Popeyes employee in trouble!

[stevej37]

Her atttorney said that she had been asking for a refund..after being double-billed.
“My client was called ‘an ugly broke-down cracker,’

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/popeyes-employee-body-slams-woman-tennessee-143324729.html

[biosurfer1]

Seems like Popeyes is going to be writing a check soon.

I don't care if that lady went around calling every employee every word in the book. All the words in the world won't save them from a male employee going after a female customer LEAVING the store and body slamming her.

He f-ed up, big time

[john70t]

Mob beating.
Hiring diversity there at Popeyes?

(edit: the firefox Download Flash Video does not work on Yahoo even with all scripts enabled)

[Tobra]

Hopefully the victim is able to recover full use of her R arm. I guarantee there is major damage to her shoulder.

That POS who did that had best do some time.

[Jeff Higgins]

I fail to see how Popeye's can be held responsible for Mr. Deriance Ra’Shaiel Hughes' actions. He clearly took it upon himself to conduct himself in a manner inconsistent with Popeye's corporate policy. Now if he had done something that Popeye's corporate policy actually condones, and that action had resulted in the woman's injury then, yes, Popeye's should be held responsible. Just because this thug happened to be their employee and at work at the time should not mean that the company is responsible for his criminal actions. They clearly have no way of predicting or preventing this kind of behavior, and should in no way be held responsible for their employee's violent outburst.

[masraum]

Wow! The woman is a Moron in a big way if she called him that when she was clearly outnumbered, and he was clearly not concerned about a major confrontation. No matter what she said, it doesn't justify what he did and he should pay.

I was called a cracker years ago. It confused me at first, and then I just laughed. I guess the "sticks and stones" message really stuck with me.

[unclebilly]

Are you for real?

The employee was flying the corporate colours or corporate property. Gawd damn right, Popeyes is responsible.

It happened over a double charge. It would have been WAY cheaper to give her her money back and say sorry. This guy (and Popeyes) is going to be $orry for a long time...

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

I fail to see how Popeye's can be held responsible for Mr. Deriance Ra’Shaiel Hughes' actions. He clearly took it upon himself to conduct himself in a manner inconsistent with Popeye's corporate policy. Now if he had done something that Popeye's corporate policy actually condones, and that action had resulted in the woman's injury then, yes, Popeye's should be held responsible. Just because this thug happened to be their employee and at work at the time should not mean that the company is responsible for his criminal actions. They clearly have no way of predicting or preventing this kind of behavior, and should in no way be held responsible for their employee's violent outburst.

[Baz]

'Sticks and stones may break my bones......but words can never hurt me.'

Do they still teach this to kids?

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by unclebilly

Are you for real?

The employee was flying the corporate colours or corporate property. Gawd damn right, Popeyes is responsible.

It happened over a double charge. It would have been WAY cheaper to give her her money back and say sorry. This guy (and Popeyes) is going to be $orry for a long time...

Absolutely for real. No way on earth is a company responsible for the criminal behavior of an employee, unless it can be shown that employee was acting at the behest of the company. In this case, he clearly was not.

What happened inside, when he denied (I assume he denied) her refund, is the company's problem. At that point, he was acting as a representative of the company. He was acting, I assume, contrary to his training, and that does indeed point to a failure of the company to adequately instill company values in their training program. Or a failure to recognize that he didn't "get it", and was not yet ready to deal with the public.

That is where Popeye's responsibilities end. When Mr. Hughs took it upon himself to attack this woman, that became entirely his responsibility, not his employer's. It does not make it their responsibility simply because he was wearing their uniform or under their employment at the time.

[john70t]

The continued representation of the Popeye's(tm) Franchise did not end at the counter or the front door of the establishment.

It should be noted this incident is following the victim, of certain ethnitity, being intentionally overcharged fraudulently and subject to racial epithets.
It should also be noted that the specific staff of the Popeyes(tm) restaurant does not represent the ethnic diversity of the city.
This will be expounded upon later..

The actions of Mr. Deriance Ra’Shaiel Hughes along with numerous increasingly hostile employees continued into the parking lot.
At that point, any notion of the victim being able to simply leave unharmed was no longer an option.

Most importantly, the noticeable inaction of upper management throughout this entire incident, which lasted X minutes, would suggest to any prudent observer that the entirety of the staff continued to represente the franchise as a whole.

[stevej37]

Originally Posted by john70t

Most importantly, the noticeable inaction of upper management throughout this entire incident, which lasted X minutes, would suggest to any prudent observer that the entirety of the staff continued to represente the franchise as a whole.

In the video, after she gets body-slammed, two of the employees are seen throwing their hands up and heading back inside. Not sure what else they could have done..but it looked like they were not too concerned about the womans well-being.

[RWebb]

interesting - you got civil vs. criminal liability, state vs. federal law, and then use of the N-word (albeit by aln old lady)...

sounds complicated to me

it will settle

[legion]

This person was almost certainly an employee of a Popeye's franchise, not an employee of Popeye's. Still, in our legal system, just because someone makes a stupid decision while wearing a name tag, the company name on that tag has to pay.

[biosurfer1]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Absolutely for real. No way on earth is a company responsible for the criminal behavior of an employee, unless it can be shown that employee was acting at the behest of the company. In this case, he clearly was not.

.

That is completely ridiculous. Under your logic, no company would ever be responsible for anything their employees did because it's NEVER part of any company policy to do anything illegal.

So Walmart shouldn't have been held responsible when their driver fell asleep behind the wheel and ran into Tracy Morgan's bus killing people and putting him in a coma? Pretty sure it's not in Walmarts policy to do that.

[RWebb]

I thought Jeff was talking about criminal liability, not civil

[Eric 951]

amateurs. Here in PGH a female Mcdonalds employee followed a couple outside and paralyzed the 62 year old man with a punch to the back of the head.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by unclebilly

This guy (and Popeyes) is going to be $orry for a long time...

That guy's probably got no money or anything to give/take. He probably doesn't really care that much.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by Baz

'Sticks and stones may break my bones......but words can never hurt me.'

Do they still teach this to kids?

Apparently not. Not that it matters because in some circles (and I don't mean this racially, all sorts of folks think like this) "he disrespected me" is a thing.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by Eric 951

amateurs. Here in PGH a female Mcdonalds employee followed a couple outside and paralyzed the 62 year old man with a punch to the back of the head.

And there's no amount of money that can fix that.

But there is enough money to make the rest of his life comfortable with a little left over to hire some folks to visit the person that did it to have a "chat" about how polite society works.

[Tobra]

Mr Higgins, that is not how it works.

Originally Posted by masraum

That guy's probably got no money or anything to give/take. He probably doesn't really care that much.

^this^

Popeye's has deep pockets and they will pay. It does not matter if it is a franchise.

Given that the assailant was black, and the victim was white, and it was clearly a racially motivated attack, it seems that it would be a hate crime. No one can know for certain, but I guarantee that the assailant is not charged with a hate crime.

Assume that she did call him, to use the parlance of South Park, a nagger. If he called her an ugly, broke ass cracker first, and she responded in kind, would that change anything? Should it change anything?

If someone uses a racist epithet, does it follow that you get to break their leg?