Okay a couple things happened to me a couple days ago that bothered me:
One: A customer came into Wegmans (yes, I still work there, shut up) at around 10:15 PM, said he lost his ATM card and needs cash, and asked if he could cash a check. Jen refused, saying that we cannot give cash out past 10:00. Upon further discussion, others agreed with her decision.
Two: I was talking with the overnight cashier, who complained to me that Charlie (the only other person working who knew how to run register) left early, and she couldnít buy lunch because ďweíre not supposed to ring ourselves out.Ē She didnít have lunch that day. She didnít eat anything until her shift was over.
Letís take a look at this logically: why do we have rules? To protect the publicís best interest. Some examples: Why canít you murder? So people donít die; it protects their best interest. Why canít you smoke crack? So you donít get addicted, harm yourself with the harm it does to your body, and you donít harm other people. Why canít you speed? So you donít die when an accident occurs.
That makes sense right? So letís apply that reasoning to the above situations. Situation one: why does Wegmans refuse money back after 10:00? So the cashier doesnít run out of money in their till. Before 10:00, the accounting office is open, and if needed they can supply extra cash if the cashier needs it. That rule makes sense; it protects the best interest of the cashier. But in this case, it was 10:15, the accounting office is still open, the cashier could easily afford the extra $40, and the guy needed money. So the rule, which is designed to prevent the cashier from running out of money doesnít apply. Not only does the cashier have enough money, but the accounting office was open if she needed more. Had it not been for Agazi, the guy in need of cash may have been stranded somewhere.
Situation two: why does Wegmans not allow people to cash themselves out? So people donít take extra money out of the till when no oneís looking. That rule makes sense (although Iíve violated it many times). But in this case, she was the only cashier there. On top of that, she needed food for lunch. And sheís obviously not going to give herself extra money if she just wants food. So the rule, which is designed so that people donít steal money, doesnít apply (assuming she doesnít take any money). On top of that, she suffered most of her shift as a result of her decision.
The moral: THINK FOR YOURSELVES! Rules are in place to prevent people from getting hurt (physically, mentally or monetarily). If you know that none of those three will occurÖwhat difference does it make?