seamusTX wrote:I have no way of knowing what the company policy on employees being assaulted is. I'll bet it doesn't recommend intervening, though.
Likely not. But I'd bet it doesn't prohibit intervention either.
The story says that the robber was not attacking the woman cashier. Mr. Beverly thought she was. IOW, he acted before fully evaluating the situation.
I don't think that's either fair or accurate. The story tells us that she screamed, and that
"The security tape showed the female co-worker struggling with the robber over the cash-register drawer."
So there was a scream and a physical altercation taking place. Now I'm not sure what you mean by "fully evaluating" the situation, but it sounds like he had reasonable grounds for drawing a conclusion in the heat of the moment that she was being assaulted. How much time should he have taken before acting? Should he have given up the advantage of surprise by announcing his presence and asking what was going on?
I'll rephrase what I wrote earlier: This firing sounds like bureaucratic excess; but it's what we get in a world where lawyers and risk-averse executives make the rules, and employees are expendable.
A conclusion with which I've already agreed.
).