[masraum]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

That is not what I said at all. You either misunderstood, or are intentionally exaggerating.



If the driver fell asleep because Walmart had him on the road too long, had him working back to back shifts with too little rest, then yes - they share liability. If it were truly something Walmart had done that caused him to nod off, then absolutely, they would be liable.

If, on the other hand, the driver was up too late partying, had through his own actions deprived himself of sleep, why would Walmart be liable? If the guy had health issues that he kept from Walmart, why would they be liable?

This whole notion that an employer is "liable" for the aberrant deeds of each and every employee (at least while they are on the clock) has got to stop. I know Americans love to sue, and it is pretty fruitless to sue some low level employee with no assets. Far more profitable to sue the employer, who had absolutely no control over, had absolutely nothing to do with the crime committed.

So, those of you touting Popeye's responsibility for this are, by insinuation, asserting that Popeye's was negligent in preventing this man from attacking this woman. You are asserting that Popeye's failed to do something. Please, then, explain what that "something" might be. Something tangible - some area in which Popeye's clearly failed. Something you would put in place, in your own business, to prevent an employee from doing something similar.

How it should be and how it is in practice are two very different things.