Home Depot fires 60-year-old black man after Trump supporter screams racist abuse at him

[phands]

Here we go again....

Home Depot in Albany allegedly fired a black man after a racist Trump supporter hurled abusive racial slurs at him.

The Times-Union reports that Maurice Rucker, 60-year-old black man, was let go from a job he’s held for 10 years—making $13 an hour—because he politely asked a customer to leash his dog in the store.

“I said to him, “Sir, when you have your dog in here we prefer that you keep it on a leash,'” according to the Times-Union.

He turned around and said, ‘F**k you. You’re an a*****e you’re a piece of s**t,'” Rucker said.

He says, ‘If Trump wasn’t president, you wouldn’t even have a job.’ He said, ‘You’re from the ghetto, what do you know?'”

“I’ve lived all over the country and I’ve had no one talk to me the way that this guy talked to me,” said Rucker.

After the relentless barrage of insults, Rucker shot back.

“‘You’re lucky I’m at work, because if I wasn’t, this wouldn’t be happening, or you wouldn’t be talking to me like this,'” Rucker told the Times Union.

Home Depot, which had not given Rucker a sizable raise during his decade of service, told the paper that they were sorry their employee was subject to racist abuse, but that he was nevertheless in the wrong.

“The problem here is that he had several opportunities to disengage and contact management to deal with the customer. We’re appalled by this customer’s behavior, but we also must require associates to follow proper protocol to defuse a situation for the sake of their safety and the safety of other associates and customers,” a spokesperson for Home Depot said.

Craig Menear, the current CEO of Home Depot, made $11,641,012 in 2017 according to SEC filings.

I await the usual suspects' "reasoning" why this isn't racially based. I can even hear the mealy-mouthed excuses already in flight.

http://Home Depot in Albany alleged...$11,641,012 in 2017 according to SEC filings.

 

[laughing dog]

Let's see if the good people of the greater Albany region start a boycott of that Home Depot.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I see as usual people want to make it racial. Yes, the customer was racial, but he got fired for talking back, not for racial reasons. Employees aren't supposed to behave badly even if customers are behaving badly.

 

[laughing dog]

This man could have been reprimanded. Instead he was fired. It makes Home Depot appear insensitive and like an asshole. Why any decent human being would defend their over-reaction is curious.

 

[phands]

This man could have been reprimanded. Instead he was fired. It makes Home Depot appear insensitive and like an asshole. Why any decent human being would defend their over-reaction is curious.

I just saw that the outcry has caused HD to offer him his job baCK. I for one won't use HD again.

 

[ZiprHead]

I see as usual people want to make it racial. Yes, the customer was racial, but he got fired for talking back, not for racial reasons. Employees aren't supposed to behave badly even if customers are behaving badly.

I agree on this one. However, considering the circumstances, I think a suspension would have been more in order.

 

[ZiprHead]

This man could have been reprimanded. Instead he was fired. It makes Home Depot appear insensitive and like an asshole. Why any decent human being would defend their over-reaction is curious.

I just saw that the outcry has caused HD to offer him his job baCK. I for one won't use HD again.

I prefer Menards but Menards, Lowes and Home Depot are all controlled by pretty right wing people. Not much of a choice out there.

 

[phands]

Sadly true. Fortunately here in Manhattan, there are choices, like Ace and local one-offs.

 

[barbos]

I see as usual people want to make it racial. Yes, the customer was racial, but he got fired for talking back, not for racial reasons. Employees aren't supposed to behave badly even if customers are behaving badly.

Well, it seems he was not the only one who overreacted, so was the management.

 

[fast]

I see as usual people want to make it racial. Yes, the customer was racial, but he got fired for talking back, not for racial reasons. Employees aren't supposed to behave badly even if customers are behaving badly.

I agree on this one. However, considering the circumstances, I think a suspension would have been more in order.

I think I'm all over the map on this one. I feel like I'm in a tizzy. I could possibly convey my thoughts as they bounced around, but damn, I just want to fight for both sides simultaneously--but with differing states of mind. I'm at a freeze on the "circumstances" part. What aspect of the circumstances drives the "more in order" part? Had the customer been just as disgustingly vulgar but without any hint of racism, and if the worker responded just as inappropriately, would that have effected your "more in order" take?

It's too late to explain my thought processes. Besides, I'd muck 'em up anyway it's so convoluted. It might help also if laughing dog could expound on the "insensitivity" part he threw in.

The aggression (not the racism) is what makes me want to go to bat for the employee and fight the white collar mentality of his not deescalating the situation. We're human beings (white and black). If the customer had explicitly slung racial slurs but done so calmly, then no, I'm not siding with the employee--he could have sucked it up and calmly gotten management involved, but that's not how it went down; the customer was treating him with aggression in his tone and body language. Turning the other cheek in face of insult is one thing, and I expect a level of decorum commensurate with whatever sense of civility is there, but employees should not be expected to roll over no matter what might come their way. Had the customer pushed him, there would be no black man fired had I been there; drop that son of a bitch customer right where he stood. Yes, defending the black man but from the aggression, not the racism.

So, it's important to what know what aspect of these circumstances drives you to be as sensitive as the other poster thinks the company should have been.

 

[BH]

I see as usual people want to make it racial. Yes, the customer was racial, but he got fired for talking back, not for racial reasons. Employees aren't supposed to behave badly even if customers are behaving badly.

I agree on this one. However, considering the circumstances, I think a suspension would have been more in order.

If we can find out who the customer was boycott his employer if he isn't fired for what he did.

Also, if the employee in any way felt physically threatened he has the right to go to the police over the matter and Home Depot must release the name of the customer if they have it for the police to investigate the complaint.

 

[braces_for_impact]

I understand the policy of having an employee disengage from the argument, but I also recognize that the manner in which the employee was attacked creates special circumstances, in my opinion. Like many of these types of stories that come out, more details are filled in later that could change the circumstances.

From what I read in the article at this time, I don't think termination was warranted. I also try to think about what the results would be if a significant amount of the population acted the way these two men did with each other on a regular basis. In that case, this only reinforces my opinion that termination was over the top. If racists can engage customers with a bigoted tirade and the end result is the termination of that employee, I can see racists easily abusing this to get people of color fired. Hell, according to the article the employee didn't even use profanity in their defense. It also wasn't even an extended argument. The customer threw a fit and left, forgot his dog, and came back and left again. It wasn't like management had arrived to defuse the situation and the employee refused to leave the situation and continued arguing with the customer despite the fact that management was now dealing with things. It also seems to me, if the man forgot his dog, he was in an awful hurry to get out of there, which leads me to believe he did use the expletives he used. If he hadn't one would think they would wait for management to arrive. The interaction was probably witnessed and the bigot was quite uncomfortable. You don't reward the bigot and their behavior by firing the employee, it will only encourage that type of thing.

 

[southernhybrid]

Home Depot offered to rehire the man. In some ways, he was lucky that this happened. It got him lots of publicity and I've read that at least two Go Fund Me pages were set up in his name. Some people are asking that Lowe's offer him a job, and it's now known that the man was only making 13 dollars an hour after 10 years of employment. That lets people know that retail workers are poorly paid and treated like shit. I think I'd be feeling pretty damn good by now, if this happened to me. Perhaps Home Depot should fire the man that fired the man without consulting with upper management first. Isn't that sort of what happened to the man? He was fired for engaging in a conflict without consulting with management, and then was fired. Maybe there should be a rule that management discuss such racially tinged conflicts with upper management before firing someone.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/07/20/he-was-fired-after-an-encounter-with-a-racist-customer-after-sharing-his-story-home-depot-changed-its-mind/?utm_term=.c6529389e9da

“We’re appalled by this customer’s behavior, but we also must require associates to follow proper protocol to defuse a situation for the sake of their safety and the safety of other associates and customers,” Holmes said.

By Friday, the company had changed its tune, telling The Washington Post that it had “taken another look at this” and was offering Rucker his job back.

“Our concern was that he didn’t disengage and alert management about a customer confrontation,” spokesman Matthew Harrigan told The Post in an email.

Home Depot said it would provide backpay, but it’s unclear whether Rucker has accepted the offer.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I see as usual people want to make it racial. Yes, the customer was racial, but he got fired for talking back, not for racial reasons. Employees aren't supposed to behave badly even if customers are behaving badly.

I agree on this one. However, considering the circumstances, I think a suspension would have been more in order.

Yeah, you could make an argument that the punishment doesn't fit the crime. If you're looking for a reason for this I would look first to age.

 

[laughing dog]

It's too late to explain my thought processes. Besides, I'd muck 'em up anyway it's so convoluted. It might help also if laughing dog could expound on the "insensitivity" part he threw in.

It's simple. Home Depot could have shown some sensitivity to the situation of the employee and chosen to either reprimand the employee or suspend him. There was no pressing need to fire the employee. And, perhaps even banning the customer from the store.

 

[fast]

It's too late to explain my thought processes. Besides, I'd muck 'em up anyway it's so convoluted. It might help also if laughing dog could expound on the "insensitivity" part he threw in.

It's simple. Home Depot could have shown some sensitivity to the situation of the employee and chosen to either reprimand the employee or suspend him. There was no pressing need to fire the employee. And, perhaps even banning the customer from the store.

What is it about the situation that warrants sensitivity? Was there something in particular about this situation?

 

[laughing dog]

It's too late to explain my thought processes. Besides, I'd muck 'em up anyway it's so convoluted. It might help also if laughing dog could expound on the "insensitivity" part he threw in.

It's simple. Home Depot could have shown some sensitivity to the situation of the employee and chosen to either reprimand the employee or suspend him. There was no pressing need to fire the employee. And, perhaps even banning the customer from the store.

What is it about the situation that warrants sensitivity? Was there something in particular about this situation?

I don't believe that you don't understand how a barrage of racial insults like this employee received are not provoking and that his response was not over the top. So are you trolling or posting drunk?

 

[fast]

What is it about the situation that warrants sensitivity? Was there something in particular about this situation?

I don't believe that you don't understand how a barrage of racial insults like this employee received are not provoking and that his response was not over the top. So are you trolling or posting drunk?

Had you bothered to take the time to not merely skim my posts, you'd know quite well why I asked what I did, but that's okay, you've inadvertently stumbled upon accidentally almost answering my question. The "like this" made your comment just far short of hitting the mark. And no, btw, it's not over the top--par for the course I'd say, so common it damn well should be situated as anticipation on our brain--expected even.

We live in a world where livelihoods hang in the balance by not acquiessing to managerial expectations. You don't like it? I imagine not, but there it is; life's not fair. Control your behavior no matter what the public dares to incite you with. Take it like the replacable whining worms you are mentality. Not nice? Tough shit. Tolerate the pungent abuse or getvthevhellnout of customer service. Over the top. If it wasnt for public out lash, it wouldn't surprise me to find the employer suing the employee for damages. What kind being dreamt up by lawyers. Don't you understand that peope are so hateful that lives don't matter? And no, not drinking, yet. Soon though. Very soon.

Damn it laughing dog. I wanted to know the precise element of the situation. Is it the racially tinged aspect or the aggressive demeanor? Saying "like this" lumps the shit back together again. The situation could have played out in multiple ways. Would a racially explicit whisper displayed in full docile mode garnered your same outtake?

I'm going to the store.

 

[fast]

Sorry

 

[laughing dog]

What is it about the situation that warrants sensitivity? Was there something in particular about this situation?

I don't believe that you don't understand how a barrage of racial insults like this employee received are not provoking and that his response was not over the top. So are you trolling or posting drunk?

Had you bothered to take the time to not merely skim my posts, you'd know quite well why I asked what I did, but that's okay, you've inadvertently stumbled upon accidentally almost answering my question. The "like this" made your comment just far short of hitting the mark. And no, btw, it's not over the top--par for the course I'd say, so common it damn well should be situated as anticipation on our brain--expected even.

We live in a world where livelihoods hang in the balance by not acquiessing to managerial expectations. You don't like it? I imagine not, but there it is; life's not fair. Control your behavior no matter what the public dares to incite you with. Take it like the replacable whining worms you are mentality. Not nice? Tough shit. Tolerate the pungent abuse or getvthevhellnout of customer service. Over the top. If it wasnt for public out lash, it wouldn't surprise me to find the employer suing the employee for damages. What kind being dreamt up by lawyers. Don't you understand that peope are so hateful that lives don't matter? And no, not drinking, yet. Soon though. Very soon.

Damn it laughing dog. I wanted to know the precise element of the situation. Is it the racially tinged aspect or the aggressive demeanor? Saying "like this" lumps the shit back together again. The situation could have played out in multiple ways. Would a racially explicit whisper displayed in full docile mode garnered your same outtake?

I'm going to the store.

There was a barrage of insults that would provoke anyone. To me it does not matter that they were racial. The management of that Home Depot over-reacted because there is no universal mandate to fire employees - they could have reprimanded him or suspended him. But they choose to act like insensitive assholes.