I read a story in today's Roanoke paper that says a Tampa, FL WalMart
managed to stick its footsies in the fire again. The store staff
checked ID--driver's license, business card, a call to the company
accountant--for a human resources manager for GAF, but decided to hold
on to his $13,600 company check, and the 530+ WM gift cards he'd had
pre-printed for his employees, while they called the cops. When the
cops got there, one of them grabbed the guy, and told them, "We need to
see about that forged check you brought in here."

The HR manager is black. The check is good.

It was spent at Target, according to the story.

I hope the HR manager grabs a large pot of beans off WalMart's legal
stove with this one, and sues the living **** out of the deputy and the
municipality for which acts as a paid thug.

"Charlie Self" wrote in message
ups.com...

When the
cops got there, one of them grabbed the guy, and told them, "We need to
see about that forged check you brought in here."

The HR manager is black. The check is good.

It was spent at Target, according to the story.


Did they call the cops because they thought a black person couldn't have
access to those resources? Does the story say that? Or has it gotten to
the point that as long as you are black, everything that happens to you is
automatically racially motivated?

Charlie Self wrote:
I read a story in today's Roanoke paper that says a Tampa, FL WalMart
managed to stick its footsies in the fire again. The store staff
checked ID--driver's license, business card, a call to the company
accountant--for a human resources manager for GAF, but decided to hold
on to his $13,600 company check, and the 530+ WM gift cards he'd had
pre-printed for his employees, while they called the cops. When the
cops got there, one of them grabbed the guy, and told them, "We need to
see about that forged check you brought in here."

The HR manager is black. The check is good.

It was spent at Target, according to the story.

I hope the HR manager grabs a large pot of beans off WalMart's legal
stove with this one, and sues the living **** out of the deputy and the
municipality for which acts as a paid thug.

The story also says the HR manager was stalled for about 2 hours -
which is about 1 hour and 55 minutes longer than I would wait for
someone to accept my $13,600!

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/13316814.htm

"Charlie Self" wrote in news:1133643137.529629.98290
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

I read a story in today's Roanoke paper that says a Tampa, FL WalMart
managed to stick its footsies in the fire again. The store staff
checked ID--driver's license, business card, a call to the company
accountant--for a human resources manager for GAF, but decided to hold
on to his $13,600 company check, and the 530+ WM gift cards he'd had
pre-printed for his employees, while they called the cops. When the
cops got there, one of them grabbed the guy, and told them, "We need to
see about that forged check you brought in here."

The HR manager is black. The check is good.

It was spent at Target, according to the story.

I hope the HR manager grabs a large pot of beans off WalMart's legal
stove with this one, and sues the living **** out of the deputy and the
municipality for which acts as a paid thug.

I agree with your wish of bewns for the HR manager, but I have a thought:
With a $10K limit above which monetary transactions have to be reported
to thwe Feds somewhere somehow, would it not have been wise to call ahead
and see whether a check would be acceptable payment?

By the way, it brings to mind The first chekc I ever presented to Sears,
not long after opening our first checking account in Cambridge, MA in
1969. I was asked for my driver's license, and produced it. Guess they
had never seen a Dutch license at Sears on Mass Ave (since gone). I
didn't yet have a Mass license, and they were a bit taken aback by this
sheet of hot pink, measuring about 4 x 11" (wide). We still have some of
the pans from that first household purchase in the US.

For a current application for a Dutch license, see
http://www.rdw.nl/NR/rdonlyres/ACED28C9-8A1D-458C-B9B5-
D7F06E68DF8B/0/3E0660m.pdf. It would help if you understand Dutch.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

"Han" wrote in message
...
"Charlie Self" wrote in news:1133643137.529629.98290
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

I read a story in today's Roanoke paper that says a Tampa, FL WalMart
managed to stick its footsies in the fire again. The store staff
checked ID--driver's license, business card, a call to the company
accountant--for a human resources manager for GAF, but decided to hold
on to his $13,600 company check, and the 530+ WM gift cards he'd had
pre-printed for his employees, while they called the cops. When the
cops got there, one of them grabbed the guy, and told them, "We need to
see about that forged check you brought in here."

The HR manager is black. The check is good.

It was spent at Target, according to the story.

I hope the HR manager grabs a large pot of beans off WalMart's legal
stove with this one, and sues the living **** out of the deputy and the
municipality for which acts as a paid thug.

I agree with your wish of bewns for the HR manager, but I have a thought:
With a $10K limit above which monetary transactions have to be reported
to thwe Feds somewhere somehow, would it not have been wise to call ahead
and see whether a check would be acceptable payment?

By the way, it brings to mind The first chekc I ever presented to Sears,
not long after opening our first checking account in Cambridge, MA in
1969. I was asked for my driver's license, and produced it. Guess they
had never seen a Dutch license at Sears on Mass Ave (since gone). I
didn't yet have a Mass license, and they were a bit taken aback by this
sheet of hot pink, measuring about 4 x 11" (wide). We still have some of
the pans from that first household purchase in the US.


The order was placed earlier...it didn't say how much earlier. Regardless of
what the Feds want, Wal-Mart is not an enforcement arm, and GAF is a major
company, so you'd think that their check, assurances of the guy's business
card and ID and a call to the company accountant would suffice. This was NOT
a personal check.

Obviously not.

"Frank Ketchum" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Charlie Self" wrote in message
ups.com...

When the
cops got there, one of them grabbed the guy, and told them, "We need to
see about that forged check you brought in here."

The HR manager is black. The check is good.

It was spent at Target, according to the story.


Did they call the cops because they thought a black person couldn't have
access to those resources? Does the story say that? Or has it gotten to
the point that as long as you are black, everything that happens to you is
automatically racially motivated?

And you think that a guy who comes in with payment for a pre-order, in the
form of a company check--and GAF is a sizable company--with a business card
(admittedly not much for ID), a driver's license, and the assurance of a
phone call to the company's accountant was stalled, grabbed and screwed over
because he was...what? Possibly if this had been a personal check, there
might have been some hesitation for such a sizable sale, but ID was proper,
the order was waiting for him, and so was trouble in the persona of the kind
of jerk-off that companies like Wal-Mart too often hire. Then add a
delightful cop to the mix, and they picked on the guy cause he hadn't wiped
his nose.

You figure it out.

That $10,000 limit you refer to applies only to cash deposited or withdrawn
from a bank. It's an interesting way to try and stop obvious money
laundering.

Doesn't apply to checks, certainly doesn't apply when someone is making a
purchase at a retail store.

John E

"Han" wrote in message
...
"Charlie Self" wrote in news:1133643137.529629.98290
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

I read a story in today's Roanoke paper that says a Tampa, FL WalMart
managed to stick its footsies in the fire again. The store staff
checked ID--driver's license, business card, a call to the company
accountant--for a human resources manager for GAF, but decided to hold
on to his $13,600 company check, and the 530+ WM gift cards he'd had
pre-printed for his employees, while they called the cops. When the
cops got there, one of them grabbed the guy, and told them, "We need to
see about that forged check you brought in here."

The HR manager is black. The check is good.

It was spent at Target, according to the story.

I hope the HR manager grabs a large pot of beans off WalMart's legal
stove with this one, and sues the living **** out of the deputy and the
municipality for which acts as a paid thug.

I agree with your wish of bewns for the HR manager, but I have a thought:
With a $10K limit above which monetary transactions have to be reported
to thwe Feds somewhere somehow, would it not have been wise to call ahead
and see whether a check would be acceptable payment?

By the way, it brings to mind The first chekc I ever presented to Sears,
not long after opening our first checking account in Cambridge, MA in
1969. I was asked for my driver's license, and produced it. Guess they
had never seen a Dutch license at Sears on Mass Ave (since gone). I
didn't yet have a Mass license, and they were a bit taken aback by this
sheet of hot pink, measuring about 4 x 11" (wide). We still have some of
the pans from that first household purchase in the US.

For a current application for a Dutch license, see
http://www.rdw.nl/NR/rdonlyres/ACED28C9-8A1D-458C-B9B5-
D7F06E68DF8B/0/3E0660m.pdf. It would help if you understand Dutch.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 23:14:44 GMT, Han wrote:

"Charlie Self" wrote in news:1133643137.529629.98290
:

I read a story in today's Roanoke paper that says a Tampa, FL WalMart
managed to stick its footsies in the fire again. The store staff
checked ID--driver's license, business card, a call to the company
accountant--for a human resources manager for GAF, but decided to hold
on to his $13,600 company check, and the 530+ WM gift cards he'd had
pre-printed for his employees, while they called the cops. When the
cops got there, one of them grabbed the guy, and told them, "We need to
see about that forged check you brought in here."

The HR manager is black. The check is good.


It's probably a bit pre-mature to assume that race was the motivating
factor here. How was the guy dressed? If he was dressed down, is it
possible this was a trigger of suspicion? If a similarly dressed-down
white person had attempted the same thing would the same paranoia have
reigned at Walmart?


It was spent at Target, according to the story.


A fitting twist

I hope the HR manager grabs a large pot of beans off WalMart's legal
stove with this one, and sues the living **** out of the deputy and the
municipality for which acts as a paid thug.


Yep. There had to have been a better way to have handled that situation.
I've been caught in cases in the past where the only company ID I had was
an insurance card when attempting to get a company discount from a
particular retailer (purchase was for items for work). The retailer in
this case did right and I learned a valuable lesson -- make sure that you
take a company badge with you for these kinds of things.

Several things may have led to the WM manager's suspicions. In most
cases, transactions this large are handled via purchase orders, so the fact
someone had shown up with a check that large may have pegged the suspicion
meter. Anybody can have business cards for anything printed up and I
suspect that had the manager accepted the check and it turned out to be
fraudulent, it would have been his backside on the line, so he was in a bad
situation.


I agree with your wish of bewns for the HR manager, but I have a thought:
With a $10K limit above which monetary transactions have to be reported
to thwe Feds somewhere somehow, would it not have been wise to call ahead
and see whether a check would be acceptable payment?

.... snip

My understanding is the $10k reporting requirement is for bank
transactions, not all financial transactions. The purpose is to catch
money laundering.


+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Charlie Self (in )
said:

pathetic story snipped

The author of one of my favorite business books opined that there were
two classes of business, based on their top management norms.

He said that first-raters hired only first-raters who, in turn, used
similar standards to hire the remainder of the business' management.

In the other class of businesses, there were second-raters at the top
who hired third raters, who then used similar standards to hire the
remainder of the business' management.

The really bad news is that it's nearly impossible to upgrade an
"other" class business to a "first" class business - and all too easy
for a wormy board of directors and/or heir to spoil a top-notch
company.

Wal-Mart's problems are unlikely to be limited to the Tampa operation.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html

I agree with your wish of bewns for the HR manager, but I have a thought:
With a $10K limit above which monetary transactions have to be reported
to thwe Feds somewhere somehow, would it not have been wise to call ahead
and see whether a check would be acceptable payment?

... snip

My understanding is the $10k reporting requirement is for bank
transactions, not all financial transactions. The purpose is to catch
money laundering.


Technically $10,000 in _any_ transaction can be reported. However, it
mainly refers to cash or combination of cash and checks. If you take
cash for $5000 a week early, then take another $6000 in a few more
days, you have to report it. If you get $5000 in cash and a Cashiers
check for the balance, it's not required. If you get $9900 and then a
check you are supposed to report that. This the feds feel is an
attempt to circumvent the rules.

This reminds me I need to file a form at work first thing on MONDAY!

Alan

In the modern media, if he had been white, it probably would not have
made the news.

"In most cases, transactions this large are handled via purchase
orders, so the fact
someone had shown up with a check that large may have pegged the
suspicion
meter."

Payment is still made by check.

On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 21:59:02 GMT, "Frank Ketchum"
wrote:


"Charlie Self" wrote in message
oups.com...

When the
cops got there, one of them grabbed the guy, and told them, "We need to
see about that forged check you brought in here."

The HR manager is black. The check is good.

It was spent at Target, according to the story.


Did they call the cops because they thought a black person couldn't have
access to those resources? Does the story say that? Or has it gotten to
the point that as long as you are black, everything that happens to you is
automatically racially motivated?

It's been that way for a long time. I firmly believe from personal
experience that a large majority of "racial" difficulties allegedly
experienced by blacks are exactly the same sort of experiences all of
us have. But if you've been raised to be black, that is, to be
offended and oppressed, you can apply no other interpretation to the
act.

I'd like to know how the transaction escalated to the level of police
involvement. I wonder if there was a little "attitude" expressed
somewhere in it.



--
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net

Proud participant of rec.woodworking since February, 1997

"Charlie Self" wrote:

snip

When the
cops got there, one of them grabbed the guy, and told them, "We need to
see about that forged check you brought in here."

The HR manager is black. The check is good.

It was spent at Target, according to the story.


Some things to remember:

Tampa is headquarters for GAF, or was, last time we did business.

If this event happened during business hours, a simple telephone call by
the appropriate WalMart employee to GAF accounting, would have verified
the validity of the check.

Of course the person placing the telephone call needs to be able to
communicate and understand conversation that has advanced a level or two
beyond Neanderthal.

Lew

According to the St Pete times the gaf employee waited for over two hrs
for wal-mart to give him the gift cards but would not. He even asked for
the company check back wal-mart refused. cops called that there was a
forged check. A felon. So cops grabbed the felon. Cops went on info that
the check was forged and man was trying to pass it. Wal-mart mgr would
not even say he was sorry. Bentonvill(?) had to call his company and say
we sorry. Oh and the employee even called his company to tell them the
problem but the
wal-mart mgr knew better.
To the average reader I think you have to assume, this wal-mart mgr did
not trust the black guy. Hey wally mart lost $13,500 sale , lost a
future company sale from Gaf, and should loose a local store mgr. Anyone
interested in applying for his
$22,000 / yr. position. It is also 10 hr a day 6 days a week .

On 3 Dec 2005 17:57:02 -0800, "A.M. Wood"
wrote:

"In most cases, transactions this large are handled via purchase
orders, so the fact
someone had shown up with a check that large may have pegged the
suspicion
meter."

Payment is still made by check.

While that is true, it is also true that the checks issued through
purchase orders are issued by the appropriate financial departments of the
company issuing the purchase order and generally sent via mail to the
financial receiving department of the company with whom the purchase order
was placed. In my experience, it would be very unusual for a person to
deliver a check in person.



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Yes the st pete times reported that the call was made two weeks prior so
wally mart could print up the gift cards. All 520 of them.

You are of course assuming the dumb ass mgr would know what a purchase
order LOOKED like. Ever consider that the local store can only accept
cash check or credit card. ? It might be easier to log on to the St,
petersburg times and read the story as the paper reported it.
Someone mentioned attitude in the debate here. Now tell me what your
attitude would be if you company comptroller gave you a company check
for $13,500 told you to go to such and such wal-mart and pick up the 520
gift cards, You had Id and this
dumb ass mgr hold up the transaction for two hrs and you even try to get
the check back and you even call your company and tell them what is
going on. Now what would you do. You honest has been challenged. Your
integrity too.

"John Emmons" wrote in message
...
That $10,000 limit you refer to applies only to cash deposited or
withdrawn
from a bank. It's an interesting way to try and stop obvious money
laundering.

Doesn't apply to checks, certainly doesn't apply when someone is making a
purchase at a retail store.

John E


Wrong, A form 8300 has to be filed on ALL transactions over $10,000. Cash,
check or combinations of each. If fact, a retailer or banker can not (under
huge penalty) even advise or even hint that a 8300 for will be filed on the
transaction.

Dave



Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

On 3 Dec 2005 12:52:17 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, "Charlie
Self" quickly quoth:

I read a story in today's Roanoke paper that says a Tampa, FL WalMart
managed to stick its footsies in the fire again. The store staff
checked ID--driver's license, business card, a call to the company
accountant--for a human resources manager for GAF, but decided to hold
on to his $13,600 company check, and the 530+ WM gift cards he'd had
pre-printed for his employees, while they called the cops. When the
cops got there, one of them grabbed the guy, and told them, "We need to
see about that forged check you brought in here."

The HR manager is black. The check is good.

It was spent at Target, according to the story.

I hope the HR manager grabs a large pot of beans off WalMart's legal
stove with this one, and sues the living **** out of the deputy and the
municipality for which acts as a paid thug.

A definite injustice was done, but hoping that a city and a
corporation get sued for something that an employee of each
did to the poor guy is simply NOT the way to fix it, Charlie.
The person who called the cops/got the guy arrested and, if
warranted, the cop, should be held responsible, not the companies
they work for. That's just downright idiotic.

You shouldn't be able to sue a gun manufacturer for something some
asshole might have done with a gun in Boston or 'Bama, either.

Shame on you for that type of thinking. Lawsuits hurt EVERYONE!
Well, except for the insurance companies and lawyers who all charge
their highest rates for the privilege.

Go wash your mind out with soap.


--
Instant Gratification Takes Too Long!
-----------------------------------------------
www.diversify.com Non-Instant Web Development

On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 21:59:02 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, "Frank
Ketchum" quickly quoth:

"Charlie Self" wrote in message
oups.com...

When the
cops got there, one of them grabbed the guy, and told them, "We need to
see about that forged check you brought in here."

The HR manager is black. The check is good.

It was spent at Target, according to the story.


Did they call the cops because they thought a black person couldn't have
access to those resources? Does the story say that? Or has it gotten to
the point that as long as you are black, everything that happens to you is
automatically racially motivated?

Perhaps fewer than half the folks who walk into Wally World to cash a
check do so for checks with sums smaller than $13.6k.

Questions: Was the employee/exec, or the cop, or the writer black?
The story is far from complete enough as it stands here.


--
Instant Gratification Takes Too Long!
-----------------------------------------------
www.diversify.com Non-Instant Web Development

"Han" wrote:


SNIPS

I agree with your wish of bewns for the HR manager, but I have a thought:
With a $10K limit above which monetary transactions have to be reported
to thwe Feds somewhere somehow, would it not have been wise to call ahead
and see whether a check would be acceptable payment?

You don't know what you are talking about.

There is no requirement to report anything to do with a $ 13,500, or $
1,350,000 check transaction to the feds.

Ony cash -- currency -- transactions in excess of $ 10,000 from someone ot
already a known customer trigger a CTR. (currency transaction report).

Please engage brain before again putting fingers to keyboard.

--
Jim McLaughlin

Reply address is deliberately munged.
If you really need to reply directly, try:
jimdotmclaughlinatcomcastdotcom

And you know it is a dotnet not a dotcom
address.

Larry Jaques said:

On 3 Dec 2005 12:52:17 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, "Charlie
Self" quickly quoth:

I hope the HR manager grabs a large pot of beans off WalMart's legal
stove with this one, and sues the living **** out of the deputy and the
municipality for which acts as a paid thug.

A definite injustice was done, but hoping that a city and a
corporation get sued for something that an employee of each
did to the poor guy is simply NOT the way to fix it, Charlie.
The person who called the cops/got the guy arrested and, if
warranted, the cop, should be held responsible, not the companies
they work for. That's just downright idiotic.

It's stupid and the "right thing" seems like it would be common sense,
but it ain't the way civil tort law works. Years ago, I poured over
tombs of civil actions for false imprisonment, malicious prosecution
and false arrest in both state records and on WestLaw - and you
wouldn't believe some of the court and jury decisions. You have cases
where criminals caught in the act win judgments, but legitimately
damaged innocents receive nothing. It's all a big load of crap - and
the courts are inconsistent in application and are totally lacking in
reasonable common sense.

And in most jurisdictions (around here, anyway) municipalities are
immune from any liability in all but the most egregious cases.
Few have the resources to pursue a case beyond the local levels where
such things are simply "covered-up".

BTW, Sheriff's departments and other law enforcement and fire
officials are generally also considered an arm of the court - in these
here parts, anyway...

As one judge told me, we are all "Brothers and Sisters of the Bar".
Meaning that they cover each others asses to the detriment of yours.
And this includes cronies, contributors, and family members.

Well, except for the insurance companies and lawyers who all charge
their highest rates for the privilege.

Guaranteed! Soulless *******s...


Greg G.

"TeamCasa" wrote in message


Wrong, A form 8300 has to be filed on ALL transactions over $10,000.
Cash, check or combinations of each. If fact, a retailer or banker can
not (under huge penalty) even advise or even hint that a 8300 for will be
filed on the transaction.

Dave

Don't think so. Do you realize how many check transactions of that
magnitude are made by businesses every minute of the day? I've never seen
it in my 40 years in industry.

Larry Jaques (in ) said:

| On 3 Dec 2005 12:52:17 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, "Charlie
| Self" quickly quoth:
|
|| I hope the HR manager grabs a large pot of beans off WalMart's
|| legal stove with this one, and sues the living **** out of the
|| deputy and the municipality for which acts as a paid thug.
|
| A definite injustice was done, but hoping that a city and a
| corporation get sued for something that an employee of each
| did to the poor guy is simply NOT the way to fix it, Charlie.
| The person who called the cops/got the guy arrested and, if
| warranted, the cop, should be held responsible, not the companies
| they work for. That's just downright idiotic.

Not so idiotic as you might think - a manager 'speaks with the voice
of the corporation' (that's how he can hire and fire and direct the
conduct of those reporting to him/her). If that manager makes a legal
faux pas, the organization that granted him the authority to do so is
responsible for his actions.

| You shouldn't be able to sue a gun manufacturer for something some
| asshole might have done with a gun in Boston or 'Bama, either.

Unless the shooter was an employee of that manufacturer and encouraged
by them to shoot customers as a part of conducting the company's
business. :-)

| Shame on you for that type of thinking. Lawsuits hurt EVERYONE!
| Well, except for the insurance companies and lawyers who all charge
| their highest rates for the privilege.

Except for the "shame on you" part, I agree. Still, Wal-Mart
management issued a false felony accusation (is that libel?) and the
Tampa PD fielded an inadequately trained/screened officer who
preempted judicial powers by assuming guilt without evidence and spoke
falsely of that guilt in a public setting (as an official
representative of the City of Tampa).

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html

TeamCasa wrote:
"John Emmons" wrote in message
...
That $10,000 limit you refer to applies only to cash deposited or
withdrawn
from a bank. It's an interesting way to try and stop obvious money
laundering.

Doesn't apply to checks, certainly doesn't apply when someone is making a
purchase at a retail store.

John E


Wrong, A form 8300 has to be filed on ALL transactions over $10,000. Cash,
check or combinations of each. If fact, a retailer or banker can not (under
huge penalty) even advise or even hint that a 8300 for will be filed on the
transaction.

Dave


irrelevant, unless you have information that this was not done.



Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Larry Jaques wrote:

A definite injustice was done, but hoping that a city and a
corporation get sued for something that an employee of each
did to the poor guy is simply NOT the way to fix it, Charlie.


A comment like the above reminds me of a story about Paul Brown, the
football coach.

Seems Brown was having a service preformed and the guy screwed up doing
the job.

The guy tried to apologize to Brown;, however, rejected it saying, "It's
not your fault, it's the idiot who hired you."

I couldn't agree more.

Lew

In article ,
"Charles Self" wrote:

The order was placed earlier...it didn't say how much earlier. Regardless of
what the Feds want, Wal-Mart is not an enforcement arm, and GAF is a major
company, so you'd think that their check, assurances of the guy's business
card and ID and a call to the company accountant would suffice. This was NOT
a personal check.

And the Miami Herald says, in part
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/13316814.htm:

Employees of a Wal-Mart Supercenter called deputies last week to apprehend
Reginald Pitts after he handed over a $13,600 check to pay for 520 gift cards
that were to be given to employees at GAF Materials Corp., a roofing
materials manufacturer where Pitts is a human resources manager.

Note the guy's not some drone off the manufacturing floor, he's an HR
manager. Those people usually dress pretty business-like; at least they
do in my wife's HR office. They're also pretty well versed in
business-like behavior and have decent educations.

The company, which had $1.6 billion in revenue last year, had been spending
about $50,000 a year on Wal-Mart gift cards and never had a problem when it
sent another employee -- a white, female administrator who according to The
St. Petersburg Times was on vacation that day -- to pick them up.

''I keep going over and over the incident in my mind,'' Pitts told The St.
Petersburg Times. ``I cannot come up with any possible reason why I was
treated like this except that I am black.''

SNIP

Pitts said that when he went to the store last week to pick up the cards,
store managers stalled for about two hours while he stood waiting by the
customer service desk. He had handed over his GAF business card, his driver's
license and the toll-free numbers to GAF's bank. His accounting supervisor
assured them over the phone that the check was good.

It's certainly difficult to tell what really took place from reading an
article but it certainly sounds as though the guy had the ID, supporting
information and a company history with the practice.

What's criminal in all of this is making him stand around in a Walmart
for 2 hours! See? The slippery-slope of making torture acceptable has
trickled down to Wallyworld.
--
Owen Lowe
The Fly-by-Night Copper Company
__________

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
Corporate States of America and to the
Republicans for which it stands, one nation,
under debt, easily divisible, with liberty
and justice for oil."
- Wiley Miller, Non Sequitur, 1/24/05

"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...
On 3 Dec 2005 17:57:02 -0800, "A.M. Wood"
wrote:

"In most cases, transactions this large are handled via purchase
orders, so the fact
someone had shown up with a check that large may have pegged the
suspicion
meter."

Payment is still made by check.

While that is true, it is also true that the checks issued through
purchase orders are issued by the appropriate financial departments of the
company issuing the purchase order and generally sent via mail to the
financial receiving department of the company with whom the purchase order
was placed. In my experience, it would be very unusual for a person to
deliver a check in person.

Say what? This is a frigging Wal-Mart, not a machine shop. It's a low to
lower quality retail store, not some office supplies outfit. I would assume
that the check was issued by GAF's appropriate department. You do NOT mail
checks to a retail store unless it's a mail order store. No mention was made
of a PO, so I have no idea if one was involved. Delivering a check in person
is how we buy at retail stores. It is how probably 50% of Wal-Mart customers
buy. The only discordant note here was the size of the check. The product
had been ordered and printed for the particular employees.

You mentioned dress: I do not know how the HR manager was dressed, but in
IME, HR types tend to dress up a bit more than other corporate employees,
some of them being almost as natty as Don Guillard at Woodcraft.

"LRod" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 21:59:02 GMT, "Frank Ketchum"
wrote:


"Charlie Self" wrote in message
roups.com...

When the
cops got there, one of them grabbed the guy, and told them, "We need to
see about that forged check you brought in here."

The HR manager is black. The check is good.

It was spent at Target, according to the story.


Did they call the cops because they thought a black person couldn't have
access to those resources? Does the story say that? Or has it gotten to
the point that as long as you are black, everything that happens to you is
automatically racially motivated?

It's been that way for a long time. I firmly believe from personal
experience that a large majority of "racial" difficulties allegedly
experienced by blacks are exactly the same sort of experiences all of
us have. But if you've been raised to be black, that is, to be
offended and oppressed, you can apply no other interpretation to the
act.

I'd like to know how the transaction escalated to the level of police
involvement. I wonder if there was a little "attitude" expressed
somewhere in it.



Attitude? I hope there was attitude. If they'd done that to me, they'd have
needed the frigging cops and an ER squad to get the manager's balls down
from around his neck where I'd punt them for his treating me like that.

Attitude doesn't always come with being black. It comes with being screwed
over.

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On 3 Dec 2005 12:52:17 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, "Charlie
Self" quickly quoth:

I read a story in today's Roanoke paper that says a Tampa, FL WalMart
managed to stick its footsies in the fire again. The store staff
checked ID--driver's license, business card, a call to the company
accountant--for a human resources manager for GAF, but decided to hold
on to his $13,600 company check, and the 530+ WM gift cards he'd had
pre-printed for his employees, while they called the cops. When the
cops got there, one of them grabbed the guy, and told them, "We need to
see about that forged check you brought in here."

The HR manager is black. The check is good.

It was spent at Target, according to the story.

I hope the HR manager grabs a large pot of beans off WalMart's legal
stove with this one, and sues the living **** out of the deputy and the
municipality for which acts as a paid thug.

A definite injustice was done, but hoping that a city and a
corporation get sued for something that an employee of each
did to the poor guy is simply NOT the way to fix it, Charlie.
The person who called the cops/got the guy arrested and, if
warranted, the cop, should be held responsible, not the companies
they work for. That's just downright idiotic.

You shouldn't be able to sue a gun manufacturer for something some
asshole might have done with a gun in Boston or 'Bama, either.

Shame on you for that type of thinking. Lawsuits hurt EVERYONE!
Well, except for the insurance companies and lawyers who all charge
their highest rates for the privilege.

Go wash your mind out with soap.

No chance. If the companies and towns didn't hire these assholes, they'd
have no power to make the messes they do. If it costs the companies and
towns enough money, they might actual spend more than 22K a year for a
manager.

Lawsuits do NOT hurt everyone unless the lawsuits are frivolous. I see no
frivolity here.

Fly-by-Night CC wrote:

What's criminal in all of this is making him stand around in a Walmart
for 2 hours! See? The slippery-slope of making torture acceptable has
trickled down to Wallyworld.

I've been in two. Both had the same rancid popcorn smell as K-Mart.
Standing at the service desk in one for 2 hours is certainly Cruel and
Unusual!

"Han" wrote in message
...

I agree with your wish of bewns for the HR manager, but I have a thought:
With a $10K limit above which monetary transactions have to be reported
to thwe Feds somewhere somehow, would it not have been wise to call ahead
and see whether a check would be acceptable payment?


The $10 limit has to do with bank deposits/withdraws not with commercial or
even private transactions. No, it would not really have been any more
prudent to call ahead. Corporations issue checks in the mega buck range on
an hourly basis. Though... I'll admit that my first thought when reading
Charlie's post was - why didn't GAF cut a PO? That's more the normal
process.

--

-Mike-

Old proverb: "Never attribute to anger that which can be explained by
stupidity". I trust there's more to the story than meets the media eye.

IMHO, YMMV

"While that is true, it is also true that the checks issued through
purchase orders are issued by the appropriate financial departments of
the company issuing the purchase order and generally sent via mail to
the financial receiving department of the company with whom the
purchase order was placed. In my experience, it would be very unusual
for a person to deliver a check in person. "

The check was issued by the company.

Sure, for the average "widgets" a company will send a check. However,
when cash or near cash items are involved it is the always the case
that a real live human being will deliver payment in person when the
transaction involves purchasing items such as this. (Gift cards are
like cash) That person will be either a trusted company employee or a
bonded messenger. In my 20+ years as a professional financial manager
this has ALWAYS been the case. Though I've only seen messengers
trusted with securities. Cash or near cash items are always handled by
employees. If I were GAF's CFO I would have been damn glad that it was
another member of senior management was the one running around with 10k
of cash rather than just anyone.

"Mike Marlow" wrote in message
Though... I'll admit that my first thought when reading
Charlie's post was - why didn't GAF cut a PO? That's more the normal
process.


Wal Mart would not know what to do with a PO. The are just not set up to do
business that way, at least on the local store level.

All of our normal business transactions are by PO but if we have a lunch
catered, order pizza, or the local snow plow guy, we cut a check as the
local stores do not have billing procedures and the cost associated with
them.

"Ba r r y"
At work, I buy test sets that cost $30,000 each. Occasionally, I buy
as many as ten at a time. They get paid for with a corporate check
from our AP dept. There is no extra paperwork.

I bought a new Toyota pickup in March with a personal check. There
was no extra paperwork.

The down payment on my home was a certified check from my account, the
rest was a check from the mortgage holder. The only extra paperwork I
had to file was to certify to the lender that I didn't borrow the down
payment.

Seeing a pattern? G

The check IS the paper trail. The IRS paperwork is used in cash
transactions.

Barry

The 8300 IRS form is not a form the buyer ever sees. I am a car dealer,
believe me we file the forms. We are not allowed by law to even tell you we
are filing it. Not to mention we have to keep it on file for five years!

Dave



Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

"Charles Self" wrote in message
news:cNpkf.119439$qk4.101316@bgtnsc05-

was stalled, grabbed and screwed over because he was...what?

I was just asking if the story says this or if it your interpretation.
Relax.

"Mike Marlow" wrote in message
...

"Han" wrote in message
...

I agree with your wish of bewns for the HR manager, but I have a thought:
With a $10K limit above which monetary transactions have to be reported
to thwe Feds somewhere somehow, would it not have been wise to call ahead
and see whether a check would be acceptable payment?


The $10 limit has to do with bank deposits/withdraws not with commercial
or
even private transactions. No, it would not really have been any more
prudent to call ahead. Corporations issue checks in the mega buck range
on
an hourly basis. Though... I'll admit that my first thought when reading
Charlie's post was - why didn't GAF cut a PO? That's more the normal
process.


These things were ordered earlier--pre-printed, remember? It may well be
that a PO was issued then.

"TeamCasa" wrote in
:


"Ba r r y"
At work, I buy test sets that cost $30,000 each. Occasionally, I buy
as many as ten at a time. They get paid for with a corporate check
from our AP dept. There is no extra paperwork.

I bought a new Toyota pickup in March with a personal check. There
was no extra paperwork.

The down payment on my home was a certified check from my account,
the rest was a check from the mortgage holder. The only extra
paperwork I had to file was to certify to the lender that I didn't
borrow the down payment.

Seeing a pattern? G

The check IS the paper trail. The IRS paperwork is used in cash
transactions.

Barry

The 8300 IRS form is not a form the buyer ever sees. I am a car
dealer, believe me we file the forms. We are not allowed by law to
even tell you we are filing it. Not to mention we have to keep it on
file for five years!

Dave


Form 8300; All parts must be filed for all Cash transactions over $10,000.
the term Cash means the following; U.S. and Foreign coin and currency
received in any transaction. A cashiers check, money order, bank draft, or
travellers check having a face value of $10,000 or less that is received in
the cash transaction that collectively exceeds $10,000. Cash does not
include a check drawn on the payers own account, such as a personal check
or business check, regardles of the amount, nor an inter bank transfer.
Cash does not include coin, cashiers check, money order, bank draft or
travellers check if it constitutes the proceeds of a US sourced bank loan.
The receipient of the payment received in trade or business must file the
form 8300.