Who knows if the OP can get a settlement out of this, but if I were one of the customers in the store that night, and found out that the back door had been broken that long, I would definitely be calling a lawyer.
Given the "right to work" statute, they can fire you whenever for whatever, and being the owners they can make any assisine rules they want. I bet the 3mo. suspension was just to give the corp. lawyers time to decide if it would be safe to fire you
MichaelAfter three months(paid) of just waiting following my incident. I was finally called in for a meeting with my supervisors at 8am this morning. The person in charge showed up 30 minutes late to let me know she was "not going to drag this out." and that I was being terminated for failure to comply with their policy of weapon banning.
I had worked there for 8 years. I can't say as this was completely unexpected, as this is standard operating procedure for YUM! foods inc.(Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, KFC). But, it sure shows the kind of attitude that many large companies have towards their indentured servants (aka wage slaves, aka employees)
I did drag it out just a little, because I felt like I needed a little more than "screw you, get out." (Hell, they got me out of bed at 8am for a meeting there had to be more to it.) I thought maybe severance pay of some sort or at least some sort of personal statement like "If I had the choice" or "I'm sorry there was nothing we could do." Or even just "Sorry." But, I was met with the cold eyes of someone whose only concern is for dollar signs and company profit.
Don't get me wrong everyone else in chain of command has a heart. This one not so much. (This is the same person when minimum wage was raised recently - no one got a pay increase, new hires and long time employees paid minimum wage side by side.)
Some high points of the 5 minute conversation.
She brought up safety. I responded that if safety was a concern someone would have been a little quicker on the back door that had been broken for months (It sure is fixed now.) Or there would be real security cameras instead of fake globes with nothing behind them (Actually, I know for fact that they were put there not to deter robbers, but rather to deter employees from eating product.)
I brought up severance pay. She responded I had already been paid while on suspension. I replied that had I known this was where it was going I would have used money to pursue other employment. She said "you're free to try unemployment and see if that helps."
I brought up the fact that everyone in the store could have been dead. Her reply? Everyone could be dead even though you had your gun. (Silent confused staring...)
My parting words - "I'm being punished for someone else commiting an armed robbery. Now, I'm going to struggle to feed my children. Have a nice life."
I don't think this will work.Hire a lawyer, sue them for failing to provide adequate security, since they have assumed the responsibility to do so by denying you the ability.
Seriously.
Their failure has caused you damages. Because of their failure, you are now out of a job. I'm absolutely certain you have suffered emotional pain and distress caused by their negligence, and will continue to for quite some time. They are liable for that.
I don't think this will work.
Their security procedures PROBABLY state give away the cash so nobody is hurt. The reality of THIS PARTICULAR situation is that no employees or customers were hurt during the robbery and the bad guy was apparently leaving the store.
Further, they can easily argue that it was the employee's action of defending the store that caused the dismissal of the employee, not the actions of the company or the robber. Consequently they committed no failure and they are due to pay no monetary damages.
Now as for the emotional distress, to that I cannot speak but I'm not sure if that is grounds for a suit.
I am NOT a lawyer, but I was a rather large employer before I retired, this reply is JUST MY OPINION and not legal advice. However, I think the situation sucks. I'd have not fired an employee for this even if it was against the work rules (which are probably in place due to insurance company demands).