Next Question

Mahalo is adding a tip to all questions that don't offer a tip.
M¢25 Funded By Mahalo ? |
February 28, 2009 08:57 PM
RSS
Hmm. I can kind of understand both sides, though I choose to side with Barbara.
"That case was decided on Tuesday, with a Bundesarbeitsgericht (state labor court) in Berlin upholding the grocery chain's right to dismiss her. The argumentation being that a company has every right to fire an employee after "an irreparable breach of trust." "
Irreparable breach of trust... for stealing $1.66? She's been there for 31 years, can't they look back and check her record and see she's done nothing else? However, $1.66 is easy enough to miss... what if she'd been stealing $1 a month, here and there without being noticed, for 31 years?
My opinion: She should have been penalized, and been put back into almost like training... having a manager keep a close eye on her, have every cent that passes through her hands closely monitored, etc. She'd been an employee for 31 years, that's long enough for the company to take out the time and resources to do something like that to give her a chance.
"That same day, Bild Zeitung quoted Kaiser's -- company slogan Here Beats The Heart -- Regional Manager Tobias Tuchlenski "I can't understand why she stole from us. We have 5,000 employees in Berlin. Imagine what would happen if all of them stole €1.30 every day?" "
He's got a point, that they have to set a standard and show all employees that this was unacceptable behavior. However, I still say that it was too harsh... penalize her, dock it from her pay, put her back under training, whatever... but don't fire her on the spot for such a small first offense after 31 years worth of loyalty.
"Barbara E. herself believes that the true reason behind her dismissal was her outspokenness, and her participation in a strike at Kaiser's, end of 2007."
That's probably the case. That ticked them off and they were looking for an excuse to legitimately fire her. But again, that's only opinion.
Bottom line: What she did was wrong, but their reaction to fire her on the spot was wrong as well.
Source(s):
http://www.plastic.com/article.html;sid=09/02/27/22494573
Permalink | Report
If indeed she was fired because she stole $1.65, then I think that were are many other ways to deal with this besides firing her.
However, if she stole the money and is refusing to own up to it, then the firing is legitimate.
Permalink | Report
Answered Question

Mahalo is adding a tip to all questions that don't offer a tip.
What do you guys think of the Barbara E. case?
Basically, 50-year-old Barbara "Barbara E." Emme was a cashier at the same grocery store for 31 years, but was fired after being accused of stealing €1.30 ($1.65) in bottle recycling deposit receipts. (No, I didn't misplace that decimal point. One euro, thirty euro cents).
After a court decision defended the firing, it turned into a widespread scandal - why do those Wall Street bankers get to run off with billions of dollars and keep their jobs, while a lowly cashier is accused of stealing €1.30 and is sacked after 31 years on the job?
Basically, she's become a prominent figure of the upcoming elections in Germany - sort of the "Joe the Plumber" of socialism.
Your thoughts?
http://www.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idUSTRE51P69V20090226
After a court decision defended the firing, it turned into a widespread scandal - why do those Wall Street bankers get to run off with billions of dollars and keep their jobs, while a lowly cashier is accused of stealing €1.30 and is sacked after 31 years on the job?
Basically, she's become a prominent figure of the upcoming elections in Germany - sort of the "Joe the Plumber" of socialism.
Your thoughts?
http://www.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idUSTRE51P69V20090226
Interesting Question?
Yes (1)
No (0)
RSS
Best Answer Chosen by Asker
| February 28, 2009 09:33 PM |
"That case was decided on Tuesday, with a Bundesarbeitsgericht (state labor court) in Berlin upholding the grocery chain's right to dismiss her. The argumentation being that a company has every right to fire an employee after "an irreparable breach of trust." "
Irreparable breach of trust... for stealing $1.66? She's been there for 31 years, can't they look back and check her record and see she's done nothing else? However, $1.66 is easy enough to miss... what if she'd been stealing $1 a month, here and there without being noticed, for 31 years?
My opinion: She should have been penalized, and been put back into almost like training... having a manager keep a close eye on her, have every cent that passes through her hands closely monitored, etc. She'd been an employee for 31 years, that's long enough for the company to take out the time and resources to do something like that to give her a chance.
"That same day, Bild Zeitung quoted Kaiser's -- company slogan Here Beats The Heart -- Regional Manager Tobias Tuchlenski "I can't understand why she stole from us. We have 5,000 employees in Berlin. Imagine what would happen if all of them stole €1.30 every day?" "
He's got a point, that they have to set a standard and show all employees that this was unacceptable behavior. However, I still say that it was too harsh... penalize her, dock it from her pay, put her back under training, whatever... but don't fire her on the spot for such a small first offense after 31 years worth of loyalty.
"Barbara E. herself believes that the true reason behind her dismissal was her outspokenness, and her participation in a strike at Kaiser's, end of 2007."
That's probably the case. That ticked them off and they were looking for an excuse to legitimately fire her. But again, that's only opinion.
Bottom line: What she did was wrong, but their reaction to fire her on the spot was wrong as well.
Source(s):
http://www.plastic.com/article.html;sid=09/02/27/22494573
| Asker's Rating: |
• Great feedback.
Permalink | Report
Other Answers (1)
February 28, 2009 09:34 PM
I think that there must have been some other reason than that given for firing her. If I was a customer, I think that I would have lost trust in the supermarket management because of this. If indeed she was fired because she stole $1.65, then I think that were are many other ways to deal with this besides firing her.
However, if she stole the money and is refusing to own up to it, then the firing is legitimate.
Permalink | Report
Answer this Question
Related Questions
Ask a Question
Buy Mahalo Dollars with Credit Card or PayPal
Top Members
Most Popular Tags
Categories
- Anonymous
- Arts & Design
- Beauty & Style
- Books & Authors
- Business
- Cars & Transportation
- Consumer Electronics
- Coupons Deals
- Education
- Entertainment
- Environment
- Fitness
- Food & Drink
- From Email
- From Iphone
- From Twitter
- Health
- History
- Hobbies
- Home & Garden
- How Tos
- Humor
- Jobs
- Legal
- Local
- Love & Relationships
- Mahalo Answers Community
- Money
- Music
- News
- NSFW
- Parenting
- Pets
- Science & Mathematics
- Services
- Shopping
- Social Science
- Society & Culture
- Sports
- Technology & Internet
- Travel
- Video Games
Welcome New Members
- tinaleebremille..., December 07, 2009 10:17 PM
- teddy13, December 07, 2009 10:09 PM
- eduardk66, December 07, 2009 10:06 PM
- terretta, December 07, 2009 10:01 PM
- hery, December 07, 2009 09:58 PM
Mahalo Dollars are the currency of Mahalo Answers.
Each Mahalo Dollar costs $1.
Once you earn more than 40 Mahalo Dollars, you can request to be paid via PayPal. Each Mahalo Dollar is currently worth $0.75 when paid out via PayPal. Learn More
P.S. I think that was the first time that I've ever used the words "cashier" and "31 years of tenure" in the same sentence. lol