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
@DrGirlfriend: It would have been a good opportunity to have a meeting and explain some of the things that could have gone wrong when they decided to chase this guy down. I guess it’s one of those zero-tolerance-you-never-ever-do-this type of rules.
miller is a hero. pure and simple. he should not be penalized for chasing a crook down.
I noted that they fired due to asset protection.
Hmmm, guessing the asset isn’t their “valuable” employee… Nor does it seem that the asset was the funds in the vending machine.
Rather, asset protection means covering their own asses.
@Buran: I don’t think you’re going to get a corporation the size of Home Depot to create/revise policy based on the assumption that the police are useless.
@CarnageSIS: That’s a good point. Is Home Depot’s policy to let them go as soon as they start to run or only once they’ve made it out the store?
@Rectilinear Propagation: Yep, just like at Northern Illinois University (six minutes for the police to arrive: 5 dead, 16 wounded), or Columbine (13 murdered in 16 minutes), Luby’s Cafeteria (23 dead), Kirkwood (“the police officer was killed immediately when the attack started. People cowered or were reduced to futilely throwing chairs at the killer.” Oops, we didn’t think of that one, did we?)
“In October 1997, after a shooter had killed two students at a high school in Pearl, Miss., assistant principal Joel Myrick retrieved a gun from his car and immobilized him until the police arrived. An April 1998 school-related shooting in Edinboro, Pa., which left a teacher dead, was stopped by nearby restaurant owner James Strand, who pointed a shotgun at the shooter as he was reloading his gun. The police did not arrive until eleven minutes later.”
Maybe we should just all carry a chair around, just in case. That’ll work … until someone is fatally injured by a chair.
@DikembeMeiztombo: Well there is the Good Samaritan law ([en.wikipedia.org]) but it’s not quite the same thing.
Calling the police is useless. They won’t even bother to show up in many cases, it is impossible to track down a shoplifter or a small break-in.
My wife knows a mother from preschool, whose car got completely cleaned of all the high-end electronics right in front of a very busy Walmart when she was shopping. I bet the bypassing Walmart cart movers did not move a finger precisely because of the “asset protection”.
I don’t understand how the guy was a threat to employees, but ok. Let’s say that was the case because we weren’t there. But then the guy ran away and had already ditched the potential weapon, the crowbar. Why would he chase the guy? As an aside, the guy wasn’t even vandalizing HD property (I assume) since it was (probably) a Coca-Cola/Pepsi/Lay’s/fill-in-the-blank machine outside. Once upon a time I worked in retail and we were always told not to chase shoplifters. Although, again, this person wasn’t an HD shoplifter. Someone should’ve snapped a pic with a phone camera everyone seems to have these days and turned it in when the cops showed up.
@moviemoron: no, no, haven’t you heard? he’ll stick to petty crime.
@dorkins: We should sue the pants off of the assistant principal Joel Myrick and the restaurant owner James Strand. You can’t really fire a restaurant owner, but you can bulldoze him.
@chemmy: Nice!
@Rectilinear Propagation: I think the perp is supposed to call, “Olly olly oxen free” before you can not give chase.
@Kilotonne: They’re probably in jail as we speak.
Can’t say for sure, but I’ve seen plenty of really good HD managers fired for reasons other than what they finally pin on you. The regional manager maybe didn’t like this guy…. he may have made too much money…. for what ever reason, they were looking for an excuse to fire him, and they found one.
Let this be a lesson to everyone: The next time Home Depot asks to see your receipt, and you don’t want to show it to them, just tell the door checker that you’re shop lifting, and if they attempt to detain you, they will most assuredly get fired for violating Home Depot policy. Way easier than arguing over privacy concerns, or being treated like a criminal.
@Rectilinear Propagation: “I guess it’s one of those zero-tolerance-you-never-ever-do-this type of rules.”
I’ve worked retail for many years, and yes, this is one of those zero-tolerance rules. Usually managers are given more extensive loss prevention training and are required to sign off on the policies. “Don’t chase the crooks” is the most common rule in every place I’ve ever worked, and every employee is made aware of it, no matter what their position might be.
The company’s POV is that “you are worth more to us than the stuff or money being stolen”. It sounds all warm and fuzzy, but it’s dollars-and-cents reality. Those 14 cases of beer the thief is loading into the car are worth a lot less than the settlement your family is going to get when he shoots you in the head.
Couldn’t they have just put a written reprimand in his file and told him not to do that anymore?
@dorkins: I’m not sure why you responded to that comment with details from campus shootings. Are you arguing that there should be a law requiring citizens to stop criminals?
I’ve worked in retail, and management forbids you to do this. We were always told to never chase after people, even if they just robbed the place.
@Rectilinear Propagation: Wait, you were responding to the “that’s why we have police” part of the comment.
@Rectilinear Propagation: No, no, you’re obviously a bleeding-heart crybaby. Stopping them doesn’t do any good, we need a law that you are required to shoot them on sight.
No one here has ever seen Spider-Man? Standing by and saying “I missed the part where that’s my problem” is what got Uncle Ben killed.
This HD worker should get a freakin’ medal and the keys to the city for stopping a criminal from perhaps doing worse to someone else later.
Is there an embargo (or a price hike) on commas that I’m not aware of?
The title of this story sure would benefit from 2 well-placed commas.
@CumaeanSibyl: A reprimand??? That wouldn’t show that they’re tough on … er … ignoring crime. Or on people who are tough on crime.
@ludwigk: Would’t it be funny if everyone just started running out of Home Depot without paying?
@savvy9999: Aw, Spider-Man was just a movie. That stuff doesn’t apply in real life.
@BrianH: “Is there an embargo (or a price hike) on commas that I’m not aware of?”
They’ve all been stolen from Home Depot in the last month.
@dorkins: Yes. I’m pretty damn sure it is.
Good luck to him.
@jeff303: Ah. That’s the one. I think.
Damn right he got fired. Everyone knows you don’t chase down or detain suspected shoplifters. The potential lawsuits it opens you up to far outweigh a bag of quarters smashed out of a vending machine. The guy’s actions, as noble as they may have been, put his company at risk legaly. End of story.
$1.5 Mil is BS. He is gouging Home Depot even though he clearly defied policy.
I have to say, the firing here is just. The manager’s own case simply doesn’t justify his claimed concern for his or his employee’s safety. It was fine for him to respond initially, but if the company has a policy that insists employees not put themselves in danger in aprehending shoplifters, he clearly violated it. As a manager, he needs to be held to a higher standard of conduct, so I can see why they opted against a reprimand.
Look, these policies do protect employees. And for all the cynicism big corporates justly inspire, I actually think they mean it here when they say they are concerned for their employees safety. That it is in their financial interest to be concerned for their safety doesn’t hurt, I’ll grant, but I do think they generally mean it. This manager broke he rule he surely was well informed about, and there doesn’t seem to be any valid concern for him to have. I won’t cry if Home Depot settles with him for whatever it’d cost to defend themselves against the suit. Its not like this is a bad guy, but he did break company regulations and its reasonable to get fired for that.
@dorkins: Yeah, it’s too bad Home Depot can’t possibly do anything to deter crime, they just have to watch everyone steal and not do anything.
I mean, it’s not like they could, I don’t know, hire an off-duty cop to stand at the exit and, you know, arrest people who commit crimes. That would clearly be impossible. I mean, it’s certainly not the case at any large store I’ve been to that uniformed officers were there.
When I worked at a popular chain convenience store in college, we certainly never did anything like that on busy weekend nights, because all of us clerks were really really eager to jump in front of dudes who were stealing 40s of malt liquor. Good times, good times. And I was sooooo excited to be like “this serious risk of bodily harm is TOTALLY worth it to me because I’m an American hero! I can’t believe they’re paying me a whole $4.35 per hour to be able to participate in vigilante justice! U-S-A! U-S-A!”
Why didn’t the guy just call the police and be done with it? The vending machine probably didn’t even belong to Home Depot.
Sorry folks, but this guy was taking a huge, unreasonable risk with his own life and those of his employees by chasing down and detaining the suspect, here. There’s a reason that the usual corporate line when it comes to these situations is “do not attempt to apprehend”. Just last year, I saw a person get killed — no exaggeration — as a result of retail store employees chasing a thief.
Is the Home Depot manager a good guy? Sounds like he probably is. Was he using good judgment in this situation? By doing anything but getting the guy away from the store, the customers and the employees, and then calling the cops, no. He absolutely was not.
After twelve years at the company, the manager should have known better than to endanger himself and his employees. If the suspect had seriously injured or killed him or one of his employees, you can bet the lawsuit on Home Depot’s hands would be for a hell of a lot more than $1.5 million.
I hate, hate, HATE Home Depot, but they’re in the right here.
@Fidel on the Roof: It’s actually $2.5 million compensatory if he doesn’t get his job back, $1.5 million if he does, and $5 million punitive either way. His wife is asking for $600,000 for, uh, “damages because of her husband’s loss.”
Wonder how most of the “this guy totally deserves a medal” crowd feel about frivolous lawsuits and the people who bring them…
If you are an HD employee, the only reasonable thing to do is help the shoplifter load his truck.
B: “Remember, the shoplifter has the same rights as the customers who refuse to show their receipt upon leaving the store.”
If the shopkeeper sees a thief take the merchandise off the shelf, and then out of the store, without paying, the shopkeeper does have a right to detain the suspect and call the police.
This is different from refusing to show a receipt for merchandise that was lawfully purchased.
@Beerad: Meaning he can’t get it up because of depression/stress and she has to resort to batteried operated boyfriends (BOBs). I hear D cells are expensive.
One thing – this guy was not a suspected shoplifter. He was a vandal and a thief, and he had likely committed the crime of assault (not battery) or “threatening”, depending on local law by his actions threatening employees with the crowbar. This is a little bit different from some kid sticking a roll of duct tape under his shirt. I think that would be grounds for a little leniency on HD’s part – along with a warning about doing something like that again.
Gotta side with HD here. The guy chased after someone as an employee and held them.
HD has a potential liability. They don’t want one. The employee’s job is to do what the company wants.
I think the employee should go find a job where they don’t have to follow directions or take responsibility for anything. Clearly can’t handle it. I don’t think there’s any store that doesn’t prohibit employees from confronting someone in this situation. To much of a risk.
@dandd: “If you are an HD employee, the only reasonable thing to do is help the shoplifter load his truck.”
Uh, pretty sure that’s a union job. Unless you want to get sued.
@Canoehead: Except that all he assaulted/battered/threatened was a vending machine. From how the article reads, a cashier (seemingly inside the building) saw him hit the vending machine (outside the building) and felt threatened. Two other employees then detained him, and there’s no suggestion that he menaced them in any way at all. There seems to have been some talking back and forth, so this wasn’t exactly a crazed violent felon.
Maybe HD was trying to protect the maker of crowbars..
I’m all for policemen and rehab couselors, but he was hired to be the store manager – not be be a policeman or a rehab counselor. I hate HD, but I’m not surprised they fired him.
Plaintiff wins lawsuit = Home Depot doubles all its prices.
My brother worked for HD, day one, you get it drilled into you that you do not chase, stop, or confront a suspected shoplifter. Oh, and you will get fired if you do.
It is also doubtful that the vending machine even belonged to HD, vending is not a core business function.
In this specific situation, the person was breaking into the machine, but this guy arrived after it happened, he had no way of knowing the whole story. How would this have played out had the person using the crowbar been working for the vending machine owner opening a broken machine. Remember, Rusty did not see the situation first hand.
Sucks to be Rusty. I wonder if he ever conducted new hire or follow up training for his employees and talked about the no-pursuit policies?
I’ts simple. Very Simple. If it was against the compnaies policy to chace down suspects they have every right to fire him. If it was not then they do not. Unless it’s in Florida. Here they can fire you for anyithing short of discrimination.
Hmmm. From business management perspective, I just love an employee that takes risks and protects my business and property.
My insurance agent has an entirely different perspective. Can’t say the agent is wrong as I pay the bill and would hate to pay more.
This entire issue boils down to money. The risk exposure to HD far exceeds the benefits of the former employee’s actions.
There is no clear right and wrong.
Personally I encourage local PD to run radar out of my parking lot. Good for the community and keeps a legally loaded gun in close proximity to the business to discourage riff-raff.
you are not allowed to chase or detain people in retail stores. period. He did the right thing, unfortunately the right thing isn’t allowed.