Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28
  1. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #2  
    It really isn't a question of whether you think it's right or not. Sprint has a right to fire employees for breaking corporate policy. I think it's silly and unfair, but do they have the right? Yes.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  2. socoot1's Avatar
    Posts
    56 Posts
    Global Posts
    59 Global Posts
       #3  
    I don't have an opinion whether it's right or wrong.
  3. #4  
    Here's the issue. A security officer asked for help with a suspected shoplifter. The Sprint employees were not working at that moment. They assisted in getting the suspected shoplifter. If the suspect was caught with the merchandise and goes to court to sue Sprint or anyone else, the judge should fine the suspect and through the case out of court.
    We have gone to far in this country to protect and give the wrongdoer rights. We need to back up and stop this crap and make the wrongdoers accountable for any and all actions that come about. Am I saying that if the wrongdoer gets fatally injured that no one should be held accountable? No. But all this sue happy garbage needs to stop and people need to take responsibility for their own actions.

    Good job to the Sprint employees.
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  4. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    It really isn't a question of whether you think it's right or not. Sprint has a right to fire employees for breaking corporate policy. I think it's silly and unfair, but do they have the right? Yes.
    they have a very strong wrongful termination case.

    They were not acting on behalf of their employer -- they were not chasing after a theft from Sprint, they were on break, and not on Sprint property when the events began. They acted in response to the the semi-official request of an "official" -- the mall cop.

    Take it to a jury trial, sympathetic plaintiffs -- they could each get $250K in compensatory.

    If Sprint is smart, they settle asap.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  5. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    they have a very strong wrongful termination case.

    They were not acting on behalf of their employer -- they were not chasing after a theft from Sprint, they were on break, and not on Sprint property when the events began. They acted in response to the the semi-official request of an "official" -- the mall cop.

    Take it to a jury trial, sympathetic plaintiffs -- they could each get $250K in compensatory.

    If Sprint is smart, they settle asap.
    +1
    That is what the courts are for. When a "RIGHTdoer" is wronged and needs to be made "whole".
    And If I was the security guard, I would sue the shoplifter for the stress on my heart. lol
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  6. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by Finally Pre View Post
    Here's the issue. A security officer asked for help with a suspected shoplifter. The Sprint employees were not working at that moment. They assisted in getting the suspected shoplifter. If the suspect was caught with the merchandise and goes to court to sue Sprint or anyone else, the judge should fine the suspect and through the case out of court.
    We have gone to far in this country to protect and give the wrongdoer rights. We need to back up and stop this crap and make the wrongdoers accountable for any and all actions that come about. Am I saying that if the wrongdoer gets fatally injured that no one should be held accountable? No. But all this sue happy garbage needs to stop and people need to take responsibility for their own actions.

    Good job to the Sprint employees.
    I agree with 99% of this, except to mention that the Sprint employees were actually just on break - a part of being at work. Had they been off that day and just hanging out doing some shopping, I doubt we'd have heard about the incident because Sprint can't dictate what they do with their off time. Break time is still "at work" time.

    Being at work, Sprint has liabilities, and can be sued based on the actions of their employees.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  7. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    I agree with 99% of this, except to mention that the Sprint employees were actually just on break - a part of being at work. Had they been off that day and just hanging out doing some shopping, I doubt we'd have heard about the incident because Sprint can't dictate what they do with their off time. Break time is still "at work" time.

    Being at work, Sprint has liabilities, and can be sued based on the actions of their employees.
    And I also agree with that "1%"
    I only wish that the courts would just wake up and stop all this suing.
    I was in Ireland a fee years ago and went to the Cliffs of Mohr. There were 1-2 feet high slate slabs standing on end at the edge of the cliff with a sign that said do not cross or something to that effect. I asked why there was not a higher fence of some type. There Irishman said why, if someone were to cross over and get hurt, it is thier own problem.
    If this was in the US there would be a 20 foot fence and if someone climbed over they could sue and may win. There is something wrong here.
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  8. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by Finally Pre View Post
    If this was in the US there would be a 20 foot fence and if someone climbed over they could sue and may win. There is something wrong here.
    ..aaand don't forget the free healthcare and grief councelling they can receive.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  9. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    ..aaand don't forget the free healthcare and grief councelling they can receive.
    you sure no how to make me feel bad.

    According to my NoBAMA app, There are 996 days left.
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  10. #11  
    I keep seeing "wrongdoers". Everybody knows it's "evildoers"...eh heh heh heh heh. [/bush voice]
  11. #12  
    This is just Sprint being stupid. However, I have the solution.

    Apple has recently shown a tendency to get warrants, search houses, and sue people. These two guys showed a willingness to chase and track apple thieves. They were working right next to the apple store.

    They should go to work for that Apple store. they will fit right in, and are already trained for the next raid Apple wants to run on a journalist's house...
  12. Kedar's Avatar
    Posts
    994 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,071 Global Posts
    #13  
    Why is there a policy against chasing shoplifters?
    ...


    Edit: Ohhh

    Separately, the Houston Chronicle reported the company paid nearly $750,000 as part of a settlement to the family of a 30-year-old alleged shoplifter who died of a heart attack as employees tried to stop him. (The items he was accused of stealing: a package of diapers, a pair of sunglasses, a BB gun, and a package of BBs.)
    Liabilities. =/
  13. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    they have a very strong wrongful termination case.

    They were not acting on behalf of their employer -- they were not chasing after a theft from Sprint, they were on break, and not on Sprint property when the events began. They acted in response to the the semi-official request of an "official" -- the mall cop.

    Take it to a jury trial, sympathetic plaintiffs -- they could each get $250K in compensatory.

    If Sprint is smart, they settle asap.
    If they were on a scheduled 15 minute break it is a paid break. Therefore they are still on the Sprint clock and must abide by the Sprint rules. If it would have been their unpaid lunch break, they have a great case.
  14. ght
    ght is offline
    ght's Avatar
    Posts
    772 Posts
    Global Posts
    886 Global Posts
    #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedar View Post
    Why is there a policy against chasing shoplifters?
    ...


    Edit: Ohhh



    Liabilities. =/

    It makes me sick that criminals can sue for things like that. What is this country coming to? Good grief.
  15. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    I agree with 99% of this, except to mention that the Sprint employees were actually just on break - a part of being at work. Had they been off that day and just hanging out doing some shopping, I doubt we'd have heard about the incident because Sprint can't dictate what they do with their off time. Break time is still "at work" time.

    Being at work, Sprint has liabilities, and can be sued based on the actions of their employees.
    Understandable, but how 'bout this...

    They're on their 30 minute break, and decide to drive to the bank to pick up some of that "chedda"... an armed robber meets them inside & decides to wave a loaded gun at everyone in there, including the 2 men in question. One of those men carries a pistol with him daily [when not at work, of course, because his employer presumably has "policies" against such rights] that he has trained with for more than 15,000 rounds, and, within a second or two, he decides that today is the day that he puts it to use before somebody is possibly injured. He's so well trained & such a good shot that he's capable of dropping to the floor and shooting both the robber's hand & chest. The robber drops, the people scatter, the Sprint guy saved the day, while his friend is off running, too.

    Are the Sprint guys really still working??
  16. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #17  
    I think it simply comes down to:

    a) Even if they were on a break, they were still 'on duty'. They are still being paid. Sprint is paying these guys whether they or on the floor or on a break. Therefore, they're actively representing Sprint, and Sprint shares some liability for their actions.
    b) Sprint has the right to make these rules for their employees, and to enforce them.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  17. #18  
    they just need to go to work for apple. They will fit right in.
  18. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    I think it simply comes down to:

    a) Even if they were on a break, they were still 'on duty'. They are still being paid. Sprint is paying these guys whether they or on the floor or on a break. Therefore, they're actively representing Sprint, and Sprint shares some liability for their actions.
    b) Sprint has the right to make these rules for their employees, and to enforce them.
    'Tis an interesting concept, where corporate policy extends past corporate property...

    I must admit.
  19. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by grndslm View Post
    'Tis an interesting concept, where corporate policy extends past corporate property...

    I must admit.
    Really? It's not the property that's in question, it's the actions of their employees. What should Sprint do if one of their employees walks across the hall to another store, strips off all of their clothes, and dances the light fandango in front of a bunch of kids? Fire them, even though it wasn't on Sprint property?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions