WalMart redux

Suggest you read this:

formatting link
at example 2.

Reply to
Wes Stewart
Loading thread data ...

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 23:34:50 -0600, with neither quill nor qualm, "Morris Dovey" quickly quoth:

Although that may be the exact legal definition, there is no such tight communication in a large corporation such as Wally World. And unless the corporation approves of and encourages this kind of stunt, no action should be taken against them. The responsibility should lie with the perps, not the companies.

Rightio!

What, you feel that encouraging bad lawsuits should be praised? Encouraging a change in corporate policy may be in order, though.

?
Reply to
Larry Jaques

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 07:39:26 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, Lew Hodgett quickly quoth:

Did Brown mean himself or was he referring to the contractor who hired the guy who screwed up? There's a BIG difference.

Reply to
Larry Jaques

Hmmmm.......the story could fit the perfromance profile of our erstwhile FEMA director, good 'ole "Brownie" .........

Mutt

Lew Hodgett wrote:

Reply to
Pig

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 00:15:51 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, Fly-by-Night CC quickly quoth:

But he was on vacation and may have been less well dressed than he might have been for work. The reports didn't say and there were no photos that I saw.

Right, picture ID and a business card with his name on it is usually good enough for all places except banks. The clerk/mgr really hosed it this time.

Hey, since torture isn't legal, what say we export some Hormel plants to Iraq. Unused space on the processing floor could be used to house rebels.

Reply to
Larry Jaques

WW has been accused of racism often. If it has ever been proven, it would make a case easy. I'm sure many lawyers will want to take a snipe at them just for fun though.

Reply to
Edwin Pawlowski

| What, you feel that encouraging bad lawsuits should be praised? | Encouraging a change in corporate policy may be in order, though.

Not at all what I said. I recognize that there are people in this world for whom "because I can" is sufficient justification for anything they might want to do. As authority figures in a business setting (managers), these are the people who demand limitless unpaid overtime and sexual favors, they're the gropers, the defective merchandise recyclers, the bait and switch merchants, and the customer abusers. In a less legalistic society, they'd probably end up beaten by one of their victims or the victim's family. In our society the only recourse that minimizes further victimization is through the courts.

I'm not sure that fairness and justice are always best served by our courts; but that's what we have to work with. If all you have is a hammer, then that's how you drive screws. :-(

When one of these low-life types is made an authority figure (manager), it is the result of a decision made by someone within the organization who already carries more authority (a higher level manager, an officer, or a director). In our society we associate freedom to choose (and especially to make the choices that constitute the exercise of authority) and responsibility very tightly - as if they were two sides of a single coin. We have also granted "personhood" to commercial entities, in order to encompass them within a legal framework originally designed and evolved for individual persons.

When a manager commits a misdeed in the corporate context, it is as if the corporation comitted the misdeed. Any attempt to separate the manager's responsibility from the corporate responsibility would be like telling a traffic cop: "Honest, officer, I wasn't speeding - it was my right foot's fault. I was just along for the ride." To finish the analogy, a corporation is a person with many feet.

|| Still, Wal-Mart || management issued a false felony accusation (is that libel?) and || the Tampa PD fielded an inadequately trained/screened officer who || preempted judicial powers by assuming guilt without evidence and || spoke falsely of that guilt in a public setting (as an official || representative of the City of Tampa). | | ?

"?" what? The felony allegation on the part of the W-M manager - or the official status of the cop who presumed (and vocalized his presumptions) that an innocent man was guilty?

-- Morris Dovey DeSoto Solar DeSoto, Iowa USA

formatting link

Reply to
Morris Dovey

Retailers don't do that reporting. It's a banking function.

Reply to
Dhakala

I have to agree. I don't think the article gives the entire story.

As a small business owner, for an order of this size, I would have required that everything related to the purchase was prearranged and approved, including who the authorized person would be that would be picking up the order. It looks like many previous orders were transacted and in this instance the HR manager was a new face. I suspect this had a major impact on what transpired.

Reply to
no(SPAM)vasys

You're missing my point here Charles. While it is true that most Walmart customers buy via check, it is highly unusual for a *corporation* to issue a check to an individual to go purchase something. Corporations just don't work that way. When I buy something for work, I do it in one of three ways, 1) Tell the admin what I want and she handles all the appropriate orders and paperwork. :-) That's my preferred method, but sometimes circumstances like time or other issues don't let me use that method. 2) Go through one of our buyers who will issue a purchase order and obtain the item or 3) Use a company-issued AMEX card, purchase the item then turn in a receipt for reimbursement. There are no cases of which I am aware that people have actually gotten company checks prior to making a purchase for the purpose of that purchase.

I'm not [by any stretch] trying to make excuses for Walmart here. They bungled this pretty badly. However, I do believe that the circumstances indicated were certainly unusual enough that it is not strange that this situation caused the manager to be suspicious. Especially since it would have been his backside in a sling if he had taken such a large amount and had it truly be a fraudulent transaction. Obviously none of us can see into his thoughts or heart, but I certainly wouldn't go crying racism because of this incident -- the same kind of action could have been taken toward a company employee of any race. Where the manager bungled this was by being so quick to call in the police, it almost smacks of overzealousness with the idea of helping the police capture some notorious criminal rather than insisting that the HR manager return with appropriate company ID.

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Reply to
Mark & Juanita

Well, if you get a more complete view of the story, it turns out the woman who normally does this particular type of errand, in exactly the same manner, was elsewhere that day. In other words, your idea of who EVERY corporation MUST do something doesn't hold water.

Reply to
Charles Self

In general, hell yes! Of course there are bigoted people in all classes. But having grown up in the south and then lived in Chicago and in L.A., I can assure you that the percentage of bigoted individuals goes up as their income and education goes down.

Reply to
Larry Blanchard

Has anyone ever considered the morons at wal-mart WILL NOT allow a store to accept a PO. Means the store has to mail to corp office , notice that it was not in the normal deposit order. The brains in bentonvill are the ones who screwed this up. They want cash or check. And for the local store not to know who their good loyal customers are is un excusable. And I don't mean the $100 customer. I mean the people who spend 4-5 figure amounts. Are these not the customer you want to protect. Hell they may even want to kiss their ass. Also if the mgr was a thinking man he would maybe have sent someone over to gaf and checked the story out themselves. Hell he had two hrs to screw this up and he took all two hrs. Also do you think a thief would stand there for two hrs. Hell he would grab what was on the counter and took off.But this guy wanted the COMPANY check back or the gift cards. Sounds like you people defending wal-mart would rather have the manager for an employee instead of the gaf employee. Also guess the employees are happy now that they do not have to go to wal-mart. Now how much did wally and the gang loose? I am sure those of you supporting wal-mart will spend a few extra dollars to help the bottom line.

Reply to
O D

On Sun, 4 Dec 2005 13:02:58 -0600, with neither quill nor qualm, "Morris Dovey" quickly quoth:

So is it better to sue for many of the funds the corporation owns or is it better to force the corporation to rid itself of these idiots? The former increases costs paid by you and me.

OK, I see what you're saying. (Are you a lawyer, perchance?) I thought you meant that the management made a public statement regarding the guy. So, do you want to see a high-digit lawsuit against Tampa for some potentially bigoted/idiot cop's antics? Or would you rather see him (and his fellow officers) better trained and/or in another line of work?

Reply to
Larry Jaques

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 20:28:46 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, "Charles Self" quickly quoth:

So US Senators (like Byrd) are/were low-paid, eh? Bigotry has no boundaries when it comes to pay. I know lots of poor non-bigots and have read about bigoted billionaires. P.S: Your statement there might be construed to have a bit of bias, too. Careful.

Oh, bullshit, Morris. :) A few million $ here and there doesn't necessarily change a thing in a large company. A court settlement llowing them to offer classes for their employees in lieu of large fines might, though. It would probably affect the employees more than the upper managerial structure.

Agreed.

======================================================== TANSTAAFL: There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

formatting link
Gourmet Web Applications ==========================

Reply to
Larry Jaques

| On Sun, 4 Dec 2005 13:02:58 -0600, with neither quill nor qualm, | "Morris Dovey" quickly quoth: | || When a manager commits a misdeed in the corporate context, it is || as if the corporation comitted the misdeed. Any attempt to || separate the manager's responsibility from the corporate || responsibility would be like telling a traffic cop: "Honest, || officer, I wasn't speeding - it was my right foot's fault. I was || just along for the ride." To finish the analogy, a corporation is || a person with many feet. | | So is it better to sue for many of the funds the corporation owns | or is it better to force the corporation to rid itself of these | idiots? The former increases costs paid by you and me.

This is a question each of us needs to consider. For myself alone: I am willing to pay a share of the cost for those I care about to live in a free, fair, and just society - and you might be a bit surprised at the number of people I care about - and by just how much I happen to care.

|| "?" what? The felony allegation on the part of the W-M manager - or || the official status of the cop who presumed (and vocalized his || presumptions) that an innocent man was guilty? | | OK, I see what you're saying. (Are you a lawyer, perchance?) I | thought you meant that the management made a public statement | regarding the guy. So, do you want to see a high-digit lawsuit | against Tampa for some potentially bigoted/idiot cop's antics? Or | would you rather see him (and his fellow officers) better trained | and/or in another line of work?

IANAL. I'm a mathematician/(hardware/software)geek/full-time woodworker. If you visit the link below you can learn more about me than you ever wanted to know.

What would /I/ like? Assuming that the newspaper account was accurate:

I'd like Wal-Mart to put their money where their mouth is: I'd like for them to initiate what IBMers call "charm school" for managers - where, in addition to the mechanics of running a department or a whole store, managers are trained in how to be polite and diplomatic with even the most difficult of customers. I'd like to see Wal-Mart demote managers who can't "get it" to jobs on the loading dock, where their opportunity to abuse customers is minimized. I'd like to see one of Wal-Mart's top execs, together with the errant manager visit Mr Pitts at his GAF office and offer their apologies in person, and explain to him the steps that are being taken to prevent similar mistreatment of customers ever again at any Wal-Mart store.

I'd like for the cop in question to spend an hour with the top person in the Tampa PD, and then an hour with the Mayor - getting an earful of the damage that can be done by just the _perception_ of ethnic discrimination. Then I'd like him to go on unpaid leave long enough to visit the GAF offices and apologize to Mr Pitts in the presence of Mr Pitts' boss and co-workers. Then I'd like him returned to duty on probation with a refresher course in community relations at the police academy and a public service requirement to spend a minimum of an hour at each of the Tampa schools working with students/teachers to eliminate/reduce ethnic tensions (and Tampa does have 'em!). After these requirements have been satisfactorily completed, I'd like to see him fully reinstated.

There are significant costs involved. My take is that positive corrective action is more valuable than monetary penalties. I'm not interested in seeing Mr Pitts become wealthy at the expense of his friends and neighbors, and no amount of money can undo what he was put through. I'd rather that he, his associates at GAF, and his community see him as a catalyst for positive change in their world.

I have reason to believe that the folks who run Wal-Mart have become so enraptured by financial success that they've lost sight of the need for their enterprise to be a good corporate citizen and to participate constructively in the broader community. Perhaps putting a time limit on getting all management employees through "charm school" might help them to re-focus a bit.

I know this isn't terribly well considered and organized, but it's the best I could do off the top of my head.

Now - aren't you glad you asked? :-)

-- Morris Dovey

formatting link

Reply to
Morris Dovey

| Oh, bullshit, Morris. :) A few million $ here and there doesn't

*HEY!* That's not me you're responding to...

-- Morris Dovey DeSoto Solar DeSoto, Iowa USA

formatting link

Reply to
Morris Dovey

Gee Larry, seems like you and I are both guilty of the same horse@#$% reasoning. :-) Suspect we'd have gotten whole-hearted buy-in had either of us used the name Trent Lott. :-)

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Reply to
Mark & Juanita

Are you yankin' my chain, Larry-w/o-C? Just in case you're not and you were out the day Evelyn Wood covered comprehension... ;) It wasn't he who was on vacation, it was the white lady who normally picked up the gift cards who was sunning in Barbados:

"The company, which had $1.6 billion in revenue last year, had been spending about $50,000 a year on Wal-Mart gift cards and never had a problem when it sent another employee -- a white, female administrator who according to The St. Petersburg Times was on vacation that day -- to pick them up."

Reply to
Fly-by-Night CC

Oh yeah!?! Strom Thurman. So there.

Reply to
Fly-by-Night CC

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.