We pride ourselves on having the friendliest
and most welcoming forums for moms and moms to be! Please take a moment
for free so you can be a part of our growing community of mothers.
If you have any problems registering please drop an email to email@example.com.
Our community is moderated by our moderation team so you won't see spam or offensive messages posted on our forums. Each of our message boards is hosted by JustMommies hosts, whose names are listed at the top each board. We hope you find our message boards friendly, helpful, and fun to be on!
(yes I know it's ABC news, I just grabbed one, of many, sites with the story, lol)
I just took a snippet, you can read the whole story there.
An Arby's Restaurant in Dayton, Ohio, has fired its assistant general manager after she had to jump through the store's drive-through window to escape a knife-wielding robber. What's Arby's beef? Archer, the company says, violated a company rule.
According to the Dayton Daily News, assistant manager Mary Archer had been closing up the store when the incident occurred. In an exclusive interview with ABC affiliate WHIO-TV of Dayton, Archer said her last co-worker had just left for the night when she heard the doorbell ring.
Thinking it was her co-worker returning to pick up something she'd forgotten, Archer unlocked the door, only to find herself confronted by a robber with a knife who repeatedly shouted, "Give me the money."
"I really thought I was going to die," Archer, 56, told WHIO. She did her best to defend herself, she says, pushing the man away while she told herself, "I'm not going to die at Arby's tonight. I'm just not."
I was discussing this with some other people earlier, curious what others think.
Was this woman in the wrong? Should she have stuck by policy no matter what, ignoring her own life?
Was the restaurant in the wrong for breaking their own safety and security policy handed down by corporate?
What about the employee who left her there alone? Should that employee be in trouble, or is it still this woman's fault she was left alone? Can she really control being left alone in the store?
Should she still be fired, based on policy?
Given the fact that this is not the first robbery on this particular restaurant, do you believe that should play a role in decisions made?
Should the owner of this place be held accountable for lack of security measures for employees, and do the prior robberies have an effect on your opinion?
What would you have done, or would you do, in the same situation, as the woman who fled, the restaurant owner, and corporate?
I work in a place that is becoming increasingly more dangerous by the day, and it really shouldn't be, but I work at a university and people are nuts, so... The reason I mention that is because if there is a fire, I'm supposed to try to protect my records. I'll do what I can, but I have 1200 students, if a fire is in my office, you bet your butt I'll grab what I can and run like crazy. Although, I really don't think my university would begrudge me that. They seem pretty caring. Here are my personal thoughts on the story.
Was this woman in the wrong? Should she have stuck by policy no matter what, ignoring her own life? Heck no! Her JOB is not worth her life. She decided to live, and she did what she had to do to make that happen. Who cares about policy when your life is on the line? Seriously, why does Arby's care more about the POLICY than the life of their employee.
Was the restaurant in the wrong for breaking their own safety and security policy handed down by corporate? I guess I'm not sure what you mean by this. Were they in the wrong by breaking the "have two employees in the store at all times" policy? Well probably, but is that really a firing worthy offense?
What about the employee who left her there alone? Should that employee be in trouble, or is it still this woman's fault she was left alone? Can she really control being left alone in the store? I feel like if they're going to punish the lady who nearly died for being in the store alone, then they should punish the person who left her alone in the store as well. They're both responsible for making sure policy was followed that night if Arby's is going to get so technical about things.
Should she still be fired, based on policy? Based on policy, yes.
Given the fact that this is not the first robbery on this particular restaurant, do you believe that should play a role in decisions made? Most definitely. Proper security might could have prevented this.
Should the owner of this place be held accountable for lack of security measures for employees, and do the prior robberies have an effect on your opinion? Again, most definitely. He didn't do his job, he should get fired too, as long as Arby's is all fire crazy.
What would you have done, or would you do, in the same situation, as the woman who fled, the restaurant owner, and corporate?Like I said earlier, her life isn't worth her job. I would have run too. But I'd also fight corporate really hard for some form of restitution.
Oh sorry what I meant by that was, yes they didn't ensure(by whatever measures they need) to make sure there are always 2 people on staff, all hours of operation-which would include the closing up of the restaurant.
They also don't have any sort of security measures in place, which violates the corporate policy for safety/security.
I was reading some of the comments on other news sites about this incident and people seem to be confused thinking she let the robber in. The front door was not locked, the person simply walked in shortly after the other employee walked out. The lady wouldn't have heard the bell otherwise and it may have turned out completely different had she not been aware someone was there with her. That part is more than a little scarey. If the other employee left, one would think the policy would be to lock the front door, but it's not. That's part of the problem with a franchise, sometimes. In this case anyway. It seems only some corporate policy is trickled down and followed to the letter. While other policies are completely ignored. Basic common sense is ignored too, lol.
It also bothers me that this restaurant has been robbed twice before, yet the owner STILL didn't do jack to prevent a third. They hold just as much responsibility for her breaking policy as she does, imo.
If going by policy alone, both her and the other employee broke policy. I don't know that termination would be my first move for something like that-even on a 2nd offense. Suspension would be more like it, if anything. Personally, I am all for a business making their own rules and people following them, or paying consequences-up to and including termination if truly necessary. But it's hard to stick with that opinion when so many things went wrong here before she even did anything wrong. It's hard for me to point a finger at her and say "you broke the rules, you pay" when the restaurant didn't take any measures(within reason) to prevent her from ever needing to. Saving one's own life, or the life of another, trumps policy here, for me.
I feel bad for her though. 23 years of dedication and hard work, down the drain. All because the owners want her to follow policy(and all other employees) but they're not willing to do so themselves. That would royally suck.
I'd have done the same in her shoes. If I owned the restaurant, it wouldn't take 3+ robberies for me to get my head out of my *** if my business lacked security measures. I also wouldn't hold policy over people's heads if I wasn't willing to follow it myself.
Since this happens to be in the state where I live, I've talked to people that live in the area. Apparently at least a few of the employees at this store left when she was fired, and more could very easily walk away too. I'm sure the owners don't care, employees for fast food joints are a dime a dozen in that area. But if it were me, I'd take that as a red flag, a major one.
She was fired for not following policy. I read a few articles on this story and I cannot find them right this second, but this was not the first time she broke the policy of keeping 2 people at the store at all time. I read that she was warned prior to this. She was fired for ignoring policy. I do not care if it was enforced or not. When I do my job, I go by POLICY, what is written in our rules. If somebody fires me for doing my job by policy, then they got a fight on their hands. Policy first, then she would not have to worry about her job.
I agree, they say she was fired because of policy alone. But that also leaves the question "How is she supposed to force other employees to follow policy, so that she can?" As it's impossible for one person to follow alone
She's not allowed to make, or even ask, other employees to stay, and she most certainly can't force them to. So how could one person possibly ensure this doesn't happen when they've absolutely no control over other employees just leaving(either at the end of their shift or even just walking out if they so choose)? How can the policy be followed when there's no way TO follow it all by yourself? Should that void the policy, since it's impossible for any one person to follow it without other employees also following it?
Her last warning was for the same thing, at the end of a shift she was the last person there, that was in a couple of the stories I read. Which just tells me that she has absolutely no way to adhere to the rules without some kind of measure in place to ensure she can. The same would go for any other employee too.
I am a huge fan of "at will" employment. Employers should be able to fire people for whatever reason they want - it might not be the best decision morally but legally it should not be restricted.
"Authentic love is not a vague sentiment or a blind passion. It is an inner attitude that involves the whole human person. It is looking to the other, not to use but to serve. It is rejoicing when the other rejoices and suffers when the other suffers. Love is the gift of self." JPII