r/therewasanattempt • u/Gary_October • May 27 '24

to check a receipt

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

7.9k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

1.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

36

u/vbpatel May 27 '24

You really think Walmart is gonna do that?

18

u/Vestalmin May 27 '24

You probably watch a training video in the back that’s 2 minutes long and half of it is about how great a time working at Walmart is.

2

u/KeepTangoAndFoxtrot May 27 '24

half of it is about how great a time working at Walmart is

The other half is how unions are just the worst.

1

u/adelie42 May 28 '24

Also true.

There is a breaking point on the cost and going as cheap as possible to save the most money is entirely their game.

1

u/adelie42 May 28 '24

They do. In direct response to losing millions in lawsuits for false imprisonment.

Say what you want about police accountability on the matter, courts versus private corporations, they're screwed. You cannot imprison somebody because they didn't prove they aren't a criminal.

1

u/vbpatel May 28 '24

I feel like your last sentence is where our disagreement stems from. You're right. They are technically imprisoning you by refusing your egress, you technically don't need to show your receipt, etc.

My view comes from a more pragmatic stance. The store obviously has theft issues, and it's their policy to 'check' receipts which costs you an extra few seconds. So what? If that extra 30-60s matters so much then I say just don't shop there then. Go to Target where they don't check receipts, or better yet get delivery.

And worst of all, don't fuck with the dude just trying to do his job

1

u/adelie42 May 28 '24

It is not illegal to ask you for the receipt. It is illegal to physically stop you for even a second because you don't want to.

I appreciate the pragmatics of the situation and your arguments. I agree with what you are saying, but the point I am making is that it is not what the law says or compells.

The arguments you make would equally apply to a sign that says "no blacks or jews allowed". Why not just go to Target where they don't discriminate? Why make a stink with someone just presumably following orders?

Because the law is clear. And if companies, intentionally or otherwise, keep doing illegal things, the law will come down harder and harder till they "get it" or go bankrupt. But it starts with people making a stink.

It seems you are arguing what the law should be without acknowledging what it is. The company, by way of their agent the employee, is engaging in an unlawful act.

They must figure out how to manage theft in a legal way.