Quote:
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.