Reply #3: " Company policy is to protect the company, not the employees, who are expendable." [View All]

[Nuclear Unicorn]

I disagree with that statement. I think the genuine intent is to limit liability in case a worker injures another employee or a customer. Perhaps the solution is to ensure the law states if Employee X of Company Y commits Act Z that only Employee Y is liable unless he was acting upon the instructions of his employer.

I also think it was born of a time when criminals just took what they wanted and left but nowadays we read so many stories of workers being executed even after they've been subdued and/or the money taken.

That being said I disagree with private businesses countermanding people's individual rights. I would expect due outrage if an employer made voting GOP as a condition of continued employment.

Also, if the company is going to prohibit self-defense then it assumes total defense of its employees. I would expect the company to be liable for an injury suffered by an employee or customer because those individuals were not allowed to protect themselves.