Walmart v. Cicero, final report
- Thread starter Cicero17
- Start date
- Status
One thing I've learned and I try to remember, I can always escalate a confrontation. It's just wise to choose this as a last resort.
I mean LAST resort.
I can always yell and shout after I whisper. It's tough to resort to whispering after yelling and shouting.
I mean LAST resort.
I can always yell and shout after I whisper. It's tough to resort to whispering after yelling and shouting.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
All this talk about Wal-Mart makes going there (not to shop, but to gawk!) irresistible to me. Of course, two witnesses and my lawyer will tag along.
Ooooh! Take me, take me!
I don't know if Cicero knew darn well he would need to show a reciept. Given the droids own words (first quote), he WATCHED him pay for the bicycle. Why bend over to idiotic rules? Or bend over and justify doing a job with the least effort? The employee should be more concerned with checking actual suspicious activity rather than stopping people who he TYPICALLY won't have a confrontation with (becuase they all conform too easily) and be able at the end of the day say "Hey boss, I stopped my quota of 20 people today, and they where all good" That guy should be watching out for other comings and goings in the store. Have I ever been stopped when walking out the door without buying anything? Never. Should I have been? Technically yes. Why? Becuase I went to the high dollar sections of the store to check prices, handle items, and my shifty gaze and rapid walking pace might give them concern. No, some droid standing at the exit facing the cashiers stops me, and others, who have clearly did our moral duties and payed for our purchases. Hassling those who don't need hassling.
Alex.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
Knowing that the greeter's actual job is not to check customers' receipts anyway, the whole idiocy of "checking receipts" boggles my mind.
Ever since someone* here on the forum, one who knows how Wal-Mart operates, has explained to me what's going on with shoplifting and door greeters/receipt checkers, I can only marvel at the genius who came up with such a silly, inefficient, and preposterous system, and I shake my head in disbelief at the corporate clown who approved this system. I wouldn't be surprised if 20% of the merchandise is stolen with Wal-Mart relying on a what amounts to a farce.
* Don't ask me. I was asked to not share what I was told.
I may have said this before, but for all the door-greeter "haters" out there, they are only there to say "hello" and as a possible deterent to theft. Their only "reason" to even ask for a receipt is if the EAS is activated (and only then to get the cashier number from the receipt for the log book which is used for cashier evaluation), or if someone is exiting with an unbagged, large ticket item.
However, this "policy" has gone back and forth numerous times. They used to check everyone. Now, I'm guessing that due to complaints, they are only supposed to check what I stated above.
For the "record", there are only two types of employees who can detain you for shoplifting, managers and loss prevention associates. Everyone else is supposed to be a "good witness" and stay out of the way. Unfortunately, not everyone follows the "rules" and you get some overzealous, save the world, 5-0 wanna be's who get a little too involved.
However, this "policy" has gone back and forth numerous times. They used to check everyone. Now, I'm guessing that due to complaints, they are only supposed to check what I stated above.
For the "record", there are only two types of employees who can detain you for shoplifting, managers and loss prevention associates. Everyone else is supposed to be a "good witness" and stay out of the way. Unfortunately, not everyone follows the "rules" and you get some overzealous, save the world, 5-0 wanna be's who get a little too involved.
All the camers and surveilance stuff in the store, can we not assume that EVERY purchase is done in the open and CLEARED of any wrong-doing? Therefore, the burden is on the store to show how they had GOOD CAUSE to single out anyone for scrutiny.
Most stores have cameras at all the registers, to monitor employee integrity. Other cameras are there as a deterent. Some cameras are there for a specific reason. One example is the camera which monitors the pool chemical isle. Several years ago, people decided to mix chemicals and start fires. The cameras were installed to help gain evidence of suspects and are still being employed today. There is usually a camera in Produce to help with the "slip, trip, and fall" cases to see if the accident was really an accident. It's unrealistic to expect every inch of the store to be viewed at all times and ALL people to be tracked from selection to purchase. Also, CCTV cameras cannot be used to justify a stop unless very specific criteria are met.
"Therefore, the burden is on the store to show how they had GOOD CAUSE to single out anyone for scrutiny."
As long as everyone with an unbagged, large ticket item, is asked for a receipt, no one is being singled out. Same goes for the EAS activation. As long as the policy is consistantly adhered to, then there shouldn't be an issue. Unfortunately, this isn't always the case.
"Therefore, the burden is on the store to show how they had GOOD CAUSE to single out anyone for scrutiny."
As long as everyone with an unbagged, large ticket item, is asked for a receipt, no one is being singled out. Same goes for the EAS activation. As long as the policy is consistantly adhered to, then there shouldn't be an issue. Unfortunately, this isn't always the case.
The casinos don't have a problem with this.
True. Walmart is definitely cheap when it comes to that. They also only have 1 or 2 people responsible for the entire store.
First off - CONGRATS Cicero for the results of the case. I am very very happy for you.
For the rest of you - Wal-Mart was CLEARLY in the wrong here. As a former employee I can say with authority that we as Wal-Mart employees were told NEVER EVER to "detain, physically prevent, or even APPEAR threatening" to a shoplifter. We were told to tell the manager and BACK OFF. We told over and over again that all we were to do was contact the manager and leave it at that. We had to take a frigging test and answer a question like that. (Prairie Du Chien Wal-Mart off the 18 freeway in Wisconsin).
The greeter did not follow this policy. Therefore it is Wal-Mart who is in the wrong - they should take responsibility for their "rogue" greeter who felt it was his given duty to show a receipt and said a big sorry to Cicero.
My family members are reporting that all the wal-marts in my area have stopped checking for receipts - this all happened within the last month.
Now if I can just get them to go to Target...
For the rest of you - Wal-Mart was CLEARLY in the wrong here. As a former employee I can say with authority that we as Wal-Mart employees were told NEVER EVER to "detain, physically prevent, or even APPEAR threatening" to a shoplifter. We were told to tell the manager and BACK OFF. We told over and over again that all we were to do was contact the manager and leave it at that. We had to take a frigging test and answer a question like that. (Prairie Du Chien Wal-Mart off the 18 freeway in Wisconsin).
The greeter did not follow this policy. Therefore it is Wal-Mart who is in the wrong - they should take responsibility for their "rogue" greeter who felt it was his given duty to show a receipt and said a big sorry to Cicero.
My family members are reporting that all the wal-marts in my area have stopped checking for receipts - this all happened within the last month.
Now if I can just get them to go to Target...
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
Son of a prairie dog!
Hate to say it, But OriginHacker is right about Wal-Marts policy. I work there presently, in the garage, but before this spent 7 years at the front end. This policy he outlines is drilled into staff over and over and over...this greeter went well beyond where he should have, and will probably be severely reprimanded for it, if not fired himself. Wal-Mart DOESN'T want the bad publicity from this!
I looked back through all the threads on this subject and there's one thing I'm missing - The value of it all.
How did any part of this situation, start to finish, benefit anyone in any way? Someone point it out to me because I can't see it.
Maybe I'm too "results oriented" or I've learned to pick my battles. But I consider my time and my life as worth too much to spend it dealing with some problem that could have been easily been avoided. And avoided without compromising my morals or personal integrity in any way.
Could be the whole rage against the machine mindset and being self righteous and indignant about trivial things makes some people feel their life has meaning.
But me, I'd rather spend my time doing things I enjoy and in situations where I actually accomplishing something meaningful...
How did any part of this situation, start to finish, benefit anyone in any way? Someone point it out to me because I can't see it.
Maybe I'm too "results oriented" or I've learned to pick my battles. But I consider my time and my life as worth too much to spend it dealing with some problem that could have been easily been avoided. And avoided without compromising my morals or personal integrity in any way.
Could be the whole rage against the machine mindset and being self righteous and indignant about trivial things makes some people feel their life has meaning.
But me, I'd rather spend my time doing things I enjoy and in situations where I actually accomplishing something meaningful...
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Well, there's merit to your view, JS .. I would say that trivial things may evolve to non-trivial things and I'd say that the term trivial is in the eye of the beholder. Sure, there were "concessions" to be made that would have avoided this whole overblown affair. Most of us that have given up on high standards are used to them and treat the as "par for the course". Our standards are becoming substandard. These are concessions of convenience ...and defile and defy any sense of principle. We might as well take any of the shrouds off of any sense of propriety in everything we do ..just because it's all just a fraud ..and illusion of something that we're supposed to aspire to.
So ..cheat, lie, do a half-(blank) job ..it's okay ..you're not expected to be civil and adhere to any of societies standards in terms of conduct or integrity. Don't get annoyed ...don't object ..don't bother. Just let it continue to decay and keep navigating around it ..jumping through hoops to assure that you don't get inconvenienced.
(visions of Will Smith in I Robot- "Now the last thing you need is a old dead guy stinking up your lobby ...but seeing as you got one
I'll just go do my "cop thing".)
That is, the hindsight quarterbacking is all fine and good. Even our loved/loathed hero/villain will admit to hindsight second guessing himself...but seeing as he was in that situation and decided to take exception to it ..he just did his "I'm not wrong" thing. The court appeared to agree.
Sure it's easier to just shrug and move on. Is there some requirement to do that just because 8 out of 10 can put up with it? No one seems to see anything wrong with putting up with whatever "it" is. Further more, they end up on seeing anything wrong with the substandard or dysfunctional state to begin with.
Complacency and appeasement are the enablers of social decay. When it gets worse, thank yourself for your tolerance and passive endorsement of it. Assume the impotent posture in all things since they yield you no ROI. It's good social conditioning for otherwise intolerable conditions.
I'm not saying that I don't tend to do this too ..but I'm not going to call it a desired thing. It's practical in view of the prevailing defects in things. Again, appearing to decompensate since you don't cope with obvious defects. You're always expected to field the lame curve balls that misfits and defectives show in typical behaviors. If you don't/can't ..you're then the defective.
(I'm expanding the scope of such attitudes for demonstrative purposes - ie. I'm making it sound much harsher).
So ..cheat, lie, do a half-(blank) job ..it's okay ..you're not expected to be civil and adhere to any of societies standards in terms of conduct or integrity. Don't get annoyed ...don't object ..don't bother. Just let it continue to decay and keep navigating around it ..jumping through hoops to assure that you don't get inconvenienced.
(visions of Will Smith in I Robot- "Now the last thing you need is a old dead guy stinking up your lobby ...but seeing as you got one
That is, the hindsight quarterbacking is all fine and good. Even our loved/loathed hero/villain will admit to hindsight second guessing himself...but seeing as he was in that situation and decided to take exception to it ..he just did his "I'm not wrong" thing. The court appeared to agree.
Sure it's easier to just shrug and move on. Is there some requirement to do that just because 8 out of 10 can put up with it? No one seems to see anything wrong with putting up with whatever "it" is. Further more, they end up on seeing anything wrong with the substandard or dysfunctional state to begin with.
Complacency and appeasement are the enablers of social decay. When it gets worse, thank yourself for your tolerance and passive endorsement of it. Assume the impotent posture in all things since they yield you no ROI. It's good social conditioning for otherwise intolerable conditions.
I'm not saying that I don't tend to do this too ..but I'm not going to call it a desired thing. It's practical in view of the prevailing defects in things. Again, appearing to decompensate since you don't cope with obvious defects. You're always expected to field the lame curve balls that misfits and defectives show in typical behaviors. If you don't/can't ..you're then the defective.
(I'm expanding the scope of such attitudes for demonstrative purposes - ie. I'm making it sound much harsher).
I'd have to say that is an Excellent post. I never realized how much truth there is in what Gary Allan said. The more complacent we become the worse things are going to get. You have to work hard to keep things going good. A+ post Gary.
What do the "shrug-and-put-up-with-it-ers" think about this...
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/3/03736/76330
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/3/03736/76330
Complacency and appeasement have little place in my life Gary and I don't suffer fools well. But I don't see WallyWorld receipt checks as part of any slippery slope of societal decay anymore than dealing with the sometimes surly employees at the local mom and pops. That's people, same as they've ever been and I don't think I'll change them in the line at Walmart or in court as a defendant in a case I needn't have been involved in.
The people and companies I like, or at least can tolerate, get my business. The ones not on that list get avoided. I find that the best way to help maximize the small amount of time I have here vs. getting into a confrontation at the door of a place that I chose to enter and do business with voluntarily, over a policy that does nothing to effect me in any tangible way.
Our loved/loathed hero/villain did what he thought was right and I've no exception to that much of it. Just voicing my opinion that I don't feel I have the g0d given right to not be offended, and I've more rewarding ways to spend my time than fighting tooth and nail against every insignificant slight in life.
It also pays to be careful and polite while thinking things through, lest we escalate situations far past their importance and become what we so claim to be against. Offensive and self centered...
The people and companies I like, or at least can tolerate, get my business. The ones not on that list get avoided. I find that the best way to help maximize the small amount of time I have here vs. getting into a confrontation at the door of a place that I chose to enter and do business with voluntarily, over a policy that does nothing to effect me in any tangible way.
Our loved/loathed hero/villain did what he thought was right and I've no exception to that much of it. Just voicing my opinion that I don't feel I have the g0d given right to not be offended, and I've more rewarding ways to spend my time than fighting tooth and nail against every insignificant slight in life.
It also pays to be careful and polite while thinking things through, lest we escalate situations far past their importance and become what we so claim to be against. Offensive and self centered...
It was a good post but not really applicable to the situation at hand IMO. I see no "principal" here that's been violated by some flunky looking at a receipt as a person leaves Wally. Nor do I see any greater good that has been accomplished or reward produced from the time and effort that was expended...
- Status
