|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 1, 2011, 05:58 PM | #1 |
Junior Member
Join Date: June 6, 2007
Posts: 7
|
R.Ph fired for legally carrying
Anybody hear about a pharmacist for the pharmacy America trusts getting fired? He supposedly was involved in a robbery attempt somewhere up north- I guess his company doesn't trust him anymore.
__________________
Pithy sayings will materialize when I feel inspired |
June 1, 2011, 06:46 PM | #2 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 3, 2006
Location: Brockport, NY
Posts: 3,716
|
This one? :
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/fired...ry?id=13705438 from the news article: Quote:
__________________
You are the bows from which your children as living arrows are sent forth. |
|
June 1, 2011, 06:56 PM | #3 |
Junior Member
Join Date: June 6, 2007
Posts: 7
|
That would be the one. I think I read in a different account how the same store had been robbed recently and the employees had asked for more security measures to be taken- and none had. As the saying goes- when seconds count the police are only minutes away. Hope it works out for him.
__________________
Pithy sayings will materialize when I feel inspired |
June 1, 2011, 07:19 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 29, 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO area
Posts: 4,040
|
He'll be hard pressed to get his job back. Assuming an "at will" employment state, if he violated the rules for employees (many places, if not most, have a "no weapons" policy), he was terminated for doing exactly that. That it was to prevent a robbery is immaterial; he broke the rules.
Unless and until penalties are levied upon companies that choose to leave employees defenseless and then provide zero security, this isn't likely to change. |
June 1, 2011, 07:52 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 9, 2009
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,560
|
My Wife works for a major pharmacy chain. She sometimes opens her store at 0:dark30, and sometimes close at ten, or eleven at night. Then she'll take the days reciepts to the night drop at the bank. Her chain has a strict NO FIREARMS POLICY. And of course she follows company policy. Except when she carries. We both figure this... It's more likely that you will be forgiven, than you will be given permission. And she must be alive to get terminated.
I'd support this guy in any way I could. IMO he did what was right for his family and himself. His employer is way down on that list. Jobs come and go you only get one life. |
June 1, 2011, 08:08 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 21, 2009
Location: West Central Missouri
Posts: 2,592
|
In one of the stories I read, it said the store (Walgreens) is following OSHA policy in prohibiting guns.
Never quite heard of that one before, but I guess anything is possible.
__________________
Inside Every Bright Idea Is The 50% Probability Of A Disaster Waiting To Happen. |
June 1, 2011, 08:22 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 28, 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,231
|
Well I guess the cat is out of the bag about Walgreens. I guess the robbers in Michigan will know that Walgreens has established a system to get them in and out of the store with the money fast!
__________________
Have a nice day at the range NRA Life Member |
June 1, 2011, 08:24 PM | #8 |
Member in memoriam
Join Date: April 26, 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,649
|
It's a lot easier to replace your job than your life.
__________________
No tyrant should ever be allowed to die of natural causes. |
June 1, 2011, 08:36 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: In the valley above the plain
Posts: 13,424
|
One of my family members is a pharmacist. One of his previous employers (a "big box store") had an "instant termination" policy for carrying a firearm on store property. And, the employee handbook threatened legal action, if the firearm was used on company property (even if preventing injury to employees or self). They claimed that store security (actually pretty good, and armed) was more than enough. ....But didn't escort anyone through the pitch black parking lot, to the distant employee parking area, in a bad part of town, after closing; even if they were making the night deposits at the bank (no armored car service in that area ).
After having to draw his weapon to stop a cashier from being harmed during a robbery, the store manager chose to "look the other way" on the no firearms policy. Some similar incidents around the country have gotten that company to change their policy to something more akin to "don't ask, don't tell; if you use it, we'll sue".
__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe. |
June 1, 2011, 08:45 PM | #10 |
Member
Join Date: September 13, 2010
Posts: 33
|
I used to work in Benton Harbor Michigan... I would never set foot in there without being armed.
That place makes Chicago look welcoming... |
June 1, 2011, 09:00 PM | #11 |
Junior Member
Join Date: June 6, 2007
Posts: 7
|
A lot of companies have a "total cooperation" policy when it comes to robberies.
Don't look them in the eyes. No sudden movements. Tell them what you are doing. "Yes sir, Mr Robber- may I carry these drugs out for you? Would you like all the money or just the paper? Have a nice day. Come back, now, y'hear?"
__________________
Pithy sayings will materialize when I feel inspired |
June 1, 2011, 10:09 PM | #12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 29, 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO area
Posts: 4,040
|
Quote:
Still, for the companies to disarm employees and then not provide security is willfully disregarding the well being of those who work for you. My wife is a pharmacist, and there's a reason she didn't go to Walgreens... they're pretty well known for treating employees poorly. They pay well, but starting pharmacists get the night shifts at the 24 hour pharmacies (which often end up in iffy neighborhoods). Better to work at some other store that closes at a decent hour. |
|
June 1, 2011, 10:38 PM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 4, 2009
Location: Frozen Tundra
Posts: 2,414
|
You know its funny because I have seen plenty of video on TV where the employee doesnt do anything but comply with the thief and still gets murdered.....
Some people dont get it, crimes like this arent just about moeny they are at times about power and you can comply all the way to the grave, even if the store isnt yours.. For me so long as I am within the law Im going to do my best to prevent the BG from putting me in the grave or at the minimum take some bad guys as company... I find no honor in loosening bowels in some corner... No offense but thats how I see it..
__________________
Molon Labe |
June 1, 2011, 11:01 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 14, 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 386
|
Job or no job he has still got his life. He done what he though was right and in the end he done the right thing. There are more jobs out there.
|
June 1, 2011, 11:26 PM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2009
Location: Boca Raton, FL
Posts: 1,902
|
I would venture a guess that any crook that robs a pharmacy is after one thing and one thing only: drugs, and perhaps any loose money lying around. But it is also a good guess that these are hopped up junkies that have no value to life. If we knew for sure that they would take the drugs/money and just leave, then let them have it. But hop heads are unpredictable and may just indiscriminately shoot someone for the kick of it.
In this particular instance, it is probably store policy for employees not to have guns because of the liability of collateral damage should a bystander/customer become shot or killed by a gunshot from the pharmacist will most likely open up a deep pocket for litigation and civil suits. If I were the pharmacist, I would have done exactly what he had done. My job is not worth my life. I can always search out another job while my wife and family have a husband, father, and the ability to maintain the family unit. Isn't this the basis for why we all carry?
__________________
45Gunner May the Schwartz Be With You. NRA Instructor NRA Life Member |
June 1, 2011, 11:32 PM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2009
Posts: 3,963
|
45Gunner has it exactly. It's a calculus between the liability of allowing employees to have firearms and the potential legal bills, and the cost of an employee.
|
June 2, 2011, 12:36 AM | #17 |
Member
Join Date: November 7, 2008
Location: WI
Posts: 34
|
Walgreens does in fact have a no firearms policy in store or in parking lot. Immediate termination is clearly stated.
Also, previous statements about "hand over whatever they want" is correct. That is the current policy at all the chains to my knowledge. I have not worked in the retail setting for some time but this was one of the reasons I don't. It can be pretty lonely when you're the only one there at 0300 in "sporting" areas. Like most policies I think these were devised by the insurance actuaries wherein the cost of whatever drugs (thousands) means little to a company of billions. Much cheaper than what harm an armed employee could do generating millions-magnitude lawsuits defending themselves. It is an interesting situation, balancing the self-defense rights of the employee with company liability + a unique situation where people will acquire something they really want with force. BTW, your average chain store doesn't have that much lying around to make robbery worth it. Last edited by Mr X; June 2, 2011 at 12:56 AM. |
June 2, 2011, 09:09 AM | #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 21, 2009
Location: West Central Missouri
Posts: 2,592
|
My grandfather used to call these places that were open 24 hours a "Stop and Rob."
I still have to agree the pharmacist did the right thing. I hope he has no problem getting another job.
__________________
Inside Every Bright Idea Is The 50% Probability Of A Disaster Waiting To Happen. |
June 2, 2011, 09:27 AM | #19 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,821
|
FWIW, here's my take: If your job has a "no firearms" policy, the simple question that you have to ask yourself is this: "Would I rather be caught with it, or without it?"
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
June 2, 2011, 09:54 AM | #20 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 29, 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO area
Posts: 4,040
|
Quote:
It forces a bit more introspection on the part of the criminal, and as always when dealing with criminals, the harder the nut you are to crack, the more likely they'll go find an easier mark. I'm not saying that companies are right in this kind of policy, I'm just saying that there's more to this equation than just giving the pharmacist a weapon. |
|
June 2, 2011, 12:48 PM | #21 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 12,717
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011 My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange |
|||
June 2, 2011, 12:58 PM | #22 |
Member
Join Date: November 7, 2008
Location: WI
Posts: 34
|
Tis a sticky question
When do the actions of the company/entity in question begin to build a case of culpability or liability if an employee is harmed in an event such as a robbery? You could do an entire law school semester on that topic and still have no clear answer. So, does the policy create that liability when the reasonable company would be expected to know the risks of its business? E.g. not providing for the safety of pharmacy employees where there is a recognized risk of robbery? Is the answer the enclosed glass box of some banks and gas stations? Hardly the open atmosphere national pharmacies would like. Fort Drug just isn't as welcoming... If employees can't have immediate means of self defense - then what? The give-it-away policies seem to hang their argument on the notion of a rational perpetrator - is that a reasonable expectation RE liability? Is there a "civil right" to expect safety from these situations in the workplace, especially from a national company? I'd like to hear some thoughts on those since my opinion in this matter is biased. |
June 2, 2011, 03:56 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 24, 2011
Posts: 730
|
double naught spy, you say there is no increase in robberies of the stores that acknowledge they have a no firearms policy???? really???
Then why have 10 of the last 10 pharmacy robberies in the Spokane, WA area, as reported on the TV new...ALL BEEN WALGREENS??????? (not all the same stores, but all have been Walgreens) |
June 2, 2011, 04:16 PM | #24 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 27, 2007
Posts: 5,261
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
http://www.amazon.com/Corporation-Pa.../dp/0743247442 So, lets say you the employee pull a gun and shoot a Goblin. Right or wrong there is the potential for a lawsuit. You are an agent for the Corporation and now the Corporation is liable. Lawsuits cost money, and since all Goblins have grieving relatives, any settlement will be big. Payouts decrease profits. So the Corporation teaches you to be passive, non resisting, will fire your butt if you do anything to hurt a Goblin, even if your survival is at stake. All you have to do is Google this and you will find plenty of times where employees saved their lives through deadly force and were fired. Why? Because it is the low cost solution. If a Goblin kills you, it is a law enforcement issue. The Corporation does not owe any one anything. They don’t even owe your family burial costs. They will send the Janitors in, clean off the blood and filth, and go back to making profits. Because that is what they do and that is what they are. It is immoral, but hey, they are psychopaths, what else did you expect?
__________________
If I'm not shooting, I'm reloading. |
||||
June 2, 2011, 04:39 PM | #25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 2006
Posts: 1,512
|
I think that if a corporation has rules that specificaly benefits an assailants crime against another person, the corporation should be held as an accessory. Its the same as an accomplice tying your hands imo.
|
Tags |
2nd amendment , assault , laws , robbery , self defense |
|
|