Waitrose worker ‘crying inside’ after being sacked for confronting shoplifter | UK | News

Walker T SmithWaitrose employee fired from job of 17 years after stopping Easter egg stealing (Image: Facebook)
Waitrose has continued to defend its decision to dismiss a member of staff who intervened to stop a shoplifter, despite growing condemnation from politicians.
Walker Smith, 54, had been working at Waitrose for 17 years before being made redundant.
Management explained to him as he walked out that the retailer was “crying inside” because he felt like family.
Mr Smith was working as a shop assistant at the Waitrose branch in Clapham Junction, south London. He was performing his routine duties when a customer alerted him that someone was stuffing a bag with eggs.
Standard protocol states that staff should avoid confronting shoplifters and instead escalate the matter to senior colleagues. But having witnessed countless thefts over the years, Mr. Smith decided to take matters into his own hands.

Waitrose Clapham Junction Waitrose worker sacked after 17-year job after stopping thieves stealing Easter eggs (Image: undefined)
He challenged the thief and confiscated his bags. A brief struggle allegedly ensued before the bag shattered and several Lindt Gold Bunny Easter eggs were scattered on the floor. The thief fled towards the exit, but Mr Smith took a piece of the broken Easter egg and “out of frustration threw it at some cars, not at the thief”, he said.
He was reprimanded by his manager at the time, but a few weeks later he was called into a meeting with store management. Mr Smith said he made a final plea for leniency but was eventually told he would be released. She told the Guardian: “I tried to stay strong and didn’t say a word but I was crying inside. They took me out the back door next to the bins. “I felt demoralized.
“Waitrose is like my family. My friends are there. I’ve been there for 17 years, I must be doing something right. I’m not a bad, violent or aggressive person. I’m disappointed to see this every day and not to see Waitrose doing much about it.”
Mr Smith later expressed his gratitude to supporters on his personal Facebook page and stated that his immediate priority was to find new employment.

Lindt golden rabbit egg, £6 (Image: undefined)
She wrote: “Thank you everyone for reaching out with the kind messages and support, I really appreciate it. I didn’t think it would blow up this much but my priority now is to find a job.”
“I live in Clapham Junction so if you or someone you know is looking for a reliable, conscientious employee please contact us. I was with Waitrose for 17 years so warehousing, customer service – apart from dealing with thieves(!) or similar work would be great.”
Waitrose, however, stressed that staff safety is of the utmost importance and has therefore approved special protocols to combat shoplifters. The retailer acknowledged that employees had been injured while confronting thieves before, and said it would never want to put its employees in danger. A Waitrose spokesperson said: “The safety and security of our partners and customers couldn’t be more important to us and we have policies in place to protect both. We have had incidents where partners have been hospitalized whilst tackling shoplifters. Fortunately, they have always recovered, but this may not always be the case.”
“There is a serious threat to life in the fight against thieves. We refuse to risk anyone’s life and that’s why we have policies that are very clearly understood and must be strictly adhered to.”
“As a responsible employer, we would never want to be in a position to notify families of a tragedy because someone tried to stop the theft. “Nothing we sell is worth risking lives.
“This reporting does not cover all the facts of the situation. While we can never discuss an individual case, we can assure you that the correct process was followed, which included a standard appeal procedure.
“We have been campaigning for some time for more to be done to protect store workers from criminals, including making retail crime a specific standalone offence.”




