Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Advice re assault at work (not me)

kalidarkone

kalidarkone

Bringing YOU round.....
My friends ma (E) works for Sainsbury as a manager. She is a middle aged.

A customer tried to leave the shop without paying for £200 worth of groceries. Two staff including (E) blocked the customer leaving and challenged him regarding the attempted theft.

The customer was holding a bottle of wine and proceeded to batter the other staff member round the head with it. It took 5 cops to restrain and arrest the customer. (E) sustained some cuts and bruises.

Senior management now have called (E) in for a disciplinary and are saying that she handled the situation badly and did not adequately protect the other member of staff. They are not accepting any responsibility. After the meeting they sent (E) back to work a really long shift till 11pm. No one asked if she was OK. There has been no duty of care shown. She might lose her job.

To me it sounds like some kind of constructive dismissal? Trying to avoid paying compensation to (E) and battered staff member? This is conjecture on my part.

(E) is in a union so has contacted them. We are getting her to write a statement. Have suggested that she goes sick and looks for another job in the meanwhile.

Also there is an ongoing safety issue to consider. What if thieving customer comes back to have a go at (E) or collegue?

Any advice gratefully received.
A list of next steps would be handy.

moomoo I know you work in retail- any advice?
Elpenor Puddy_Tat cesare
 
OK look I don't know about the ins and outs of it and you'll probably get more sensible advice from others but I would suggest:

If staff working in retail have NOT been trained and have an SIA certification or similar Security qualification, been trained in safe restraint etc, then it shouldn't be their fucking job to work as if they are security guards, to try to remove goods from or detain a shoplifter, nor is it their duty to physically protect their retail colleagues.

Employers who expect retail staff to deal with this sort of situation need to be put in that position them fucking selves.

Sorry if this isn't helpful - what your friend and her colleague are going through is awful - I hope they manage to get some good advice and are OK
 
Also £200 is never worth getting beaten up over even if it's your own money, and if the fucking owners of the shops are putting their retail staff in a position where they are and then disciplining them for not dealing with it adequately, then that is fucking disgraceful. Fuming on behalf of them both :mad:
 
kalidarkone said:
My friends ma (E) works for Sainsbury as a manager. She is a middle aged.

A customer tried to leave the shop without paying for £200 worth of groceries. Two staff including (E) blocked the customer leaving and challenged him regarding the attempted theft.

The customer was holding a bottle of wine and proceeded to batter the other staff member round the head with it. It took 5 cops to restrain and arrest the customer. (E) sustained some cuts and bruises.

Senior management now have called (E) in for a disciplinary and are saying that she handled the situation badly and did not adequately protect the other member of staff. They are not accepting any responsibility. After the meeting they sent (E) back to work a really long shift till 11pm. No one asked if she was OK. There has been no duty of care shown. She might lose her job.

To me it sounds like some kind of constructive dismissal? Trying to avoid paying compensation to (E) and battered staff member? This is conjecture on my part.

(E) is in a union so has contacted them. We are getting her to write a statement. Have suggested that she goes sick and looks for another job in the meanwhile.

Also there is an ongoing safety issue to consider. What if thieving customer comes back to have a go at (E) or collegue?

Any advice gratefully received.
A list of next steps would be handy.

moomoo I know you work in retail- any advice?
Elpenor Puddy_Tat cesare
Click to expand...

First, it's good that E is in a union and should get proper support from them.

One thing it would be worth finding out is what Sainsbury's policy is regarding shop staff getting involved in intervening to stop people leaving without paying.

If the advice is that they shouldn't intervene, and if E as a manager not only intervened themselves but also encouraged a member of staff who they are responsible for to intervene, then they might be in a position where the employer can effectively blame them for anything that happened and deny any responsibility.
 
andysays said:
First, it's good that E is in a union and should get proper support from them.

One thing it would be worth finding out is what Sainsbury's policy is regarding shop staff getting involved in intervening to stop people leaving without paying.

If the advice is that they shouldn't intervene, and if E as a manager not only intervened themselves but also encouraged a member of staff who they are responsible for to intervene, then they might be in a position where the employer can effective blame them for anything that happened and deny any responsibility.
Click to expand...
Yeah I've just asked that question regarding policy and expectations. Will post the reply.
 
Thinking from a more campaigning/action point of view, rather than the strictly legal/disciplinary side, if they are expected to intervene - and given that the workplace is unionised, might it be worth them campaigning for a work to rule and refusing to do the job of security guards?
 
andysays said:
First, it's good that E is in a union and should get proper support from them.

One thing it would be worth finding out is what Sainsbury's policy is regarding shop staff getting involved in intervening to stop people leaving without paying.

If the advice is that they shouldn't intervene, and if E as a manager not only intervened themselves but also encouraged a member of staff who they are responsible for to intervene, then they might be in a position where the employer can effectively blame them for anything that happened and deny any responsibility.
Click to expand...

If their contracts state that they shouldn't intervene, then with my union rep hat on I'd be suggesting they argue the case that they've been given inadequate training and instruction about how to avoid such situations - swing it that way, and place the fault with the employer.
 
kalidarkone said:
So apparently the staff are supposed to let them walk. There is no security at this branch.
Click to expand...
Go the inadequate training route - they've not been fully trained in policy or de-escalation strategies, and with the rise in shoplifting this is becoming more urgent to ensure all staff know their role and how to deal with this sort of situation.
 
andysays said:
If, on the other hand, either the official policy or the unofficial message from higher management is that staff should intervene, then they need to take full responsibility if that goes bad, which it sounds like it has here.
Click to expand...
Even if this is the case, it does not sound like management delt with it correctly. Putting her back on a long shift??? Even if things went a bit tits they should have their employees back as best they can. Sounds like they went for the worst most aggressive route with no sympathy, empathy or duty of care.
 
kalidarkone said:
My friends ma (E) works for Sainsbury as a manager. She is a middle aged.

A customer tried to leave the shop without paying for £200 worth of groceries. Two staff including (E) blocked the customer leaving and challenged him regarding the attempted theft.

The customer was holding a bottle of wine and proceeded to batter the other staff member round the head with it. It took 5 cops to restrain and arrest the customer. (E) sustained some cuts and bruises.

Senior management now have called (E) in for a disciplinary and are saying that she handled the situation badly and did not adequately protect the other member of staff. They are not accepting any responsibility. After the meeting they sent (E) back to work a really long shift till 11pm. No one asked if she was OK. There has been no duty of care shown. She might lose her job.

To me it sounds like some kind of constructive dismissal? Trying to avoid paying compensation to (E) and battered staff member? This is conjecture on my part.

(E) is in a union so has contacted them. We are getting her to write a statement. Have suggested that she goes sick and looks for another job in the meanwhile.

Also there is an ongoing safety issue to consider. What if thieving customer comes back to have a go at (E) or collegue?

Any advice gratefully received.
A list of next steps would be handy.

moomoo I know you work in retail- any advice?
Elpenor Puddy_Tat cesare
Click to expand...
Listen to the union.

See if the union will stump up for a lawyer and listen to what the lawyer says.

Don't say anything to anyone till they have taken legal advice. Maybe write some notes for herself, but DON'T give them or share them with the company until they have been reviewed by a lawyer. If the company ask for a duty report DON'T make one until she has spoken to a lawyer.

In light of all the above (and I am not a lawyer) it might be far far better for your friend if the reason they intervened wasn't in fact to prevent any financial loss but because they believed that the subject was about to be violent towards other colleagues or other customers and all they were doing was acting to prevent this.

Again try and get a lawyer. Don't say or write anything until they have spoken to a lawyer.

Again I am not a lawyer but I do know a little bit about the practical application of English laws around use of force. PM me if you would like a chat.

For what it's worth, I think it is incredibly unlikely the subject will come back and have a go.

Try and get a lawyer.
 
Last edited:
Throbbing Angel said:
Aye - I noticed that a local Co-op has GPS trackers in their meat boxes now. :(
Click to expand...
Our local Morrisons has all their baby formula security protected - I just find that shocking.
It's one thing to put the bottles of spirits and fillet steak under lock and key but ffs if people need baby formula just let them fucking take it - it's shocking to me that it is deemed reasonable to protect profits even if it means an infant may be undernourished due to poverty.
 
I work in a different supermarket and we just watch thieves filling their bags with booze and we do nothing. Today a man ran past me out of the fire exit with a basket full of Voltarol. Our lives are worth than a few quid and round here they’ve probably got knives or needles so they can crack on. Occasionally the security will stop someone pushing a trolley out but if they go through the back there is literally nothing we can do.
 
Epona said:
Our local Morrisons has all their baby formula security protected - I just find that shocking.
It's one thing to put the bottles of spirits and fillet steak under lock and key but ffs if people need baby formula just let them fucking take it - it's shocking to me that it is deemed reasonable to protect profits even if it means an infant may be undernourished due to poverty.
Click to expand...
Trouble with that is that inside six weeks the shops just won't bothering to stock baby food for people to buy.
 
Epona said:
Go the inadequate training route - they've not been fully trained in policy or de-escalation strategies, and with the rise in shoplifting this is becoming more urgent to ensure all staff know their role and how to deal with this sort of situation.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this bit is important.

Everyone should have been properly trained in the policy of non-intervention (if that's what it is) and there should be a record of that training for each individual as part of an induction or similar.

It should also be reinforced whenever there's an incident or potential incident, ie managers should inform staff that something happened and remind everyone what the correct thing to do in that situation is.
 
A380 said:
Trouble with that is that inside six weeks the shops just won't bothering to stock baby food for people to buy.
Click to expand...
I don't really see a problem with the idea of shopping for profit dying out in favour of fair distribution of goods to those who need them - but that's not for this thread, so I'll leave it there ;)
 
skyscraper101 said:
I think QoG works for Sainsburys too? Any insider knowledge here?

QueenOfGoths
Click to expand...
Funnily enough I was sitting next to someone doing safety training today.

While we are advised not to intervene in case of violence, and it is mentioned that intervening outside the store may result in a disciplinary, we are also asked not to stand by if we witness behaviour that we feel is wrong either by customers or other members of staff.

Now I think that's a bit contradictory as on the one had we're not to intervene on the other we're supposed to "own it" and point it out. Which basically means, in my case, finding a manager.

I'm not sure this helps and I don't know if managers receive different training. I'm assuming they do. It does sound rather dodgy though.
 
kalidarkone

:( not to mention :mad:

subject to the usual disclaimers that i'm not a lawyer, don't work in retail or security, and it's a long time since i was a union rep...

a few angles here.

what you've said on this thread is contradictory -

kalidarkone said:
and are saying that she handled the situation badly and did not adequately protect the other member of staff
Click to expand...

kalidarkone said:
So apparently the staff are supposed to let them walk.
Click to expand...

have senior management now shifted their position?

i don't think that retail staff (even managers) have any powers to get physical with members of the public. I think that SIA licensed security staff have some powers, although i'm a bit fuzzy what they are. police obviously have more powers.

think the first question is what instructions / training has E received about what to do in this sort of situation? and was E following those instructions? and are those instructions reasonable and lawful? employees have the right to refuse to follow instructions that would be illegal, or an obvious safety hazard. (although seeking union advice as soon as possible is recommended here.)

i'm now the sort of transport worker who mostly drives a desk, but last time i was front line, that employer's instructions / training were about recognising potential violent situations, avoiding them if at all possible, defusing rather than escalating them, and emphasis was on getting out of situation rather than getting in to a fight.

i'm aware of a situation on the underground a year or so back where a station staff member was at least threatened with the sack for intervening to protect a pregnant colleague who was getting attacked by a passenger (i don't know the full details so there's a lot of 'alleged' in play here - I think the RMT were balloting for strike action over this, but not sure what the outcome of it all was.) From what I'm aware, the expectation is that railway station gateline staff are not expected to try and physically detain someone they suspect of fare-dodging, there are revenue protection / railway enforcement officers who may have more powers.

was a disciplinary discussion held in the immediate aftermath of the incident? it would probably be invalid if E was injured / still in a state of shock.

has E reported this in the accident book (or electronic equivalent) as a work related incident / injury? i'm out of touch with the rules about what level of work related incident has to be reported further, or who to - HSE have some responsibilities in this area, but some workplace safety is down to local councils' environmental health, and i really can't remember the detail.

I wouldn't recommend booking off sick just to make a point (bearing in mind that many employers regard being sick as a disciplinary offence) but also would not recommend continuing to work if E is not in a fit state to. If they do report sick, then E should make sure it's reported and recorded as sickness arising from a workplace injury /assault.

Second strand to it is that employer has a duty to take reasonable steps to ensure employees' health and safety. and they should at least have considered the risk of incidents with shop-lifters getting violent. What may be reasonable for one location may be inadequate somewhere else.

Union representation in retail is difficult, as there's so many part time / casual staff - it's a spiral where the union doesn't have much bargaining power because it doesn't have many members, so people don't bother to join what they see as a weak union.

Ultimately, union rep is the best line at the moment - and I hope the union rep in question knows that a useful skill is knowing when to call on regional office (or whatever the set up is) rather than trying to muddle through something that's beyond them.

Does E know what the other member of staff is doing? Them both working together would be better than senior management trying to play them off against each other.

Looking for another job is always an option, but probably not a good idea to resign too soon. Constructive dismissal is a legal concept, but my understanding is it's difficult to get it to a tribunal if you haven't at least tried to resolve it via a grievance first. Again, advice from union or lawyer is recommended before going down that path.
 
kalidarkone said:
To me it sounds like some kind of constructive dismissal?
Click to expand...
I don't see how constructive dismissal comes in? This is a disciplinary.
kalidarkone said:
Senior management now have called (E) in for a disciplinary and are saying that she handled the situation badly and did not adequately protect the other member of staff. They are not accepting any responsibility. After the meeting they sent (E) back to work a really long shift till 11pm. No one asked if she was OK. There has been no duty of care shown. She might lose her job.
Click to expand...
If the employer follows the Acas guidelines (and if they don't it should count against them) then there should be an investigation to determine the facts - and there is a requirement for the investigating officer to look for evidence that exonerates as much as shows 'guilt'. Only after the investigation should the employer proceed to a hearing.

E's done the first thing - contact their union.
The next thing I'd suggest it that E establish what policy, process and procedures the employer is using - they can ask to see the policy (they should have been provided with it), and at the minimum should have an email, more properly a letter, outlining the procedure
If the employer has considered trying to resolve the issue informally but feels they need to start a disciplinary procedure, they must tell the employee straight away.

They should do this in writing and should include:
  • sufficient information about the alleged misconduct or poor performance
  • possible consequences, for example a written warning
The employee should have this information in time to prepare for a disciplinary 'hearing'. This is a meeting where the employer hears all the evidence to make a final decision.
The employer must make sure they follow a full and fair procedure throughout.
This is for the protection of the employee, the employer and their organisation.
Click to expand...

I'm not quire clear from your post if the employer is counting this 'talk' after the incident as the investigation, they should not be, it clearly would not stand up to scrutiny but bosses try on all sorts of crap. E needs to have clarity as to whether the meeting they've been requested to attend is an investigation meeting or a hearing.

With regards to lawyers - IME most unions would not provide legal support at this stage. The investigation/hearing would be done by a rep or possibly some sort of official. So E should not get too stressed out if there is no lawyer at this stage. It would certainly be very unusual to be allowed to bring a lawyer to any hearing.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sue
Epona said:
Our local Morrisons has all their baby formula security protected - I just find that shocking.
It's one thing to put the bottles of spirits and fillet steak under lock and key but ffs if people need baby formula just let them fucking take it - it's shocking to me that it is deemed reasonable to protect profits even if it means an infant may be undernourished due to poverty.
Click to expand...
I think the people stealing baby formula aren't stealing it to feed their own starving bairns or see themselves as some Robin Hood figure stealing from the rich to give to the poor, it's far more likely they're stealing it so they can then sell it onto the parents of the aforementioned starving bairns at slightly less than what Morrison is doing.
 
Puddy_Tat said:
I think that SIA licensed security staff have some powers, although i'm a bit fuzzy what they are. police obviously have more powers.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that SIA-licensed security officers have no more powers than any other person.

Security officers may - like any person - use reasonable force for lawful purposes. Security officers - like any person - may carry and use handcuffs. Security officers - like any person - may not carry weapons. Security officers - like any person - have the right under certain conditions to arrest or detain someone.

There is a small tranche of security officers who have additional powers, such as ‘authorised officers’ employed by NHS organisations. ‘Authorised officers’ are empowered under the Criminal Justice & Immigration Act to eject people from NHS premises under specifically enumerated conditions. Any force used must be justifiably ‘reasonable’ for it to be legal.
 
What a terrible situation your friend is in kalidarkone ... My sympathy & support
Seems to be dammed if you do and dammed if you don't !

My advice - write up a log of events, both your friend and her colleague as well as any witnesses.
Contact Union [I see ^^^ that's already in hand]
look at official policies [get copies]
Advice from ACAS
and get a lawyer [via the union that specialises in employee rights legislation]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Men - have you ever been sexually harrassed at work?
2 3 4 5
Replies
127
Views
5K
Hollis
Hollis
muvva
Job offer advice please
Replies
18
Views
448
MickiQ
MickiQ
Thora
Careers advice for young people
2 3 4
Replies
111
Views
2K
cesare
cesare
P
Wearing sunglasses at work
2
Replies
56
Views
2K
tommers
tommers
ruffneck23
Advice re late payment from agency
Replies
6
Views
384
wemakeyousoundb
wemakeyousoundb
Back
Top Bottom