The Way I See It -- Walgreens Fires Employee Who Fires

This commentary refers to the following story:

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/fired-walgreens-gun-toting-michigan-pharmacist-filled-robbers/story?id=13705438

I feel there is always something wrong when an employee cannot defend him/herself in a possible life-threatening situation.  I don’t know of any employee handbook that says that “just stand there, get shot, and die”.  Certainly, nobody would ever in their right mind ever say that because it is stupid policy, yet this is exactly the way most businesses operate.

What bothers me the most is that Mr. Hoven could have any sort of weapon be used to attack the would-be robbers, not just the concealed weapon he was carrying.  He could have had a baseball bat, a knife, a can of mace, a large rock, or any of hundreds of various items to use against the attackers.  Sadly, the unappreciative Walgreens decided to turn this hero into a poster child of doing the wrong thing.  The problem is he saved to employees from getting shot themselves and yet company policy states that you can’t carry a concealed weapon.  Sadly, this is where logic and policy collide.  Not in a good way either.  How would Walgreens have explained to Mr. Hoven’s family that he got killed because he didn’t defend himself when he could have done so?  Certainly, blood would be on the hands of Walgreens along multi-million dollar lawsuits.  It is natural for anybody to defend themselves (if they can) when being attacked. Anybody would have to be stupid otherwise in not doing so.  And this is where policies are not only bad, but really wrong.

Apparently, most policy makers are lawyers who sit isolated from reality and have no clue on what life is outside their little boxes.  Policies are meant to be BROKEN WHEN NEEDED!!  Not every policy should ever be followed to the letter, otherwise most people would be unemployed within a couple of weeks of being hired..

Here is what Walgreens should have done:  Mr. Hoven should have been spoken to about what he did and explain what the consequences of what he did.  He should neither have been fired nor been put on any sort of suspension.  He saved people’s lives—he should have been commended for that, not condemned.  I hope that Mr. Hoven wins his case against them for their foolish termination.

The reason why I bring up this story is that over the years I have been the victim of crimes at each of the three companies I have worked for..and one of them regards a life-threatening incident, which I will describe all of them in a future post.  In all of those cases of mine, policy was violated and I became the victim with no recourse.  Certainly in my cases, a different result would have come if the companies paid attention and showed compassion not ignorance, but what can be expected from stupid companies anyway?  And that is the way I see it…