Morrisons employee of 30 years is sacked for tackling teenage shoplifter after bosses mentioned she ‘put firm repute in jeopardy’ for not following ‘deter not detain’ coverage

A karate-trained Morrisons worker of 30 years was sacked for tackling a teenage shoplifter when bosses said she had put the company’s reputation in jeopardy for not following its ‘deter-not-detain’ policy.  

Jane Pilborough, 62, was the only staff member to try to stop the young thief’s attempts to smuggle ‘chicken bites’ out of the Newark store in his pockets. 

The grandmother insisted she had followed the supermarket chain’s much criticised ‘deter-not-detain’ policy and tried to persuade the crook to go back to pay for the hot food. 

When he got near the exit, the hoodlum ‘made a sudden move’, causing the retail worker to grab hold of his rucksack in a movement she described as ‘natural instinct’.

From there, Ms Pilborough has no memory of what happened as she was in ‘fight or flight mode’. 

But CCTV footage showed her falling to the ground after the shoplifter spun around to shake her off before he ran out of the store. She believed he was 18 or 19 years old, but it later transpired he was 14 or 15.   

A clearly shaken Ms Pilborough was helped to her feet and taken to the store’s staff canteen after suffering minor injuries to her hand and knee. 

Yet days later, bosses began disciplinary proceedings against her in August 2024 rather than lauding her for her bravery.

By the end of the month, her three-decade career with Morrisons, with a previously unblemished record, came to an unceremonious end.

She was sacked for gross misconduct and accused of trying to yank him back into the store in what was described as a ‘tug of war’.

Ms Pilborough told the Daily Mail the sacking left her feeling like she had been dumped on the scrapheap. 

‘I still feel resentful of the way I was treated,’ she said. 

Referring to the recent case of Morrisons manager Sean Egan’s sacking, she added: ‘I thought, “yeah, it’s still happening. They’re still getting rid of people”. I mean, I wasn’t the only one. 

‘Obviously, the union rep couldn’t go into details, but apparently there were a few others at roundabout the same time [as my case], they just decided there was a hard line. They were just dismissing people that got involved.’

She was acting team leader and one of 15 employees, including security, wearing headsets to hear the duty manager’s calls to intervene when a group of youths were suspected of shoplifting. 

Ms Pilborough said: ‘The term she [the duty manager] used was that there was somebody in the store who had concealed. 

‘She actually stated that she wanted him stopping, and she said to block the doors. Obviously, this was for everybody on a headset. But security didn’t respond. I found myself in an impossible situation where I saw the individual just walk straight through one of the checkouts past the last point of payment.’

She said she then walked backwards in front of the teenager and asked him to go back to pay. He refused and denied he had taken any groceries, despite his pockets ‘bulging’.

While she was speaking to the teenager, she had called again through her headset for security to intervene, but got no response.  

Ms Pilborough, who had watched a training video two weeks before the incident titled ‘recognising theft and responding’, said: ‘When we got closer to the doors, he made a sudden move. I then cannot remember exactly what happened. My mind blanked it out. 

‘I went, apparently, from what I’ve been told, I went into automatic fight or flight, and your mind actually blocks it out. 

‘But all I can remember is the feeling of falling. The next thing I know, I’m on the ground and he’s running away.’ 

Police were called but the investigation was dropped as, according to Ms Pilborough’s disciplinary notes, seen by the Daily Mail, the CCTV ‘doesn’t really prove anything’.  

During the investigation, she told bosses she felt her ‘automatic response and karate training [had] gone against me’. 

A few days after her disciplinary meeting, she was told in a chastising letter, seen by the Daily Mail, that the decision had been made to terminate her employment. 

‘Your actions put yourself in danger, the lives of your fellow colleagues and other customers shopping at the time,’ it reads. 

‘This situation could have been avoided if you had chosen to follow the company procedure. Instead, you have put the company’s reputation in jeopardy as this could have been filmed and shared on social media at any point.’ 

The letter also criticised her for ignoring the company’s policy and suggested she could have faced criminal charges for trying to physically stop a juvenile shoplifter. 

Ms Pilborough, who has since found another job, appealed the decision, but this was upheld following a meeting in October of the same year. 

In its decision, bosses noted it was ‘admirable’ that she cared for her place of work, but said Ms Pilborough’s ‘actions led to worsening a situation that could have de-escalated by simply letting the shoplifter leave the premises’.

It is believed Morrisons introduced its new shoplifting policy in 2023, with it including offering suspected thieves a basket rather than challenging them. 

A post from one person on a Reddit thread last year, who claimed to be an employee of the supermarket, said that staff are told to deter them with ‘customer service’. 

‘If you see them stuffing things up their shirt, you’re supposed to go over and offer them a basket for the goods they clearly can’t carry,’ they wrote.

‘Not always but a lot of them will put back whatever, or at least leave at that point when they know you are on to them.’ 

Disciplinary notes of Ms Pilborough’s case make reference to her being ‘past the point of offering a basket’. 

Morrisons told the Mail that staff do not offer a basket to suspected shoplifters when a crime is in progress. 

A spokesperson for the supermarket said: ‘We recognise that difficult situations like this can cause real challenges for colleagues in store. That’s why, when dealing with a shoplifter, a colleague’s safety is always the number one priority and why we have clear procedures in place to de-escalate incidents, to prevent any of our colleagues being put at risk in a physical struggle and coming to harm. 

‘We believe colleague safety always outweighs the protection of stock. We cannot ignore the potential for violence, and it is essential to remember that only the police are authorised to intervene in these situations.

‘Unfortunately, the former colleague’s actions and the evidence to the disciplinary hearing showed that, although she had been trained on how to respond to a theft situation safely just a few weeks before the incident, she did not follow that procedure and that led to a physical altercation with a juvenile shoplifter.

‘The matter was investigated thoroughly and, regretfully, the recommendation of the disciplinary panel was that she be dismissed. This was upheld on appeal.’