Roseville gas station employee fired for attacking robber

[justaguy]

If you’re a permit holder and have integrity are you going out of your way to save everyone? Or are you looking out for the greater good of you and yours? Most likely answer you’re looking out for number one and everything else comes in a far second. If SA gets sued in to bankruptcy how many people will loose their job? I’m guessing more than one.

I’m not saying stop doing what you think is right I’m just saying that there is more than one way to look at it. Law suits and insurance aren’t cheap. The STUPID law suits need to be stopped.

[ree]

I just got a reply to my e-mail from SA. Here's what they have to say

Thank you for contacting us and making us aware of your concerns
regarding our SuperAmerica store located in Roseville, MN.

Confronting a potentially armed robber could have serious consequences
for employees and customers. While it is regrettable this situation
occurred, it is important that we have and enforce policies to ensure
the safety of all our employees and customers during a potentially
dangerous situation.

Please understand that personnel issues are very sensitive and strictly
confidential. Be assured that appropriate management personnel have been
made aware of your comments and concerns.

We appreciate your concern as well as your patronage, and hope that you
will continue to be one of our valued customers.

Sincerely,

Speedway SuperAmerica
Customer Service

My issue with the policy is that it's interpreted as black and white, zero-tolerance. Once a bad guy has already started the violence, taking no action might actually result in greater harm than taking action. Arguably, Mark would have been allowing more harm to occur to himself and the other employee by taking the action of inaction than he did by fighting. That the manager and corporate are unable to see both sides of the coin, realize how ambiguous the policy is, and interpret it in context is what is most disturbing.

I've seen comments about how this is just like the Pizza Hut delivery case. Personally, I don't think it is. In the Pizza Hut case, they have a cut-and-dry policy: no weapons. It was clearly violated.

In the SA case, the policy was not clearly violated. Those who think it was have logic impairment and, IMO, their priorities are in the wrong place.

[princewally]

In the SA case, the policy was not clearly violated.

Even if it was, it wasn't a case of 'cooperate with the robber and all will be well'. It would have been a matter of watching a coworker get beaten, possibly to death. Who can honestly stand by and watch that, and still live with themselves after the fact? It wasn't a nameless, faceless stranger that can be forgotten, it was a coworker, possibly a friend.

This is an excellent example of a situation that calls for an exception to the rule. I won't give my money to a company that considers saving the life of a coworker to be a termination offense.

[ree]

Even if it was, it wasn't a case of 'cooperate with the robber and all will be well'. It would have been a matter of watching a coworker get beaten, possibly to death. Who can honestly stand by and watch that, and still live with themselves after the fact? It wasn't a nameless, faceless stranger that can be forgotten, it was a coworker, possibly a friend.

This is an excellent example of a situation that calls for an exception to the rule. I won't give my money to a company that considers saving the life of a coworker to be a termination offense.

Yep. I just filled up the H2 and a couple gas cans a competitor. I should start tallying my dollar amounts and forwarding these on to SA corporate in response to their sad boilerplate response.

[BRIT_in_the_weeds]

Is there a MN statute that you have to go to the aid of another??
If so, do corporate policies trump MN state law.??

If there is, I see lawyers lining up to represent the terminated employee, and in this instance I'd be ok with lawyers.

[gman1868]

SA will never get any of my money.

[Pat]

Filled up at BP yesterday...

[BRIT_in_the_weeds]

Filled up at BP yesterday...

British Petroleum..........Beautiful people

[EAGSCCW]

Copyright © 2006 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.

604A.01 GOOD SAMARITAN LAW.
Subdivision 1. Duty to assist. A person at the scene of an emergency who knows that another
person is exposed to or has suffered grave physical harm shall, to the extent that the person can
do so without danger or peril to self or others, give reasonable assistance to the exposed person.
Reasonable assistance may include obtaining or attempting to obtain aid from law enforcement or
medical personnel. A person who violates this subdivision is guilty of a petty misdemeanor.
Subd. 2. General immunity from liability. (a) A person who, without compensation or the
expectation of compensation, renders emergency care, advice, or assistance at the scene of an
emergency or during transit to a location where professional medical care can be rendered, is
not liable for any civil damages as a result of acts or omissions by that person in rendering the
emergency care, advice, or assistance, unless the person acts in a willful and wanton or reckless
manner in providing the care, advice, or assistance. This subdivision does not apply to a person
rendering emergency care, advice, or assistance during the course of regular employment, and
receiving compensation or expecting to receive compensation for rendering the care, advice, or
assistance.
(b) For the purposes of this section, the scene of an emergency is an area outside the confines
of a hospital or other institution that has hospital facilities, or an office of a person licensed to
practice one or more of the healing arts under chapter 147, 147A, 148, 150A, or 153. The scene of
an emergency includes areas threatened by or exposed to spillage, seepage, fire, explosion, or
other release of hazardous materials, and includes ski areas and trails.
(c) For the purposes of this section, "person" includes a public or private nonprofit volunteer
firefighter, volunteer police officer, volunteer ambulance attendant, volunteer first provider of
emergency medical services, volunteer ski patroller, and any partnership, corporation, association,
or other entity.
(d) For the purposes of this section, "compensation" does not include payments,
reimbursement for expenses, or pension benefits paid to members of volunteer organizations.
(e) For purposes of this section, "emergency care" includes providing emergency medical
care by using or providing an automatic external defibrillator, unless the person on whom the
device is to be used objects; or unless the person is rendering this care during the course of regular
employment, the person is receiving or expects to receive compensation for rendering this care,
and the usual and regular duties of the person include the provision of emergency medical care.
"Automatic external defibrillator" means a medical device heart monitor and defibrillator that:
(1) has received approval of its premarket notification, filed pursuant to United States Code,
title 21, section 360(k), from the United States Food and Drug Administration;
(2) is capable of recognizing the presence or absence of ventricular fibrillation or rapid
ventricular tachycardia, and is capable of determining, without intervention by an operator,
whether defibrillation should be performed; and
(3) upon determining that defibrillation should be performed, automatically charges and
requests delivery of an electrical impulse to an individual's heart.
History: 1994 c 623 art 2 s 1; 1995 c 205 art 2 s 8; 1998 c 329 s 1; 2001 c 107 s 1

[JonL]

Yeah, but that refers to medical care and stands mute in the situation discussed here.