Walmart termination

Godisincontrol

New Member
My husband was suspended via word of mouth on Friday July 10,2015 from walmart without knowing why until further notice (He worked as asset protection)Monday July 13,2015 he went to work to talk with store manager to see what was going on why was he suspended. Then he saw HR person there and he was told he was terminated. He asked why,then they said cause he left walmart property. Which he only went off tell police where shoplifter was. His AP-09 policy says "Do not follow suspect off property". Even still store manager said pretty much that was grounds for termination. Which my husband has been working with walmart for almost 9 years. And he has never been suspended and he has gotten coached for getting in physical apprehension when he worked in Fl...but cause he went to notify police across street seems petty for termination ...it's all so shady how it was all done...what should he do?
 
File for unemployment and seek new work. I am a retail theft consultant and work with persons on both sides of retail theft issues as well as train Loss Prevention persons. If he left store (you should not have named) against company policy (even if he had valid reason) he can be terminated. In addition if you Google "at will" you will see the company does not need a reason to fire him. I also suspect there might be more to this than hes telling you or he even knows himself
 
how do I delete account? The "advice" isn't helpful...I'm not giving full details here so but just from summary I get nothing...cause y is there a policy if it's "at will"...doesn't make sense with this type of place
 
"At will" is a Federal law. It basically means an employer or employee may terminate employment with or without cause or warning. The exception is if the termination violates law, employment contract or, Union contract. If you feel your case fits one of these areas contact an Attorney
 
Well, no, that's not quite right. There is no Federal law designating at-will employment at the law of the land. If anything it would be state, but even then it's not a statute; more of a doctrine.

There is one state where at-will is the exception.
 
I stand corrected thank you CBG. OP CBG is an HR expert her advice is the advice you should listen to. I only jumped in because it was an AP (Loss Prevention) issue which is my area lol
 
Why don't you give us the details you think might change the answers you've been given. While shrinkmaster was wrong about it being a Federal law, the fact remains that most employment in the US is at will and you've posted nothing to suggest that your husband's employment was not. Our answers can only be as good as the information you give us, so if you think this advice is wrong, tell us why.
 
This kind of firing is NOT uncommon. Retailer put these policies in place to protect them from law suit. Therefore they can and often do get very strict at enforcing them. Even in cases similar to your husbands. If he has worked AP for 9 years its possible he has seen similar firings under circumstances one might think were not direct violations. I tell all who I train or all retailers I talk to that its important you have clear guidelines for your Loss Prevention team and that you stick with it and are consistent with enforcing this. Sadly this can mean that a simple move (like with your husband) can result in a termination.
 
Gee, maybe the AP person was on his lunch break and technically "off the clock" when he went over to the police station. If he left the building on his lunch break, he cannot be termed, he can do whatever he wants, on his lunch break, wink wink
 
Gee, maybe the AP person was on his lunch break and technically "off the clock" when he went over to the police station. If he left the building on his lunch break, he cannot be termed, he can do whatever he wants, on his lunch break, wink wink

No really this can still get him fired as he acted on behalf of his employer
 
Suppose you post a link to the law that says you cannot be termed for what you do on your lunch break. We'll wait. But we won't hold our breath.
 
Gee, maybe the AP person was on his lunch break and technically "off the clock" when he went over to the police station. If he left the building on his lunch break, he cannot be termed, he can do whatever he wants, on his lunch break, wink wink

An employer can tell an employee not to leave the premises at any time (even during lunch).
 
Back
Top