MONEY MORAL DILEMMA. Should Vinnie chase the robbers?

englishmac

THFC wrote: »

Yes he should chase the robber if he wishes.

Not because his boss expects him too or regardless of what you are paid.

He could be seriously hurt on £6 an hour or £10 an hour, you don't know.

But it's not Vinnies job to catch thieves.

Too many people turn a blind eye or ignore wrong doing.

But if Vinnie want's and feels obliged to pursue, then good on him.

I myself detest crime, people who stand and do nothing to prevent it, and the courts who impose little sentences.

That's society today unfortunately and i am not an old fuddy duddy, i just respect people and property and treat them how i expect to be treated.

If i stole, i would expect to be punished, if not maybe i would think this is easy. Fact is i have more to lose by committing crime than i could ever gain and would never entertain the idea.

I also detest crime. I also respect people and property. It is not from cowardice or uncaring that I think Vinnie should not pursue. I know people who have been assaulted in similar circumstances and have received no justice. Also, the majority of employers, in retail especially, regard their employees as just a number. They did not employ Vinnie as a security guard, they have obviously not provided him with appropriate training and they have already taken potential losses into account with insurance cover and profit margins. You only have one life; don't risk it for someone else's bank balance, particularly when they don't appreciate it anyway.

King_Drax_I

A similar thing once happened to a friend of mine. He was standing in a queue when the robber ran past the queue. All it took was a surreptitious foot stuck out in the robber's path [My friend's foot? I'm not telling...;)], and the robber tripped and went sprawling. Put a serious crimp on his day

jaylo264

Vinnie probably won`t rise to the dizzy heights of supervisor unles he at least pretends to try to stop him.........

weegie.geek

jaylo264 wrote: »

Vinnie probably won`t rise to the dizzy heights of supervisor unles he at least pretends to try to stop him.........

Excellent, another 50p an hour and the responsibilities that come with being a supervisor? :rolleyes:

I'm sure Vinnie's welcome to the post.

panlane

It comes as no surprise to me that crime is so high when one reads the actively dismissive responses to this question. This did not even strike me as a dilemma until I read what most thought. I'd chase after the thief if I was just a customer in the store, let alone an employee (wage is immaterial, civic duty is all). Everybody is so worried about what might happen that they turn a blind eye to what is happening. Look around you and you'll see what that gets you: a criminal minority emboldened by perpetual appeasement from a cowed majority.

Critics will probably say that I haven't done this in practice or I haven't been really threatened by a weapon. I shan't go into the details of incidents but take it that I live by my word on this. Consider this: if the average member of society won't defend society's values then society doesn't hold those values, it merely pretends to. Seems that for a group of people built around a website dedicated to maximising the value of your property, you seem quite happy to have people undermine everyone's property rights. Shame on you.

johnmc

It's nothing to do with his job description or what he gets paid.

I've been here MANY times before and I can assure you all that if he chases and detains this individual he WILL be done for assault and wrongful arrest.

His rights as a citizen are that he can arrest only if he KNOWS an arrestible offence has been committed and that this person committed it.

Based on the evidence provided only his boss knows this. He can accompany his boss and assist him. He cannot "go it alone".

IMO he should get another job or join a decent Union.

Richard019

As someone who works in retail I'm quite intrigued by this.

As a 6'+ man and usually the highest ranking person working I always give myself or another big bloke (that's willing) the jobs near the doors or the most theivable things for the same reason Vinnie's boss did, deterrance.

The best way to stop a shoplifter is to make it so that they don't want to come into your store in the first place. If Vinnie isn't going to make any effort to stop the guy then that effect soon wears off as it gets round that they can do what they want. Since I changed employer my old workplace has seen theft more than quadruple whilst their other local stores have remained steady. A large part of that (so say the staff I still talk to) is because nobody is challenging them anymore.

Contrary to claims above, the majority of shop lifters are not armed, and very few have friends round the corner (that only tends to happen when it's "kids" stealing which in comparison to adult theft is far less of an issue than the press would have you believe). They want to be in and out as quickly as they can and with as little hassle as they can. What they (the majority) definately don't want is a scene creating that results in them having potential shoplifting charges upgraded to (attempted) murder. In 99% of cases if you catch them at it in the store they'll freely give you the stuff back and allow you to search them before they leave even when they out number you. This makes it virtually impossible for you to press charges against them and they know it. Although they're putting things down their shirt/trousers/into a bag/etc until they leave they can claim it was to get it to the tills more easily or other feeble excuses. If you're then on camera searching them then they have evidence that they haven't left with anything (if you knew they had something you'd have taken it then, if you didn't then how are you pressing charges). If they refuse to give the stuff back reasonable force can be used to get it back and then search them (with a witness of the same sex present if off camera). It's also worth noting, if you've kept the police onside on other matters it is very surprising what the police will back you up on as "reasonable force" providing the CCTV can be interpreted that way. I'm aware of an incident that saw an aquaintance of mine 'remove' a struggling teenager via several shelves, pillars and a door after he refused to leave when he was caught trying to steal booze cleared as reasonable force (force was only used after he was swung for the staff member and missed), and the lad's mate got a year inside for coming to help him and semi-landing one punch.

Now from experiance I know that even after they're off camera the vast majority don't want confrontation and will give you things back. However, this is where you would need to be careful. I believe, perhaps wrongly, that as soon as you leave the store you are liable to prosecution for assault with them able to take the "self-defence" line. The thinking being that their crime has been completed so you're no longer protecting yourself from a present threat.

I'd say there's not enough information given to say who's in the wrong or whether Vinnie should chase him or not.

If I were Vinnie I would be looking at the situation in more detail than is given. Firstly, has he gotten too far away to catch him anyway? Secondly, is it going to endanger somebody else if I go after him? If the answer to either of those is yes then there's no way he should do it.

If both of those are met then it's a matter of confidence. If Vinnie is happy enough to do it then yes he should go after him, chances are that if he sees someone coming after him he'll drop the stuff so he can get away. The criteria for being happy to do it vary from person to person. For example, at present I only have myself to worry about so I'm quite happy to chase people down the street to get stuff back and to do it by force if necessary. If I were seeing someone or had kids then I would be a lot less willing to put myself into the same positions. In the first instance it leaves them worried everytime I'm at work, and in the longer term if something does go wrong its not just me affected. (Part of that consideration is "How likely is he to go to the police?")

Of course the second a knife/gun/syringe is seen the chase is over and it's a police matter whether they're in the store or not.

As far as the boss telling him to stop him goes, it depends entirely on context. I've always operated a "if you're not prepared to do it yourself, don't expect your staff to do it for you" policy with any job. If the boss is stood nearby and making no effort to stop the guy then he's out of order. If he's making an effort but is too far away then it's a fair enough request (assuming all the previous conditions are met).



I was interested by the comment about a scene being made being bad PR for the store as I would say that's as far from the truth as you could possibly get. Other than at Xmas times when these things go up for my new employer I've only had to do it once or twice in nearly two years (I'm working in a far better area). The last time (the only time they've been seen and made it to the door) was getting on for a month ago, and customers are still coming up to me and asking whether he came back and telling me how good it is to see a company (I wasn't the only one involved) that actually cares about stopping them. Going from the amount that have asked me if it was me or someone else I'd say that from the 40 or 50 customers that saw it we've gained twice that again from word of mouth. Granted in the scheme of things it's a small amount, but if we get a reputation for dealing with them it expands on that.

lewt

i'd go for the trip up myself and if that didnt work leave it....

englishmac

panlane wrote: »

It comes as no surprise to me that crime is so high when one reads the actively dismissive responses to this question. This did not even strike me as a dilemma until I read what most thought. I'd chase after the thief if I was just a customer in the store, let alone an employee (wage is immaterial, civic duty is all). Everybody is so worried about what might happen that they turn a blind eye to what is happening. Look around you and you'll see what that gets you: a criminal minority emboldened by perpetual appeasement from a cowed majority.

Critics will probably say that I haven't done this in practice or I haven't been really threatened by a weapon. I shan't go into the details of incidents but take it that I live by my word on this. Consider this: if the average member of society won't defend society's values then society doesn't hold those values, it merely pretends to. Seems that for a group of people built around a website dedicated to maximising the value of your property, you seem quite happy to have people undermine everyone's property rights. Shame on you.

Gary Newlove is an example of an upright citizen standing up for society's values. Where did it get him? The result of Mr Newlove's actions may still be a minority outcome but it is an increasing concern. The website isn't dedicated to maximising the value of property but to preventing faceless organisations from taking us for a ride , thereby increasing our personal security and allowing us to live peaceful lives. When it comes to crime, I expect the police and the legal system to tackle the problem. That is what I pay a substantial proportion of my taxes for.

Scottie_24

Vinny would not be wise to run after the shoplifters, especially in todays society where some people carry weapons. Work is not worth getting injured for.

Scottie 24