employee standpoint. It would be nice to evaluate on a case by case basis. However with the society that we live in today policies are put into place to advise employees of what to do in these types of circumstances for their safety and for the protection of the employer. If this particlar employer were to review in a case by case scenario they would be violating their own policies thus opening themselves up to numerous lawsuits. Policies are developed for a reason and thus need to be followed for those reasons.

By: Dale Shantz

Dale Shantz — Fri, 30 May 2008 14:03:14 +0000

Human actions need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, within the context of policy and facts. Employees must exercise judgement, and so must managers and executives. Trying to issue “one-size-fits-all” rules in an effort to avoid having to think or decide simply doesn’t work. There may be other factors which would indeed have justified termination of this employee, but on the face of the facts provided, it appears a blind adherance to overly-encompassing rules on the part of supposed decision-makers is at work here.