• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Wal Mart and their ridiculous practices

#141
hbarcat said:
WalMart employees generally tend to be more satisfied with their employer than those of other companies.

And as far as wages goes, how much compensation is reasonable for putting items on shelves, directing customers to where those items are located, scanning those items at the cash register and taking customers' cash and giving them their change? It's about the easiest job in the world.

Except for occasionally having to tackle suspected shoplifters in the parking lot.

:D
Click to expand...

I'll put the wage rate out of the equation for now. I still do not like them because they file and receive corporate welfare. I dunno about you and the rest of you, but I've never seen an empty Wal Mart parking lot, unless its 3 am. I refuse to believe that they would need corporate welfare.
 
#142
cassanova said:
I'll put the wage rate out of the equation for now. I still do not like them because they file and receive corporate welfare. I dunno about you and the rest of you, but I've never seen an empty Wal Mart parking lot, unless its 3 am. I refuse to believe that they would need corporate welfare.
Click to expand...

it's a big corporate tyranny. they'll take from whomever they please and use all kinds of underhanded, immoral business tactics and prop it all up with highly publicized reports about how happy the wage slaves are inside the giant box they work in.

i think wal-mart is a logical kind of business for the structure in which it was made to function. unfortunately, that structure is severely flawed in just about every level.

so don't hate the company, hate the system for which it was designed. and even then, it would be better to know it and work against it, hating is totally optional.
 
#143
cassanova said:
...Any who, while in the office I was told that this Wal Mart has a hands on policy. If I understood correctly that means that they can tackle you and use force to prevent you from leaving with unpaid merchandise...
What I'd like to know is who in the Hell do these corporations thing they are and where do they get off thinking they can use force on you?
Click to expand...


I just saw this thread & haven't gotten past the 1st post, so, sorry if this has already been covered...

That is NOT Wal-Mart's policy. Period.

Store security ("asset protection" as they call them), or any other employee, for that matter, can not physically restrain a suspected shoplifter. At most, they can stand in your way and block the door. They can not follow you outside. Once you are out the door, you are off-limits. Wal-Mart's apprehension policy is to keep to a situation strictly verbal; no physical contact whatsoever. All aprehensions are to be made by at least 2 people, and the employees involved must be an AP team member or member of management.

That being said, if a suspected shoplifter physically contacts an employee in any way (i.e pushing, shoving, jabbing their finger in your chest etc) during the stop, it WILL be considered an assault.
If a suspected shoplifter decides to take a swing at someone, reasonable self-defense is accepatable, legally, but the preferred response is to just back off and let the person leave. It's all on tape, anyway. ;)
 
#145
Papazita said:
Store security ("asset protection" as they call them), or any other employee, for that matter, can not physically restrain a suspected shoplifter. At most, they can stand in your way and block the door. They can not follow you outside. Once you are out the door, you are off-limits. Wal-Mart's apprehension policy is to keep to a situation strictly verbal; no physical contact whatsoever. All aprehensions are to be made by at least 2 people, and the employees involved must be an AP team member or member of management.
Click to expand...

I don't get it.

So which is it?
 
#148
Mark Latimour said:
A couple of quotes from a security forum about working at Walmart:





Source: http://forums.securityinfowatch.com/showthread.php?p=77461



Source: Invalid Link Removed

Two statements that handcuffs can be used for restraint. I don't know if that counts as "hands off" or not, but I'd suggest not.
Click to expand...

The first link is a guy who used to work there (who knows when or for how long). Wouldn't this be the same kind of anecdotal "evidence" that we're NOT supposed to listen to? :eyebrow:

The 2nd link is to a news story from 1999. That's 10 years of changes in corporate policy!

Both links are useless to present as evidence of an alleged current policy.
 
#149
Papazita said:
You don't get what? The part about "no physical contact," or the part about "no physical contact?"

You don't touch the person. Period. What's unclear about that?
Click to expand...

i'm a little unclear about this too - it says on the one hand that there is to be no physical contact between employee and "suspect" and yet on the other hand it gives criteria for a properly conducted aprehension. how is this executed (the aprehension) without physical contact?
 
#155
cassanova said:
So I'm coming out of Wal Mart today and I see two of my friends. One of my friends was on the ground with 2 people on him. (Very much like a police take down.) They both were also both wearing Wal Mart name tags. Going against my better judgement I grabbed one of the goons that were on my friend and threw him off of him.

Long story short, the goon told me that my friend was suspected of stealing something and that when the police get there I was going to be arrested too. I was a bit confused by this, because they're not police and as far as I'm concerned they have no right touching anyone.

Any who, while in the office I was told that this Wal Mart has a hands on policy. If I understood correctly that means that they can tackle you and use force to prevent you from leaving with unpaid merchandise. So my dumb ass tells them "Well I have a hands on policy too, when I see two people attacking a friend of mine, I do what it takes to protect my friend."

The cop gets there, asks my friend to empty his pockets and guess what, he's got nothing on him. He explains what happened to the police. The cop later asked him if he would like to press charges. He said yes. So the two goons from Wal Mart were escorted out of the store in cuffs. It was quite nice to see actually.

What I'd like to know is who in the Hell do these corporations thing they are and where do they get off thinking they can use force on you? I can see if they are police officers and the suspect is combative, but I know this guy very well and he would never get physical with anyone. I really hope that he gets a huge settlement when he sues them for their actions. He's got a very nasty gash on his head from those 2 jerk offs tackling him.

Needless to say I am banned from this Wal Mart but thats ok with me.

End Rant.
Click to expand...

My local Wal-Mart could "try" enforcing that policy on me, I'm pretty sure that they wouldn't be too pleased with the result. :mad: Since I know that I'm a law abiding citizen, action like this by a store employee would be viewed (by me) as assault. Once someone assaults me or my family, all bets are off.
 
#157
NJL said:
once again, at what level do you work for WalMart...

i can't seem to understand how someone can seize or capture someone verbally..
Click to expand...

High enough of a level to know how to do my job, thank you. ;)

And if a person steps out in front of you, and one behind, and probably even a third, and they say they need to speak with you...would you consider yourself to have been apprehended? Or seized? Or caught?
 
#158
NJL said:
that doesn't seem like an apprehension at all. they have no control of the "suspect"...
Click to expand...

It works. If the person is innocent they will go happily to a backroom and wait for the police to arrive and clear them. It also protects the employees of Wal Mart from injury or libellous action. If someone has something to lose they could be come violent when they try to escape, if not they will probably agree with be escorted to an office.
 
#159
India_Sierra said:
It works. If the person is innocent they will go happily to a backroom and wait for the police to arrive and clear them. It also protects the employees of Wal Mart from injury or libellous action. If someone has something to lose they could be come violent when they try to escape, if not they will probably agree with be escorted to an office.
Click to expand...

No one goes "happily!" :p

And they don't stop someone without having absolute proof. IF the people are doing their jobs correctly, that is.
 
#160
Ever see a raccoon-eyed, teenage emo-goth trendy girl throw a screaming crying hissyfit about how "unfair" it is that she got caught stealing $100 worth of mascara?

Makes my day. :p

"But my parents let me do whatever I want!"
...and that's why you're in the back of a poilce car wearing handcuffs right now; what's your point?
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back