Posted on Sep 21, 2015
Can You Believe This? The Utah Supreme Court says you don’t have to take a bullet for your company.
4.5K
32
15
3
3
0
Sometimes a company policy has to be ignored. This is one of those situations.
SALT LAKE CITY — In a split ruling, the Utah Supreme Court sided with a group of Wal-Mart workers who were fired for exercising self-defense when confronting an armed shoplifter.
The case stems from an incident in January 2011, when six workers were fired after they fought with a shoplifter who pulled a gun on them inside the Layton Wal-Mart. The company had claimed the employees violated Wal-Mart’s policy of disengaging, withdrawing and alerting authorities.
During a hearing last year, Utah Supreme Court Justice Christine Durham bluntly asked if an employer should be able to fire somebody “for refusing to take a bullet for the company?”
http://fox13now.com/2015/09/18/the-utah-supreme-court-says-you-dont-have-to-take-a-bullet-for-your-company/
SALT LAKE CITY — In a split ruling, the Utah Supreme Court sided with a group of Wal-Mart workers who were fired for exercising self-defense when confronting an armed shoplifter.
The case stems from an incident in January 2011, when six workers were fired after they fought with a shoplifter who pulled a gun on them inside the Layton Wal-Mart. The company had claimed the employees violated Wal-Mart’s policy of disengaging, withdrawing and alerting authorities.
During a hearing last year, Utah Supreme Court Justice Christine Durham bluntly asked if an employer should be able to fire somebody “for refusing to take a bullet for the company?”
http://fox13now.com/2015/09/18/the-utah-supreme-court-says-you-dont-have-to-take-a-bullet-for-your-company/
Walmart
Policy
Supreme Court
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 9
6
6
0
Sounds like a good opinon by the judge. Amazing what common sense can accomplish.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
It would have to depend on the situation. It seems like a mismanagement issue to me. If the policy is to disengage, withdraw, and alert authorities, it is for the sake of safety of employees. If the situation allowed for a struggle to overpower the gunman, hooray for the employees who went above and beyond to do that. That's not a fireable offense.
The Utah Supreme Court in my humble opinion is right on the money on this one.
The Utah Supreme Court in my humble opinion is right on the money on this one.
(4)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
Me too SSG (Join to see). It may have been a case of self defense since the crook had a weapon. If I thought I was going to be shot, I would do anything to prevent that from happening, rules or not.
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google