After senior management became aware of the incident and spoke to Donna Hansbrough today, we are reinstating her job, and we are pleased that she has accepted the offer to return to Lowe’s.
First and foremost, there’s nothing more important than the safety of our customers and associates. Products can be replaced; people cannot.
We continue to work closely with law enforcement to investigate and prosecute those who are responsible for this theft and violent attack.
Comments (26)
sorted by:
Sounds like they were already getting backlash and since they didn't want to be another budlight they quickly got her back to try and stem the response.
This shouldn't be a policy, if it's such a risk to protect your products in an area, LEAVE. Don't sell in that area and make them either have to drive to you miles away in a safer zone or force them to have to order to deliver your products at a higher cost.
Lowe’s has spoken, “Come and rob us.”
It should be both legally protected and socially encouraged to shoot theives on the spot.
Imagine if Homeless Deathspot or one of the other big box stores came out and offered a program where if you stopped a shoplifter, you got store credit.
So... Everything is 100% off at Lowe's?
Gonna give what the kids call a "hot take" and say the woman was in the wrong here. She risked her life in the name of corporate profitability. Ostensibly she's a wife and mother and she could have died preventing Lowes from experiencing 1% more shrinkage. Really dumb move. Protect your shit, not corporate shit.
If you get your ass beat defending Lowes and their first response is to fire you for it, it wasn't a decent place to begin with. Especially since the ones who fired you don't suffer any consequences for it, and the ones who attacked you are gonna get a slap on the wrist. All you're left with in the end is a beating.
"The only two possible outcomes are to die for your corporate masters or devolve into total anarchy"
Man, whichever dimension you're posting from, I hope I never have to visit. We have way more options in this reality.
"You are what you tolerate."
She wants to live in a world where people are civilized and obey at least the basics of social order and don't take things that don't belong to them.
Does Lowes deserve that kind of protection? No. Does Lowes give two shits about her? No. But she works there, and presumably lives nearby, and wants to defend the semblance of normalcy for her community.
If more people were like her I'd be a lot less black pilled about the future of the west.
More people being like her won't mean anything. It's people in power who matter, and they're all terrible.
Yeah, everyone is talking like this is some story where a hero will rise and change the tides. They are fully stuck in their protagonist mindset.
When the reality is that if she got unlucky, she would just be shot dead and no one would care. And if she succeeded she got a small pat on the back and everyone moved on. Its a meaningless battle where nothing you do will do a thing, unless you change it from a higher point.
It's something we have to teach good people in a low-trust society though. Natural instinct - especially if you've worked somewhere a long time - is to defend your turf the same way you would protect your own business. In this case it's good that the corp has a policy against it, but they could punish people without firing them.
These types of businesses wouldn't have given a fuck if she got killed, the low-trust society is exactly this for a reason. This isn't some local shop where the owner would probably remember that moment for the rest of their lives and be really grateful. The only reason they care is because of liability.
No, they've shown that with their actions against the employee, why encourage undeserved loyalty to that place? Every time you see a corporation operate, their entire function is minimise cost and maximise profit come 2024 they'll probably replace her with a migrant and give her the boot again once the dust has settled on the media reporting and everybody has forgotten about it.
At 68 and with an attitude like hers, she's nothing but a liability to the system.
Problem is corporate policy is often contradictory. It will be don't engage with shoplifters but the employees will get in trouble for too much being shoplifted on their shifts.
I've seen that. I had a friend that worked a customer service line. They were required to take every call and run the issue to resolution, but at the same time were punished if they didn't clear so many calls per hour.
The employee's solution? If a call seemed too complicated or that it would take too long, they would hang up and pretend that they just got disconnected. See also those Wells Fargo branches that were creating fake accounts to meet corporate new account targets.
When a business asks for irrational or contradictory performance by employees, they will find the path of least resistance where they don't get into trouble.
Yep. My friend had a similar situation working for a cell phone company. They told them not to open up any accounts that seemed like they were fraud but at the same time the monthly quota they had was so high that it required you open up fraud accounts.
On top of that you were punished more for not meeting quota than you were if you opened fraud accounts and had them cancelled. So everyone just opened up the fraud accounts because usually by the time they got detected and deactivated it was past the time for their review.
Back when I worked a corpo job, we mostly solved the contradiction by simply preventing them from being able to shoplift to begin with.
Mostly through a lot of spooking and increasing their paranoia, because rarely are shoplifters cool hardened criminals. Even just a random "security to section orange" over the loud speaker (we had no security or sections) saw a noticeable dip in shoplifting as they would drop their shit and power walk out.
It won't solve it completely, but that's the issue with both people and corporations. They want a full solution to the problem and can never accept that some things can only be helped instead of finished.
Reason #238174 why feminism is a social disease.
Males don't give birth, retard.
This woman is 68 you moron what kids do you think she's popping out? Hahahaha
We're talking about feminism, not this particular woman. Pay attention.
And yet you referred to this woman as "Reason #45987987"
No, I didn't. There's a secret technique that will allow you to understand this which you can learn here: https://www.universalclass.com/i/course/reading-comprehension-101.htm