Yes, it does feel like something you'd admit at a 12-step meeting.
I live in Bentonville.
I do not work directly for WM -- I work for a vendor. I do not work with security of any kind, I fix computers when they break.
<le sigh>
I feel bad for a post I made late Thursday night/early Friday morning -- I mentioned the trampling injuries that many customers have faced in past years, all because people couldn't wait in line or be courteous to their fellow human being. And yes, that is where I lay the blame for this. The root cause was disrespect and greed.
And NOT JUST greed on the part of the largest retailer in the world.
It's easy to blame Wal-Mart for this.
It's easy, because there are a lot of things wrong with Wal-Mart's business practices in various areas. They don't unionize. They don't give all of their employees the hours they might want or pay as much as they probably could. They don't have the best benefits (but I can tell you for a fact they have better benefits than Dillard's -- I know because I've considered "selling my soul to the Beast of Bentonville" and looked over their benefits, and compared it to when I worked for Dillards in their home office). To provide "everyday low prices" they buy goods from China made by sweatshop laborers of questionable quality and safety. And because people keep buying from them, they can keep on with these unfair practices.
But ...
..... how about some friggin' personal responsibility? How about courtesy and respect for your fellow man? How about NOT beating glass doors of a business until they start to cave in and shatter, just to get a
$128 Blu-Ray Player???
A man lost his life because everyday people decided that material objects were more important than anything else. More important than patience. More important than common decency or courtesy or regard for life or property.
If people were not so greedy, it would not be necessary for a retailer to have to get extra security to prevent such a tragedy. And to be blunt, from what it sounded like, the only thing that would have kept this from happening would have been a line of riot shields and people with guns and nightsticks. The fact that apparently the SWAT team would have been needed to deal with this says a hell of a lot more about people than it does about Wal-Mart itself.
And that is NOT easy to accept, because it means the blame is put on us.
---------------
When it comes to criminal responsibility, the people who broke down the doors broke the law. They broke into private property, and killed someone in the process.
When it comes to Wal-Mart's responsibility... first, I'd like to figure out why, when it seemed like they were going to break down the doors, that anyone attempted to hold the doors shut. The standard Loss Prevention staff at a store do not have guns, do not have nightsticks, and do not have riot shields (which, again, they SHOULDN'T need) -- and very rarely are there more than 2 on duty at any time at a store.
As the article indicates, between six and ten employees attempted to keep the doors from breaking inward.
If employees saw what was happening and decided of their own volition to try to keep the doors from opening, and not under orders from management ... then I cannot justify any criminal culpability whatsoever on the company.
If a manager ordered or asked any of the non-Loss Prevention staff to attempt to hold the doors.... or, heck, even if they'd ordered LP to hold the doors.... then I would be with many of you who are suggesting people be arrested other than the people who broke down the store doors.
--
Next post will be regarding what needs to be done by WM in the future, OSHA regulations, etc etc. This was about criminal responsibility.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
