But that employee SHOULD have been fired. No stealing from the store. It's just a matter of poor ethics on the employees part. I would have fired him too.When I worked retail and was going through the training/orientation session, the store manager mentioned their zero tolerance policy and told the story of one employee who got fired after stealing a 75-cent pack of candy.
This assumes that when we watch an episode, we don't do so out of the morbid hope that Raymond will die an awful, horrendous death.Jellybeans aside, didn't we already see this in "Everybody Loves Raymond"? Frank was wrong, the floor manager was the grinch, and little eyes saw it all.
Whoops, don't misinterpret my smiley. I absolutely agree -- zero tolerance for employee theft. I just think it was really dumb of the employee to risk a job over pennies worth of candy. If you're gonna get fired from stealing from a hardware store, at least take a lawnmower or somethingBut that employee SHOULD have been fired. No stealing from the store. It's just a matter of poor ethics on the employees part. I would have fired him too.
or in other countries:Give him a slap on the wrist, THREATEN him, but actually pressing charges is just plain stupid over less than $2.
My mom did this for me when I was little, too. I'd get a cookie or piece of sandwich meat and she's just give the cashier the bag it was in. There was never really a problem with that.This reminds me of my time working for large retailer. I had people all the time eat grapes, pistachios, candy and other foods in store. They would then bring the cashier their remnants and expect them to add it to their bill.
I understand that grocers run on a razor thin margin, and that volume makes up for that. Stealing a $1 item can take several items to make up for the loss. Yes, stealing is stealing. Fine. Dandy.If the store has zero tolerance policy it is most likely due to this being a big problem at the store. If a police officer comes up to you and says "Hey we caught some one shoplifting, would you like to press charges?" I would say yes as well. Stealing is stealing.
Now sure you can get into the ramifications prosecuting or not, but thats another argument.
The officer was probably moonlighting.Fourthly, the officer questioned the man when he was off duty, which means that he didn't really have the legal authority to act as an officer (unless cops never truly go "off" duty?).
There's a difference though. Many stores have the same policy as the one you work in. It doesn't matter if someone puts a magazine inside their coat and looks like they're going to bolt out of the store. It's not stealing until they leave the premises with the items without paying for them. If the potential thief is still in the store, they haven't stolen anything (yet). Same goes for clothes, shoes, books, etc. Then, once the person has left the store, he has "stolen" the items. At that point, your employer doesn't want you to chase after anyone because of safety and liability concerns. You can do it if you want, but it's under your own terms, and you're doing this against store policy.Where I work, you can walk over the the magazine rack, pick up a magazine, and walk out the front door. no one can stop you (company policy). They can question you, if you don't have a receipt and no one charged you, you can get in trouble, but if you just deny deny deny deny, the customer is always right..