Popeyes manager fired for refusing to pay back $400 taken in armed robbery

[Pogo]

Pogo, isn't is clear? The robber was psychic, and knew that the shift manager had not put the money in the safe....

Yeah that's my theory laid down earlier -- he has crystal balls that see into the future, where he reads this message board the day before he goes in and finds out how much money he makes.

Useful, these crystal balls. Especially when you have no argument.

 

[martybegan]

Pregnant restaurant manager fired after armed robbery

"By the back of my shirt, he pulled me up and he pushed me to the front," she said. "He told me to give him everything out of my safe."
“I told them I'm not paying nothing. I just had a gun to me. I'm not paying the money.”
But the only thing Holcomb could open were the registers. The gunman got away with nearly $400.
After the robbery, Holcomb claimed that one of her managers gave her a choice: Pay the money back or be fired. Less than 36 hours later, she was fired.
"I don't think it's right because now I'm struggling for my family," she said. "What I had to do (was) keep my life."

However, a spokesman in the company's human resources department said Holcomb was fired because she didn't follow company policy, leaving too much money in the cash register. And this wasn't her first offense.

To be fair she was fired for having too much money in the register, against store policy. Its a stupid policy to fire someone over, but she isn't being fired for being robbed and giving up the cash, its not putting it into the safe quick enough.

If the story is true, she's fired for not paying back the money taken by a robber, which is just over the top scuzzy. Since when do retail workers have to compensate their employer when they get robbed?

it's scuzzy, but she was given the choice to pay the $$ back for violation of the cash in register rules, or lose her job for violation of the cash in register rules.

 

[martybegan]

Pregnant restaurant manager fired after armed robbery

"By the back of my shirt, he pulled me up and he pushed me to the front," she said. "He told me to give him everything out of my safe."
“I told them I'm not paying nothing. I just had a gun to me. I'm not paying the money.”
But the only thing Holcomb could open were the registers. The gunman got away with nearly $400.
After the robbery, Holcomb claimed that one of her managers gave her a choice: Pay the money back or be fired. Less than 36 hours later, she was fired.
"I don't think it's right because now I'm struggling for my family," she said. "What I had to do (was) keep my life."

However, a spokesman in the company's human resources department said Holcomb was fired because she didn't follow company policy, leaving too much money in the cash register. And this wasn't her first offense.

To be fair she was fired for having too much money in the register, against store policy. Its a stupid policy to fire someone over, but she isn't being fired for being robbed and giving up the cash, its not putting it into the safe quick enough.

If the story is true, she's fired for not paying back the money taken by a robber, which is just over the top scuzzy. Since when do retail workers have to compensate their employer when they get robbed?

why did the owner/management not have insurance for this type of event? if the owner/management really believes that person in that office of private trust was being deficient; it should come from that portion of the wage that may correspond to that level of authority. Why wasn't management more responsible than labor.

It may be that insurance didn't pay out the claim because procedure wasn't followed. Usually policies such as limiting cash till amounts are in compliance with insurance contracts. The point is, while she may have been wrong in not following the policy, the company should still be gracious enough to absorb the loss instead of billing somebody who lives paycheck to paycheck. They can overcome a $400 loss much easier than a poor worker. It's just scuzzy.

So what sort of punishment should they have given out for breaking the rules. It is scummy of them, but for all we know the robber cased the place and noticed this manager was tardy in putting $$ in the safe.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Pregnant restaurant manager fired after armed robbery

"By the back of my shirt, he pulled me up and he pushed me to the front," she said. "He told me to give him everything out of my safe."
“I told them I'm not paying nothing. I just had a gun to me. I'm not paying the money.”
But the only thing Holcomb could open were the registers. The gunman got away with nearly $400.
After the robbery, Holcomb claimed that one of her managers gave her a choice: Pay the money back or be fired. Less than 36 hours later, she was fired.
"I don't think it's right because now I'm struggling for my family," she said. "What I had to do (was) keep my life."

However, a spokesman in the company's human resources department said Holcomb was fired because she didn't follow company policy, leaving too much money in the cash register. And this wasn't her first offense.

To be fair she was fired for having too much money in the register, against store policy. Its a stupid policy to fire someone over, but she isn't being fired for being robbed and giving up the cash, its not putting it into the safe quick enough.

If the story is true, she's fired for not paying back the money taken by a robber, which is just over the top scuzzy. Since when do retail workers have to compensate their employer when they get robbed?

it's scuzzy, but she was given the choice to pay the $$ back for violation of the cash in register rules, or lose her job for violation of the cash in register rules.

I don't think you've ever walked in her moccasins. I have. People like her can't come up with $400 just like that. It was an unreasonable request.

 

[Esmeralda]

Update from KHOU-TV:

Marissa Holcomb, who is a mother of three with a fourth child on the way, had a meeting with Z & H Foods owner Amin Dhanani on Wednesday, a day after our original story aired of her firing.

"He just apologized and pretty much offered me if I wanted to go back to his business and work there again," she said.
...
Dhanani refused to talk on camera Wednesday, but his company released a statement that reads:

"We deeply regret the way this matter was handled. We are committed to continuing to work with Ms. Holcomb, and we apologize to her, our employees, the public and other franchise operators of the Popeyes system. We have let them down and are committed to do better."

We also contacted the Popeyes corporate office in Georgia.

They initially referred us back to the local franchisee, but the CEO Cheryl Bachelder released the following statement Wednesday evening.

"We recently became aware of a story in Houston involving a Popeyes restaurant and employee. The restaurant is operated by an independent franchisee of the Popeyes brand. We have spoken to the local franchise owner of the restaurant, and he has taken immediate action to reach out to the employee to apologize and rectify the situation. While the facts are gathered, we will closely monitor this until it is appropriately resolved. We deeply regret the distress this situation has caused."

Holcomb is not only being offered her old position, but $2,000 in back pay. For the pregnant mother of three, the decision is tough.

"I do need a way to support my kids," she says. "I don't want to go back to a business where I'm treated the same and I just get pushed back out if something else happened."
--- KHOU.com​

Yup. They fucked up on how they fired her, not why they fired her. Sigh. So if she goes back to work, she will again not do her job and dump the extra cash..which is an open invitation for another asshole to go rob them again.

Could you please explain how the robbers know in advance that she is not putting money in the safe as she is supposed to? And if they know ahead of time she is not putting money in the safe, to which she has no access, but leaving it in the cash drawer for easy access, why did the robber first ask her, at gunpoint, to open the safe? I mean seriously. Do you people think at all about this stuff? Think it out why don't you?

 

[martybegan]

Pregnant restaurant manager fired after armed robbery

"By the back of my shirt, he pulled me up and he pushed me to the front," she said. "He told me to give him everything out of my safe."
“I told them I'm not paying nothing. I just had a gun to me. I'm not paying the money.”
But the only thing Holcomb could open were the registers. The gunman got away with nearly $400.
After the robbery, Holcomb claimed that one of her managers gave her a choice: Pay the money back or be fired. Less than 36 hours later, she was fired.
"I don't think it's right because now I'm struggling for my family," she said. "What I had to do (was) keep my life."

However, a spokesman in the company's human resources department said Holcomb was fired because she didn't follow company policy, leaving too much money in the cash register. And this wasn't her first offense.

To be fair she was fired for having too much money in the register, against store policy. Its a stupid policy to fire someone over, but she isn't being fired for being robbed and giving up the cash, its not putting it into the safe quick enough.

If the story is true, she's fired for not paying back the money taken by a robber, which is just over the top scuzzy. Since when do retail workers have to compensate their employer when they get robbed?

it's scuzzy, but she was given the choice to pay the $$ back for violation of the cash in register rules, or lose her job for violation of the cash in register rules.

I don't think you've ever walked in her moccasins. I have. People like her can't come up with $400 just like that. It was an unreasonable request.

Then maybe she should have followed the rules. From the article she was a repeat offender of leaving too much in the till.

Again, how would you have punished her?

 

[Gracie]

Look, rules are in place for a reason. If one is manager, one is aware of the rules. She knew what to do in case of robbery. Problem is, she knew what to do every 15 minutes or half an hour after a busy spurt. CHECK THE TILLS, DUMP THE EXTRA CASH. She didn't do that.

Maybe I'm just jaded. TWO apartment complexes I managed were robbed by the resident manager prior to my hiring. BOTH said they were robbed while taking the deposit to the bank. One had bruises. The other no damages to her body. BOTH LIED and were busted and in jail. They took the money, claimed it was stolen, one had her boyfriend hit her to make it look real. We aren't talking 400 bucks here. We are talking THOUSANDS. Last property I had before retiring, the ex manager got a little over 10K and soon after went to Germany for a vacay. When she returned, she was arrested and copt to the theft. The other property years before, it was almost 60K in cash, the rest in checks which were found in the dumpster. She went to jail too.

As a store owner, I had rules.
1. Answer the phone within the 3rd ring or you are fired.
2. Never leave the store open and be outside having a cig or on break or going to the restroom...put a note up with Be Back In 10 Minutes.
3. Call me immediately if you have a huge sale and it is over 200 dollars, OR, put note on door and deposit it in the bank across the street.
4. No friends visiting or hanging out while you are at work.
5. Hours are stated. Do not be late opening or closing.

Rules are rules. Don't like them? Apply somewhere else.

 

[Pop23]

The bottom line for this thread--it's really simple: if this thread had been posted by a RWr, the RWrs would be going on and on about how the robbery was a result of liberal policies and essentially, somehow, inevitably Obama's fault, how there should be more guns around so citizens could fight crime like this, etc.

Zackly.

I suspect many would also have, instead of blaming the victim, focused much more on the thug thief -- the guy who's actually responsible for the robbery -- with some choice adjectives on his genetics --- until they watched the video and found out he was white.

Absolutely, exactly. They would be focusing on the robber, not the store clerk. Absolutely. And they'd be going on and on about how this was all the fault of liberals and Obama's policies somehow. They'd be going on and on about how the store clerk should have had a gun. Etc. and so on. The position they are taking instead is ludicrous in the extreme, and the only reason they are taking it is to argue against anything the left says.

The really hilarious irony here, for me, is the post I read a day or so ago by a RWr saying how Hillary Clinton is an elitist and if she were president, she would not be on the side of the 'common man.' Like, these RWrs in this thread are on the side of the common man? Hilarious.

You realize that this is about the fired employee, Right?

I think everyone agrees armed robbers are assholes.

Of course, had she followed company policy she would not have been fired and the progressives would not need a second Prozac

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Pregnant restaurant manager fired after armed robbery

"By the back of my shirt, he pulled me up and he pushed me to the front," she said. "He told me to give him everything out of my safe."
“I told them I'm not paying nothing. I just had a gun to me. I'm not paying the money.”
But the only thing Holcomb could open were the registers. The gunman got away with nearly $400.
After the robbery, Holcomb claimed that one of her managers gave her a choice: Pay the money back or be fired. Less than 36 hours later, she was fired.
"I don't think it's right because now I'm struggling for my family," she said. "What I had to do (was) keep my life."

However, a spokesman in the company's human resources department said Holcomb was fired because she didn't follow company policy, leaving too much money in the cash register. And this wasn't her first offense.

To be fair she was fired for having too much money in the register, against store policy. Its a stupid policy to fire someone over, but she isn't being fired for being robbed and giving up the cash, its not putting it into the safe quick enough.

If the story is true, she's fired for not paying back the money taken by a robber, which is just over the top scuzzy. Since when do retail workers have to compensate their employer when they get robbed?

why did the owner/management not have insurance for this type of event? if the owner/management really believes that person in that office of private trust was being deficient; it should come from that portion of the wage that may correspond to that level of authority. Why wasn't management more responsible than labor.

It may be that insurance didn't pay out the claim because procedure wasn't followed. Usually policies such as limiting cash till amounts are in compliance with insurance contracts. The point is, while she may have been wrong in not following the policy, the company should still be gracious enough to absorb the loss instead of billing somebody who lives paycheck to paycheck. They can overcome a $400 loss much easier than a poor worker. It's just scuzzy.

So what sort of punishment should they have given out for breaking the rules. It is scummy of them, but for all we know the robber cased the place and noticed this manager was tardy in putting $$ in the safe.

Was there evidence that the robber was actually studying the safe deposits made? Burglars do their homework, but robbers are usually very impulsive. I didn't question their right to fire her, I just think it's scuzzy they fired her because she couldn't pull $400 out of her back pocket instead of paying her rent.

 

[Pop23]

Update from KHOU-TV:

Marissa Holcomb, who is a mother of three with a fourth child on the way, had a meeting with Z & H Foods owner Amin Dhanani on Wednesday, a day after our original story aired of her firing.

"He just apologized and pretty much offered me if I wanted to go back to his business and work there again," she said.
...
Dhanani refused to talk on camera Wednesday, but his company released a statement that reads:

"We deeply regret the way this matter was handled. We are committed to continuing to work with Ms. Holcomb, and we apologize to her, our employees, the public and other franchise operators of the Popeyes system. We have let them down and are committed to do better."

We also contacted the Popeyes corporate office in Georgia.

They initially referred us back to the local franchisee, but the CEO Cheryl Bachelder released the following statement Wednesday evening.

"We recently became aware of a story in Houston involving a Popeyes restaurant and employee. The restaurant is operated by an independent franchisee of the Popeyes brand. We have spoken to the local franchise owner of the restaurant, and he has taken immediate action to reach out to the employee to apologize and rectify the situation. While the facts are gathered, we will closely monitor this until it is appropriately resolved. We deeply regret the distress this situation has caused."

Holcomb is not only being offered her old position, but $2,000 in back pay. For the pregnant mother of three, the decision is tough.

"I do need a way to support my kids," she says. "I don't want to go back to a business where I'm treated the same and I just get pushed back out if something else happened."
--- KHOU.com​

Yup. They fucked up on how they fired her, not why they fired her. Sigh. So if she goes back to work, she will again not do her job and dump the extra cash..which is an open invitation for another asshole to go rob them again.

Could you please explain how the robbers know in advance that she is not putting money in the safe as she is supposed to? And if they know ahead of time she is not putting money in the safe, to which she has no access, but leaving it in the cash drawer for easy access, why did the robber first ask her, at gunpoint, to open the safe? I mean seriously. Do you people think at all about this stuff? Think it out why don't you?

He has eyes?????

 

[Gracie]

had she followed company policy she would not have been fired

Ding ding ding.

 

[BullKurtz]

No it doesn't "help" --- what I find hilarious is the lengths to which you'll bend over backward to imagine some scenario that allows you to blame the victim. You completely pulled that one out of your ass and I might add, WAY further up the intestinal tract than colonoscopes ever venture.

I understand your embarrassment for claiming earlier she "wasn't a manager"...typical shoot first aim later leftist ready to condemn the "evil company" that hired all those people. The "victim" is the store owner who lost the money, comrade. I know you immediately assume they can afford it because you've never owned a business or know how to run one. Most of the theft in business is called "inventory shrinkage" ie employee theft. But what's funnier is that you progs are the most chiseling, nasty assholes when you hire somebody to do a job.

 

[martybegan]

To be fair she was fired for having too much money in the register, against store policy. Its a stupid policy to fire someone over, but she isn't being fired for being robbed and giving up the cash, its not putting it into the safe quick enough.

If the story is true, she's fired for not paying back the money taken by a robber, which is just over the top scuzzy. Since when do retail workers have to compensate their employer when they get robbed?

why did the owner/management not have insurance for this type of event? if the owner/management really believes that person in that office of private trust was being deficient; it should come from that portion of the wage that may correspond to that level of authority. Why wasn't management more responsible than labor.

It may be that insurance didn't pay out the claim because procedure wasn't followed. Usually policies such as limiting cash till amounts are in compliance with insurance contracts. The point is, while she may have been wrong in not following the policy, the company should still be gracious enough to absorb the loss instead of billing somebody who lives paycheck to paycheck. They can overcome a $400 loss much easier than a poor worker. It's just scuzzy.

So what sort of punishment should they have given out for breaking the rules. It is scummy of them, but for all we know the robber cased the place and noticed this manager was tardy in putting $$ in the safe.

Was there evidence that the robber was actually studying the safe deposits made? Burglars do their homework, but robbers are usually very impulsive. I didn't question their right to fire her, I just think it's scuzzy they fired her because she couldn't pull $400 out of her back pocket instead of paying her rent.

Giving back the $400 was an out for her to keep her job. If they just would have fired her for breaking policy I wonder if people would be so butthurt over this.

 

[Marxist]

She was fired for violating company policy.... it's on her.

Next....

I agree.

I fired a secretary on the spot one time for not depositing money in a timely fashion.

Don't mess with company money.

Ever

I fired a secretary on the spot one time for not depositing money in a timely fashion.

You're a real asshole then.

Depends, in some businesses, escrow money must be deposited within a limited amount of time. To not make the deposit in such a manner can result in very stiff fines or loss of license.

Does not really matter what business it was in. You hire someone to do a job and that includes certain things like getting money deposited at certain times.
Don’t do your job then you get fired, that is how jobs work. It is interesting that firing someone automatically makes him an asshole according to Marxist – even if she does not actually do her job. That is how some people think – usually those that think that they are owed something for simply existing.

No, it's a dick move to somehow choose to fire her after she is robbed, come on now.

 

[Pogo]

Update from KHOU-TV:

Marissa Holcomb, who is a mother of three with a fourth child on the way, had a meeting with Z & H Foods owner Amin Dhanani on Wednesday, a day after our original story aired of her firing.

"He just apologized and pretty much offered me if I wanted to go back to his business and work there again," she said.
...
Dhanani refused to talk on camera Wednesday, but his company released a statement that reads:

"We deeply regret the way this matter was handled. We are committed to continuing to work with Ms. Holcomb, and we apologize to her, our employees, the public and other franchise operators of the Popeyes system. We have let them down and are committed to do better."

We also contacted the Popeyes corporate office in Georgia.

They initially referred us back to the local franchisee, but the CEO Cheryl Bachelder released the following statement Wednesday evening.

"We recently became aware of a story in Houston involving a Popeyes restaurant and employee. The restaurant is operated by an independent franchisee of the Popeyes brand. We have spoken to the local franchise owner of the restaurant, and he has taken immediate action to reach out to the employee to apologize and rectify the situation. While the facts are gathered, we will closely monitor this until it is appropriately resolved. We deeply regret the distress this situation has caused."

Holcomb is not only being offered her old position, but $2,000 in back pay. For the pregnant mother of three, the decision is tough.

"I do need a way to support my kids," she says. "I don't want to go back to a business where I'm treated the same and I just get pushed back out if something else happened."
--- KHOU.com​

Yup. They fucked up on how they fired her, not why they fired her. Sigh. So if she goes back to work, she will again not do her job and dump the extra cash..which is an open invitation for another asshole to go rob them again.

Could you please explain how the robbers know in advance that she is not putting money in the safe as she is supposed to? And if they know ahead of time she is not putting money in the safe, to which she has no access, but leaving it in the cash drawer for easy access, why did the robber first ask her, at gunpoint, to open the safe? I mean seriously. Do you people think at all about this stuff? Think it out why don't you?

He has eyes?????

And how does he know how much is in the drawer? He has X-ray vision?

Pop, you just broke a major clue in the investigation --- Superman did it!

 

[Pop23]

She was fired for violating company policy.... it's on her.

Next....

I agree.

I fired a secretary on the spot one time for not depositing money in a timely fashion.

Don't mess with company money.

Ever

I fired a secretary on the spot one time for not depositing money in a timely fashion.

You're a real asshole then.

Depends, in some businesses, escrow money must be deposited within a limited amount of time. To not make the deposit in such a manner can result in very stiff fines or loss of license.

Does not really matter what business it was in. You hire someone to do a job and that includes certain things like getting money deposited at certain times.
Don’t do your job then you get fired, that is how jobs work. It is interesting that firing someone automatically makes him an asshole according to Marxist – even if she does not actually do her job. That is how some people think – usually those that think that they are owed something for simply existing.

No, it's a dick move to somehow choose to fire her after she is robbed, come on now.

The robbery only provided evidence that she AGAIN broke company protocol.

Is this really that hard to understand?

 

[Vandalshandle]

I'm sure that the owner will show compassion in the end. Maybe he will give her a 20% discount on a family bucket of chicken when the baby is born.

 

[Pogo]

No it doesn't "help" --- what I find hilarious is the lengths to which you'll bend over backward to imagine some scenario that allows you to blame the victim. You completely pulled that one out of your ass and I might add, WAY further up the intestinal tract than colonoscopes ever venture.

I understand your embarrassment for claiming earlier she "wasn't a manager"...typical shoot first aim later leftist ready to condemn the "evil company" that hired all those people. The "victim" is the store owner who lost the money, comrade. I know you immediately assume they can afford it because you've never owned a business or know how to run one. Most of the theft in business is called "inventory shrinkage" ie employee theft. But what's funnier is that you progs are the most chiseling, nasty assholes when you hire somebody to do a job.

The OP article posted with this thread SAID nothing about her being a shift manager, dumbass. That info was brought into the thread unsubstantiated-- without a link, which is why I CORRECTLY challenged it, so you can drop to your knees and bite my ass.

Now if you waltz through life believing everything anybody says without backing it up, bring your wallet, I have this bridge...

 

[Marxist]

I agree.

I fired a secretary on the spot one time for not depositing money in a timely fashion.

Don't mess with company money.

Ever

I fired a secretary on the spot one time for not depositing money in a timely fashion.

You're a real asshole then.

Depends, in some businesses, escrow money must be deposited within a limited amount of time. To not make the deposit in such a manner can result in very stiff fines or loss of license.

Does not really matter what business it was in. You hire someone to do a job and that includes certain things like getting money deposited at certain times.
Don’t do your job then you get fired, that is how jobs work. It is interesting that firing someone automatically makes him an asshole according to Marxist – even if she does not actually do her job. That is how some people think – usually those that think that they are owed something for simply existing.

No, it's a dick move to somehow choose to fire her after she is robbed, come on now.

The robbery only provided evidence that she AGAIN broke company protocol.

Is this really that hard to understand?

Yeah, I'd still like to know the amount.

 

[Yurt]

i'm sure it was about the other people in the restaurant, stop trolling

Trolling? It's called presenting my opinion and viewpoint on the issue, not "trolling."

I might have a bit more sympathy for her being fired if I bought her "we were too busy" excuse for not being able to follow the policy as well as I'd hope.

If you can find me evidence that there was enough people in the restaurant for the shift manager to be "busy with customers" "in the back" while the two counter people appeared to restock, I'd love to see it. I'd also then presume the robber was on drugs in that case, holding up a packed restaurant and all, unlikely, but I'll admit it does happen. I'm not unreasonable.

Still doesn't change the fact that she has reportedly repeatedly violated company policy, which was I'm sure put in place specifically to mitigate robberies like the one that happened, but in that case, if she was reasonably too busy to have done it yet, then I might just give her a warning and tell her flat out if it happened again [her not moving the cash to the vault] she'd be fired immediately.

i was not responding to you.