Did anyone see the report where Autozone fired an employee for stopping an armed robbery in Va. with his own gun? Autozone spokesman said they have a zero tolerance for possessing guns in store! And to think of all the business I've given these idiots!
So he didn't get fired for stopping a robbery. He got fired for knowingly and willingly violating his employer's policies.
Big boy rules. If you play by them you don't get to whine about the outcome...
Big boy rules. If you play by them you don't get to whine about the outcome...
They said they fired him because he brought a firearm into the store. Did not matter that it was to protect his fellow employees and humans. There was an item on Fox news also. I sent them an email through their site recommending they had given him "The Employee Of The Year Award" instead of firing him. I also stated that O'rileys is just down the street from Autozone close to where I live, and I will be using them exclusively from now on.
No gun in the workplace--sounds like "The Roger Dale Stafford Rule to Protect Potential Murderers from Their Victims" clause of the "Corporate Rule Book for Expendable Employees", which is sub-titled as, "Why Our Corporate Dollars Are More Vaulable than the Lives of Our Employees".
You clearly completely missed the point of my post....therefore I don't think I'd want to work with you either. ;-)
I saw his interview on Fox's Greta show. He said that he is hoping to get a job as an armed security gaurd. She put the word out that any one near his home town willing to hire him could call her and she would get in touch with him. He did like working there. He had been there a year and had made friends with coworkers. He knew he had done the right thing.
If a multi billion dollar corporation knowingly allows employees on the clock to carry firearms, that corporation will be liable for anything that employee does with their gun while on the clock. If the employee has extra training and is employed as a security guard, then you can insure against that risk....but standard employees would not qualify for liability coverage for that risk. Not saying I agree, but that is the reality in which we all operate.
Similar threads
