Popeyes is yet another example of a POOR corporate citizen.

Popeyes....

The apology is a start, but just a start. This young working mother was first terrorized by the armed robber, then terrorized and humiliated by her direct supervisor. Only after the firestorm that broke out on social media, did Popeye's change their tune.

I think something just a bit more in compensation would be appropriate for her, say something like a very, very large cash settlement.

1. The robbery should be covered by insurance
2. Did the franchise have insurance? Because not having it would be stupid. But... firing the woman was also stupid. So anything is possible
3. Is it company policy (spoken or unspoken) to make the employee pay it back. As stupid as that may sound, I've read stories about companies that had some bafflingly stupid policies

We should follow up on this issue.

it was illegal and against company policy to make a cashier cover shortages from their pocket, even if they volunteered to make it up. Policy also stated that we were to cooperate with robbers and not do anything to antagonize them.

All stores have insurance, though $400 isn't worth filing a claim.

Firing this woman as they did, in the advent of social media, was a monstrously stupid thing to do, and a "Career limiting move" for the manager.

cash in her register. Apparently when you get a certain amount of cash you are supposed to somehow put it in the safe or give it to your superviser. It said it wasn't her only disciplinary action, but who knows what the other was or if that is even true.

In addition to the apology and back pay. Give her paid maternity leave and find a position within the corporate offices to train her into so she'd have a decent stable job.

All it would have taken is thinking outside the box and it could have been a huge win for both the company and the employee.

where they are fairly popular. I've only eaten there once since I moved here 11 years ago.

I was eating lunch at around 3 in the afternoon at a Popeyes in a rough part of town (seems a lot of Popeyes I've seen are in rough parts of town). I just sat down with my chicken and 2 guys who were hanging out (the only other people in the dining room) came and sat across from me. First one of them said, "we decided we're going to take that chicken"...I told them to f_off...then he said, "Now we're gonna need the chicken and your money...and that watch too"...at the same time reaching into his pocket...I reac u ed under the table and flipped it onto it's side. The disturbance brought the manager out who I hadn't seen before...he was 6' something with a 60" chest, grabbed both of them and I don't think their feet were touching the floor, and threw them out. He then got me a new plate of food, apologized profusely, and picked up the dining room. I like their spicy chicken...

Brave move on your part. Glad you came out of that unscathed.

Still an Okey? Working with the old folks?

That's a real apology. No, ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Again, I note the public relations firm.

One does cancel out the other, imo.

Too late.

Sorry for the bad publicity from getting caught, it seems.

Who cares why they did it? A large company should have a good PR firm to tell them what is the right thing to do, which does not always come naturally.

I image she has had recommendations. I say shame the chicken shits!

... certainly wouldn't hurt a lawsuit, would it?

If that happened, this apology is kind of half-assed.

But it's not nothing.

we'll see how sincere it is.

Texas is fire at will state. Employer doesn't need a reason to fire someone.

Get the case in front of jury and I think even in a "right to work state" she would
have a very good chance for a big win. I think the company would settle before a
trial to avoid any more bad PR.

They already have admitted fault in their statement.

The insurance companies' campaigns to promote half-true stories of lawsuits, along with sloppy and uninformed reporting, have created a popular notion that courts hand out money like slot machines in Vegas.

Part of it is the way that issues in a suit are sometimes treated separately, but a lot of it is just folklore.

.... statement that the company issued would help her case too.

This has nothing to do w/folklore but I think a quality case could be
made against the company and its actions. That does not mean she
would win the case but still it is worth a try.

My guess is that she will settle out of court for a nice chunk of $$ and
that she will have to sign a Confidentiality clause. Every day that this
case is in the public's eye the holding company that runs those restaurants
will get very bad PR and so it might be worth their while to settle up
with her.

Name an actual cause of action.

You were asked once, and failed to do so.

..... I would bet that the company has an employee handbook and lawyer might ask
somebody from the company to show where it was stipulated that employees are
responsible for paying back to the company funds lost in an armed robbery. Emotional
and financial damages to the fired employee might also come into play if the statutes
would allow it.

My guess is that the holding company for the restaurants will want to make this go away
PDQ.

In any case I hope she has a good attorney to help her understand what can and can't
be done in this case.

Here's where it is important to understand the difference between "the law" and "what's right". They are seldom, if ever, the same thing.

The way the law works:

She is an at-will employee. She can be fired for any reason or no reason. Period.

She violated a policy (granted, the store was busy and it may have been impractical, but the law doesn't care). As a consequence she was fired. Before being fired, she was offered the opportunity to settle by paying back the amount lost due to the policy violation. She chose not to. It is perfectly legal to do that, and it happens all of the time. Employees are often given that sort of choice if they break something, lose inventory, whatever. There doesn't need to be written policy to that effect.

The way "what's right" works:

The prick owner hurt his business, and all of Popeye's business by failing to act like a decent human being.

Law is not some recipe for "what is the right thing to do". It is the utter minimum required of amoral humans, and generally a poor mechanism for addressing things that are morally wrong.

Must've noticed a dip in sales.

if that's all the statement, just an attempt to make a smaller payment on a larger bill.

So how can they change something they don't have?

That's what happened there.

making an employ pay back 400 dollars after being robbed, priceless.

Now hopefully there will will be a robust follow up review of all the company practices which allowed this to happen and a also a comprehensive review of working conditions for all their employees, particularly safety on the job. This woman had a gun pointed at her. She should have been given paid sick leave and free psychological counseling.

Then corporate would have raised an eyebrow last year when Z&H was taken to court last year for ignoring an EEOC subpoena over an ADA complaint.

A culinary grad once told me you don't want to eat this chicken.

It's the same chicken you get anywhere..Cornish cross that has been usda inspected. With chicken, if you don't maintain good food safety practices people get sick and the restaurant doesn't last..now I have seen some Popeyes locations I wouldn't eat at because of the location, or appearance of the restaurant or the staff...the nice locations do a good job with broasted chicken if that's your thing...I prefer pan fried...