Amy Schumer bans fans from taking selfies: "I Don't Owe You Anything"

Bodyguards, I suspect, are there for the very small percentage of the population who are crazy, and may actually attack or mob the celebrity.

My cousin is a bodyguard, part-time when he's not doing his law enforcement gig. He works primarily for an actor who is in action hero style movies. He said that people regularly come up to the actor and challenge him. That's what my cousin is there for - to ask them to move along. :lol:
 
Some food for thought, suppose you were at Walmart, and were looking for the shoe department but couldn't find it. You see a Walmart employee heading towards the door and you stop him and ask for directions. The employee snarls at you and tells you they are off duty and leave them alone. Remember this person is not even gaining anything. They are a private citizen heading home from work, but you just happen to recognize them as an employee. Would this be considered acceptable behaviour on the part of the employee? Was it unreasonable for you to ask the question?
I'm sure it depends on the individual store, but Walmart tends to have a very strict policy of no work off the clock. So if you asked that of an employee off the clock, all they could do would be to point out someone else who could assist you. Otherwise they risk termination.

At some other chains, they make allowances for this, so if a customer asks assistance of an employee when they are off the clock, the employee's time will be adjusted and they will be put back on the clock for the duration of the assistance offered.

In both cases, companies regard such customer requests as work, and have shaped their policies accordingly.
 
Last edited:
I'm sure it depends on the individual store, but Walmart tends to have a very strict policy of no work off the clock. So if you asked that of an employee off the clock, all they could do would be to point out someone else who could assist you. Otherwise they risk termination.

At some other chains, they make allowances for this, so if a customer asks assistance of an employee when they are off the clock, the employee's time will be adjusted and they will be put back on the clock for the duration of the assistance offered.

Are you serious? In the 15 seconds it would take to say "shoes are at the back behind the sportswear" and point in that direction, you would expect an employee's pay to be adjusted? Or better yet, be terminated for "working off the clock." (I believe you are in the US, but I assure you in Canada a labour arbitrator would have a field day if a company tried to dismiss someone for that :D.)

I am trying to figure out if you are deliberately missing my point.
 
Are you serious? In the 15 seconds it would take to say "shoes are at the back behind the sportswear" and point in that direction, you would expect an employee's pay to be adjusted? Or better yet, be terminated for "working off the clock." (I believe you are in the US, but I assure you in Canada a labour arbitrator would have a field day if a company tried to dismiss someone for that :D.)
Yes, I'm in the US. And yes, these are actual company policies--strange as they seem. The reason is because there have been lawsuits against Walmart and other such stores for compelling workers to work off the clock, so now the policies absolutely prohibit *any* work, no matter how little, being done while off the clock. While it's ostensibly done to protect workers, in the end workers can be strongly disciplined for infractions (though again it depends somewhat on the particular establishment).
I am trying to figure out if you are deliberately missing my point.
Just to reiterate what my point was, in both situations I cited, companies regard responding to customer requests such as what you outlined as work, and thus their policies are shaped accordingly. As once upon said, from a fan's perspective, it may be just this one 15 second request. But for the celebrity, it's a 15 second request times 1000. And while it may seem like a social thing for the fan, it's really work for the celebrity. And I don't think others have the right to compel someone else to work on their off-time.
 
Celebrities don't owe people anything. It boggles my mind in particular how publishing paparazzi pictures taken against a person's will and/or without their knowledge (always with the intent to profit from their image, and often from trying to shame them somehow) can be legally tolerated.

That said, her reaction to post his picture and publicly shame him seems a bit hypocritical (though understandable why it would be tempting if he acted like a jerk). I'm strongly against public shaming and the mob mentality that can result, which is unfortunately so easy and common in the age of the internet. (I found Jon Ronson's TED talk and book on the subject of public shaming very good, for anyone else interested in the subject).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information