I saw this on the early edition of the Sunday paper and found this article online. Just ridiculous. I hope someone reads this and offers this guy as a job. Seems to me he'd make a wonderful security guard! I feel bad for him, but in some ways, he's a hero. Banks need to REALLY rethink their employee rules. BTW, where WAS the security guard in this case?:confused:

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/52271217.html

Andrea

The guy didn't do know anything wrong. His firing is unfair I do hope gets another job.

i knew that the title of the article was out of context when i saw it. he was fired for mishandling the robbery, not for preventing it, and he knew he was breaking the rules. not saying i don't support what he did (i think it's awesome), but my point is there was no injustice here.

His failure to comply with bank policy could have resulted in someone's death, even his own. I feel for the guy, and I don't agree with his firing, but he's an unarmed citizen, not a cop.

I read the article. This is EXACTLY why I do not believe in rules, policy or procedures. If it were MY bank, he'd be a vice-president by now.

I would have fired him too. Bank robberies are very real, and this guy endangered himself and all the other people in the bank. As someone who works regularly with bank tellers, I can tell you this is one thing they are NEVER allowed to do. This guy deserves to be sitting in the unemployment line. I have no sympathy for him at all.

I read the article. This is EXACTLY why I do not believe in rules, policy or procedures. If it were MY bank, he'd be a vice-president by now.

Rules, policies, and procedures have been put there for the protection of the bank workers and customers. You never know how a bank robber is going to react. He could have started shooting as soon as the teller jumped the counter. You'd promote someone for putting the lives of others in danger? I'm sorry, but I really do know a lot about this area, and the bank's actions are totally justified.

His failure to comply with bank policy could have resulted in someone's death, even his own. I feel for the guy, and I don't agree with his firing, but he's an unarmed citizen, not a cop.


Exactly. He wanted to be a hero and get his picture in the newspaper. Mission accomplished ohno:

I can understand that you have to abide by a policy, but every once in a while you have to take a stand, and this teller saw an opportunity and took it.

Fight back! Screw the criminals.

I can understand that you have to abide by a policy, but every once in a while you have to take a stand, and this teller saw an opportunity and took it.

Fight back! Screw the criminals.

How would you feel if you were a customer in that bank - the robber did have a gun and started shooting? I think you'd change your tune.

How would you feel if you were a customer in that bank - the robber did have a gun and started shooting? I think you'd change your tune.

You have a point.

But, in the end it worked out well for everyone involved. I do think they should have given this guy a break and let him keep his job.

Rules, policies, and procedures have been put there for the protection of the bank workers and customers. You never know how a bank robber is going to react. He could have started shooting as soon as the teller jumped the counter. You'd promote someone for putting the lives of others in danger? I'm sorry, but I really do know a lot about this area, and the bank's actions are totally justified.

I respect your opinion, Liza, but I disagree. Which is more important - working at a place where I know that if something goes down I know people have got my back, or working at a place that might as well put a sign up front for all to see saying "Go ahead and rob us if you like - our policy lets you get away scot-free". If it were me, I'd rather people had my back.

This guy should get a promotion for stopping a robbery.

That's disgusting!! I hope the poor guy takes them to court, that's plain unfair.

The guy's lucky somebody didn't get killed. Most bank robbers actually have guns. You have no idea who you are dealing with out there. If somebody got killed, that guy would have had a lot more problems then just losing his job. He wasn't a cop.

That makes absolutely no sense. :confused: :rolleyes:

I respect your opinion, Liza, but I disagree. Which is more important - working at a place where I know that if something goes down I know people have got my back, or working at a place that might as well put a sign up front for all to see saying "Go ahead and rob us if you like - our policy lets you get away scot-free". If it were me, I'd rather people had my back.

I do this for a living. I train tellers on how to react in a robbery. This guy broke every rule in the book. That's why he's fired, and that's why I'm not sorry for him.

Speaking as someone who's worked behind the teller line for years, I would rather be with a group of people who I felt would follow the policies and do their best to keep me and everyone else in the bank safe. That means they'd have my back. There are plenty of options out there for tellers to do in the situation - I can't say more, obviously - but know that this guy had other things he could have done other than endangering his life and the lives of others.

I'm just shaking my head in disbelief that people think that this is the right way to react. I've been involved in investigating several bank robberies. I've seen several cases where the robber was armed - one of my friends had a rifle pointed at her head. Bank robberies aren't pretty. My friend did the right thing - she did what she was told, got him out the door, and he was apprehended within a few hours. That's what this teller should have done.

I do this for a living. I train tellers on how to react in a robbery. This guy broke every rule in the book. That's why he's fired, and that's why I'm not sorry for him.

Speaking as someone who's worked behind the teller line for years, I would rather be with a group of people who I felt would follow the policies and do their best to keep me and everyone else in the bank safe. That means they'd have my back. There are plenty of options out there for tellers to do in the situation - I can't say more, obviously - but know that this guy had other things he could have done other than endangering his life and the lives of others.

I'm just shaking my head in disbelief that people think that this is the right way to react. I've been involved in investigating several bank robberies. I've seen several cases where the robber was armed - one of my friends had a rifle pointed at her head. Bank robberies aren't pretty. My friend did the right thing - she did what she was told, got him out the door, and he was apprehended within a few hours. That's what this teller should have done.
agreed, you don't "have people's backs" when you're putting their lives in danger. the man sure had the spirit and i'm glad he warded off the robber, but it would be too dangerous for what he did to be standard practice.

I would have fired him too. Bank robberies are very real, and this guy endangered himself and all the other people in the bank. As someone who works regularly with bank tellers, I can tell you this is one thing they are NEVER allowed to do. This guy deserves to be sitting in the unemployment line. I have no sympathy for him at all.

Then I suppose you think the robber should have gotten away and maybe
pulled another robbery? I agree that what the teller did was not the smart
thing to do and I am not disagreeing with the bank's decision in this matter,
but I feel that the man's heart was in the right place.

I do this for a living. I train tellers on how to react in a robbery. This guy broke every rule in the book. That's why he's fired, and that's why I'm not sorry for him.

Speaking as someone who's worked behind the teller line for years, I would rather be with a group of people who I felt would follow the policies and do their best to keep me and everyone else in the bank safe. That means they'd have my back. There are plenty of options out there for tellers to do in the situation - I can't say more, obviously - but know that this guy had other things he could have done other than endangering his life and the lives of others.

I'm just shaking my head in disbelief that people think that this is the right way to react. I've been involved in investigating several bank robberies. I've seen several cases where the robber was armed - one of my friends had a rifle pointed at her head. Bank robberies aren't pretty. My friend did the right thing - she did what she was told, got him out the door, and he was apprehended within a few hours. That's what this teller should have done.

And what about the cases where employees do as they are told and the
bank robber goes ahead and shoots and wounds or kills one or more people-
you don't deny that that sort of thing has happened, do you?

And what about the cases where employees do as they are told and the
bank robber goes ahead and shoots and wounds or kills one or more people-
you don't deny that that sort of thing has happened, do you?

It is very, very, very rare that a bank robber will shoot, wound, or kill if the bank employees are doing as he/she says. Normally the robber wants to get in and out as quickly as possible. Statistically speaking, the chances are much higher of a robber getting trigger-happy when they feel threatened or annoyed by the victim teller(s). They want to be obeyed, and get out with the money.

And with the security devices and procedures that are now in place, most of the robbers get caught very quickly anyways.

Then I suppose you think the robber should have gotten away and maybe
pulled another robbery? I agree that what the teller did was not the smart
thing to do and I am not disagreeing with the bank's decision in this matter,
but I feel that the man's heart was in the right place.

Yes I do think the robber should have gotten away and maybe pulled another robbery. It usually happens. And the more he pulls, the better the odds that he'll be caught quickly.

Cash that the bank has on hand is insured against robbery. The lives of the employees and customers of the bank are not. Cash can be replaced, lives can't. This teller's heart may have been in the right place, his head was not.

I worked in a bank too but not on the front lines but 2 rooms behind a bank as a graphics person. Yes, he violated protocol. I think Liza is right, robbers would not be likely to become violent, and if they did then getting physical might be merited. Often, the money given robbers can be easily traced or when unbanded releases an ink etc.

I don't think he should have been fired this time but he should have been talked to (formally) & clearly WHY there is a protocol in place.

I also have to side with the bank on this one. He should have held back and let the police do their jobs. He could have made the situation a lot worse.