Autozone Now Anti Gun!

[PegLeg45]

You guys are knee jerking on this becuase of the gun.  Think about this from strickly a employers point of view.   if a robbery happens, you are insured for that.   if something bad happens to a employee during said robbery, you are insured for that.  Employee pulls a gun, shoots bad guy and hits kid standing behind them, you are not insured for that.   employee has a nd and hits some one/thing, comp pays, then comes after you for it.     reality is, if they are on the clock, you own anything they do.  Lets just say one of your workers takes thier work car to lunch, they have a few beers, hit some one on the way back.   now this should be on them, but its not, its on you.   thats how the world works, sucks, but its life.

Yes.
That aspect of it is understood, and is a valid point.
But, with an absolute "zero tolerance" policy in place versus a "we'll weigh each circumstance as it happens because we are all adults with brains" type policy then the good guy loses and the company loses a guy that seems like a stand-up type person.

All I'm saying is that the zero tolerance policy ties the hands, making firing absolute, instead of allowing the manager to weigh the pros/cons of what occurred and saying, "Well, that could have ended badly for both you and the company liability-wise......Even though everything worked out this time, DON'T DO IT AGAIN. This time, you'll be wrote up (but not fired) for the infraction. Next time, if there is a next time, dial 911."

[Solus]

TAB, let me be sure I understand what you are saying.

You think that the No-Guns Policy is valid but that the guy did the right thing by getting  his gun and going back in the store knowingly violating the no gun policy?   He just has to take the consequences of losing his job?

[Jrlobo]

So, was the man "on duty" when he re-entered the store with his gun? Or, was he a private citizen because he had left the premises and should no longer be considered as "on duty"? So, a lawyer could argue that he "fled" the store and therefore technically no longer was an employee on duty at that point. His return was not as an employee, but as a private armed citizen who broke up an armed robbery attempt and saved the life (perhaps) of a fellow citizen. If Autozone has a lick of sense, they would re-evaluate this case and declare that since he fled the store, he no longer was considered an employee on duty and their ZT policy no longer applied as he was not re-entering the store to perform the company's work. Autozone has an opportunity to do the right thing here. Then again, they could be like TAB and say TS.

[TAB]

We don't have enough details to know what happen.   I will say this, if he was in a autozone shirt and in the store... It does not matter if he was on the clock or not.  Just like a guy driving home in a company car and hitting some one.  Yeah, he is off the clock, but you are still going to pay.

[Jrlobo]

So TAB, the next time he should take his shirt off? Hope your company doesn't provide underwear because in the same situation you die.

[Sponsor]

[TAB]

No my point is, if your a employee and  and you do something wrong at work/ on your way to/ from   your employer is going to eat it.   thats reality, if you don't beleave me ask some one in your HR department.

[fightingquaker13]

So, was the man "on duty" when he re-entered the store with his gun? Or, was he a private citizen because he had left the premises and should no longer be considered as "on duty"? So, a lawyer could argue that he "fled" the store and therefore technically no longer was an employee on duty at that point. His return was not as an employee, but as a private armed citizen who broke up an armed robbery attempt and saved the life (perhaps) of a fellow citizen. If Autozone has a lick of sense, they would re-evaluate this case and declare that since he fled the store, he no longer was considered an employee on duty and their ZT policy no longer applied as he was not re-entering the store to perform the company's work. Autozone has an opportunity to do the right thing here. Then again, they could be like TAB and say TS.

To quote Marshall, from "How I Met Your Mother" LAWYERED!  Plus 10 on that one. And the good part about is that everyonne wins.

[kmitch200]

You guys are knee jerking on this becuase of the gun.  Think about this from strickly a employers point of view.   if a robbery happens, you are insured for that.   if something bad happens to a employee during said robbery, you are insured for that.  Employee pulls a gun, shoots bad guy and hits kid standing behind them, you are not insured for that.   employee has a nd and hits some one/thing, comp pays, then comes after you for it.     reality is, if they are on the clock, you own anything they do.  Lets just say one of your workers takes thier work car to lunch, they have a few beers, hit some one on the way back.  now this should be on them, but its not, its on you. thats how the world works, sucks, but its life.

You know this is a GUN FORUM right?
Are you saying that if one or both employees had their knees or brains blown out, thats better because 'they're insured for that'? 

It seems most times things like this happen, you can't wrap your mind around people actually using guns properly in defense of themselves or others.
Not everyone lives in the liberal utopia of the Land of Fruits & Nuts that is poisoning your mind.  (Thank you God!)

No my point is, if your a employee and  and you do something wrong at work/ on your way to/ from   your employer is going to eat it.   thats reality, if you don't beleave me ask some one in your HR department.

Bullshit.
That may be CA law but luckily for eveyone else is the US, those laws don't cross CA boundries.

[TAB]

Happens every where.  Ask your hr guys if you don't beleave me.

[tombogan03884]

You know this is a GUN FORUM right?
Are you saying that if one or both employees had their knees or brains blown out, thats better because 'they're insured for that'? 

It seems most times things like this happen, you can't wrap your mind around people actually using guns properly in defense of themselves or others.
Not everyone lives in the liberal utopia of the Land of Fruits & Nuts that is poisoning your mind.  (Thank you God!)

Bullshit.
That may be CA law but luckily for eveyone else is the US, those laws don't cross CA boundries.

It's TAB . He never supports an individual over an organization.