From: "consumerrelations bb" firstname.lastname@example.org
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 1:46:14 AM
Subject: Ref #3084662
May 20, 2011
Thank you for contacting Walgreens regarding this matter. Our policies in this area are designed to maintain the maximum safety of our customers and employees.Store employees receive comprehensive training on our company’s robbery procedures and how to react and respond to a potential robbery situation. In past incidents, employees have told us they’ve found this training effective.These policies and training programs are endorsed by law enforcement, which strongly advises against confrontation of crime suspects.Compliance is safer than confrontation. Through this practice, we have been able to maintain an exemplary record of safety.We’ve made significant investments in security technology in recent years, including increasing the number of digital surveillance cameras at our stores.With upgrades to security technology, we are able to provide police with high-resolution photographs and video of crime suspects.We continue to invest in state-of-the-art security measures and high-definition surveillance equipment and hope that the apprehension of robbery suspects in the Benton Harbor area will prevent future crimes. Thank you for contacting Walgreens to share your comments.
Consumer Response Representative
You can still take your policy and ram it,
When one has a gun pointed at their head company policy pretty much goes out the window.
Cameras provide historical data, as to what happen, and they do not prevent crime, yes they may solve it at a later date, but that is of little use to the victims. Big brother watching me does not increase my security.
Your policy is against personal defense, and compliance is getting people killed
Really law enforcement is telling you compliance is better?, as the FBI has reported several times the worse choice a victim can make is submit to an attacker.
Nearly every week we review robbery videos of clerks in stores being shot in the head, after they complied.
A couple of high profile cases the Lane Bryant robbery in Chicago IN 2008, five dead when they complied with the robber, or the Wendys massacre in NY in 2000, again 5 dead.
Cases like Michael Swanson killing two store clerks in November of 2010 in Iowa, (Video shows clerks complying) when ask why he killed them, he said because he could are growing evermore typical.
We have arrived at a new age of vicious criminals, that will kill, and maim, whenever given the chance.
Behaving passively increases the chance of injury or death by 1.4 times
Your polices are outdated, and today's criminals are more violent, more determined that they were a decade ago
Your polices are against human nature and life, and are designed to cover the company and not the people.
If an employee stands their ground and stops a robbery or worse, the company could be held liable, but dead employees can be replaced.
Your polices are about protecting profits, not people. If Walgreens truly cares about both customers and employees they would have fresh eyes look at those stated polices, and revise them for today's violent criminal element.
As long as Walgreens maintains its anti-self defense policy, I would not feel safe shopping in any of your locations, and urge others that feel the same way to shop elsewhere.
I've done some thinking on this, since my own workplace also puts all of their eggs in the "prevention" basket. Where else in life do we employ this kind of thinking?
We don't do preventative maintenance on our vehicles, then simply abandon them when they break. We don't practice preventative medicine exclusively, and then submit if we get sick or injured.
Sure, prevention may be preferable, but to depend solely on avoidance with no realistic plan for response is folly.
Response is do everything the nice bad man tells you, and well if he decides to injure or kill you thats all right too, we will just hire someone else.
Post a Comment