3 ms·
I generally agree with what you're saying. It's kind of hilarious to me that so many people here don't know what "stealing" means. Have they not read the articl
by jdtang13 8y ago
I generally agree with what you're saying. It's kind of hilarious to me that so many people here don't know what "stealing" means. Have they not read the article at all? News flash: the act of stealing requires intention. Accidentally swiping someone's ambiguously-labeled lunch is very different!!
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- fl0wenol 8y agoI think the issue is that it can be difficult to prove/disprove intent for something like stolen lunches unless there was a camera pointed at the fridge (or some other clear indicator) if you're going to fire someone over it and be protected against a wrongful termination suit. It's a bit over the top to have that in place to enforce the policy unless it was a known issue in that workplace. So the statement the GP made seems a bit extreme without context.