A Home Depot employee who was fired after he chased a man who had been vandalizing a vending machine is now suing Home Depot.
The lawsuit stated:
• Miller worked for Home Depot from March 13, 1995 to his termination Aug. 27, 2007. When terminated, he worked as manager for the Home Depot in Murfreesboro.
• When Miller arrived at work Aug. 20, 2007, the head cashier called to report a man struck a soft drink machine with a crowbar outside the building. From her tone of voice, Miller believed the cashier feared for her safety.
• Miller and assistant manager Robert Weiss saw two other employees detaining the suspect who was about 6 feet tall and weighed 180 pounds. When an employee asked for the cash taken from the machine, the suspect tossed the crowbar in a trash can and hurried away with the money. Two employees and Miller chased the suspect until they grabbed him.
• The manager counseled with the suspect, telling him he could stop using drugs and change his life.
He was not a customer of the store.
Murfreesboro Police took the suspect into custody. Police asked Miller for an affidavit for the arrest warrant. Miller obtained permission from the legal department to proceed with the prosecution.
• Later, Miller learned he was the subject of a company investigation. He was terminated Aug. 27.
Miller’s lawsuit stated he acted in concern for his employees, perceiving the suspect to be a threat to employees and customers. Under state law, Miller was justified to use reasonable force to protect employees and property.
His termination to protect others and arrest the suspect “jeopardizes clearly established public policies,” the lawsuit stated.
Gilley said Miller responded because the cashier feared the suspect with a crowbar.
“Rusty Miller instinctively has as we hope everyone would act when a human life is potentially in danger,” Gilley said. “In response, he was terminated.”
Miller offered to help the thief get help for a drug problem, his attorney said.
“How much more compassionate can you get?” Gilley said.
Attached to the lawsuit was the form Home Depot used to terminate Miller.
“Rusty pursued and detained a customer in the parking lot after the customer had broken into the vending machine outside the store,” the document stated. “Rusty’s actions are a violation of our company code of conduct — violation of asset protection policy.”
Kind of wonder why they stop you to look at your receipts if detaining you will get them fired. Poor Rusty.
Fired manager sues to get his job back [Murfreesboro Post] (Thanks, Jay!)
(Photo:IHP)
More From Consumerist
-
Home Depot Employee’s Insider Tips On Price-Matching And Discounts
-
Home Depot Employee Accused Of Making $26,000 Off Of Fake Returns
-
Home Depot Pushes Free Assembly That Isn’t All That Free
-
Should You Feel Guilty After Receiving Amazing Customer Service?
-
No, Best Buy Employee, I Won’t Come To Your House To Get My Stolen Racy Photos Back
Deserves being fired. I’m all for them chasing people at stores but I went through Home Depot training and almost worked there a couple years ago and they drill into your head not to do anything to them.
When I used to work at K-Mart when I was 16 we were able to chase the shoplifters. We used to push in carts and twice I remember watching a guy getting nailed by a cart who was trying to flee. The only time we ever got in trouble was because a guy tackled another guy into a parked car. This was probably around 1997.
@spamtasticus: At-Will Employment. Just as gay as No-Fault divorces, car accidents, and a shit load of other rights denying tactics masquerading as laws.
Im glad to hear he was fired. I hope he wastes his money on a lawsuit and looses.
No chase policies are in place so that you dont chase someone into a car and get a lawsuits on your hands.
No matter where you stand on this issue, it’s going to be interesting if Rusty should win the case, it goes to appeal, and he wins again. There would be an awful lot of other people out there fired for the same reason that would be getting in line to file a similar lawsuit.
I predict Home Depot will make a big settlement out of court to make sure this won’t happen.
Did the other two employees who chased down the guy also get fired?
All I can say is when I’m stopped by an employee to show my receipt, I’m definitely paraphrasing their legal department. “your actions are a violation of our company code of conduct — violation of asset protection policy.” Enuf said.
when the criminal ran away the danger to the employee was ended. lat the police handle the rest.
While any reasonable person would wish this plaintiff/hero well in getting either his job back,– or more realistically, a handsome settlement so that he can transition to another job (would you really want to go back after something like this ?), an important issue I would think and the company implies is the written company policy in the employee handbook and the like.
Despite acting like super-hero, under some circumstances , employee intervention could expose the company and even the super hero himself to possible civil liability. What if hero screwed up, or the alleged perp was simply having a seizure and was adjudicated as not guilty. What about video cameras ?
It’s one of these Catch 22s where you have to act or not act in an instant, Maybe “It’s not my job” and 911 is the way to go sometimes if the company policy says that’s the way it’s supposed to roll, especially when you are an “at will” (no contract) employee, which is most people. It ususlly says on the application you sign that you can be terminated with or with out cause with no explanation at any time. It doesn’t have to be because you are right. It doesn’t matter actually.
I am not lawyer or HR person. But, I know how the employment works in the REAL world (not Hollywood).
@bravo369: And just wait for that “shop lifter” to sue the company for being assaulted by the store employees. We need to stop protecting criminals from being able to sue for damages when they are injured when committing a crime. Once this happens then companies will be less likely to have stupid policies like this.
@Chris Vee: Uhh, most states have such a law. NJ shoplifting stature 2c:20-11 subsection e:
If they have probable cause, if if the shoplifter is injured (because of reasonable cause), the store is not liable.