[kellyhound]

A surveillance video of an altercation between a Mac's convenience store clerk and a robber has surfaced online showing the employee striking the assailant several times.

The 28 seconds of footage from early Tuesday reveals the clerk pushing the other man and throwing a number of punches at him while he was lying on the ground at the store on King Street East near Ottawa Street.

Jamal Abugalib, 52, was fired after the incident and then went public, saying he felt he'd been treated unjustly.

He said he held the intoxicated assailant down until police arrived.

The company declined to comment on the incident.
In an interview, Abugalib said after the man fell to the ground he jumped on top of him and held his arms until police arrived.

But the video — which has no audio — shows he did more than hold the assailant. He threw several punches. Abugalib said that the incident went by in a flash and his recollection of it must have become tainted.

Abugalib approached a newspaper about the dilemma, saying the firing has left his family with no source of income. His wife doesn't work and the couple has three children ages 14, eight and four.

A police spokesperson with knowledge about the case could not be reached.

Police previously said a 32-year-old man has been charged with robbery in connection with the incident.

A release from police said the assailant, who apparently smelled of alcohol, demanded money, which was given to him.

Then "the staff member decided to physically detain the male inside the store which prompted a struggle."

No charges were laid against Abugalib.

The firing has led to spirited discussion online. Most of them critical of the company's decision to terminate a 10-year employee.

Others took the view that employers need to be clear about rules during robberies, and firing is reasonable when an important company policy is broken that could leave the company liable.

"What he did was human instinct. What he did was for the betterment of his employer. He gained nothing from this except unemployment. I will not visit another Macs store unless they publicly rehire him," said someone in the comments.

"Imagine a world without brave people willing to put themselves in danger. Anyone who's criticizing this man's actions is a coward," said reader Justin.

Reader Denis took the opposite view: "Problems abound here. Suppose the robber died for some reason — heart attack, asphyxiation — would the clerk be held liable, civilly, perhaps even criminally for assaulting the fleeing robber, given Mac's policy not to intervene. It has happened."

**** said, "No, that is a safety issue for YOU and anybody else in the store. He violated policy and put himself in unnecessary danger. Good riddance."

Aaron Schat, a McMaster University professor of human resource management, said having a company policy that prohibits employees from confronting would-be robbers "is quite reasonable.

"The problem is the enforcement of the policy."

He noted there are other punishment options, less severe than dismissal, for employees who breach a policy in the heat of the moment. They could be reprimanded or suspended.

A less severe punishment would still send a message that confrontations will not be tolerated, he said, while sparing the employee the extreme hardship of losing a job altogether.

[Shakey]

No good deed goes unpunished.

[spudigitti]

He nailed that little fukker....