DISNEYLAND CHANGES SHOPLIFTING POLICY IN RESPONSE TO CRITICISM

Goofy's security force has changed its shoplifting policy.

Responding to media reports that Disneyland security officials asked suspected shoplifters to pay damages on the spot, the amusement park has announced it will no longer seek money from juveniles who are detained, but not yet prosecuted, on shoplifting charges.

In recent weeks, several guests have complained to local newspapers that they were told they could avoid prosecution by paying damages immediately, even though they had yet been formally accused of any crime. Some guests said Disneyland security personnel detained them for several hours until they felt they had no choice but to pay, even though they insisted they were innocent.

Disneyland spokesman Tom Brocato said the park will still seek civil damages from shoplifters who are convicted or plead guilty, however.

Meanwhile, the National Retail Federation (NRF) reports that shoplifting accounts for 36 percent of inventory shrinkage in retail stores.

The Retail Theft Trends Report, conducted by Loss Prevention Specialists and Sensormatic Electronics Corp., found shop-lifters are most likely to prey on stores between 3 and 6 p.m. on Saturdays. The most commonly pilfered merchandise includes cigarettes, athletic shoes, electronic games, and clothing, particularly shirts and blouses.

The holiday season is typically the busiest time of the year for shoplifters. Eleven percent of all shoplifters nabbed in 1995 were apprehended in December. To help merchants protect themselves, the NRF has put together a "holiday survival kit" with loss prevention tips.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 3.8 million Baby Boomers will turn fifty this year, up from 2.4 million just five years ago. The graying of America is just beginning.

Twenty years from now, one out of every three people in the U.S. will be over age 50. Expect to see a corresponding increase in age discrimination suits filed against employers. These cases are already on the rise.

Last week, Lockheed Martin Corp. agreed to pay $13 million to 3,000 over the age of 40 workers who were fired between 1990 and 1994. The company also agreed to rehire 450 of the employees.

The settlement is the result of a May 1994 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) suit filed against Martin Marietta Astronautics. Martin Marietta later merged with Lockheed Corp..

EEOC attorneys involved in the lawsuit agreed that Martin Marietta probably did need to reduce its work force in the early 1990's because of downturns in the aero-space industry. However, the suit contended that the company should have offered enhanced retirement payments to older employees.

Two recent federal appeals court cases have have important implications for businesses trying to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

In the first case, a federal appeals court ruled the employers and insurers who provide lower mental health benefits than for physical illnesses may be in violation of the ADA. The ruling revolves around a previous circuit court case in which an employee suffering from severe depression sued Schering-Plough Company for discriminating against employees with mental illnesses.

Under Schering-Plough's health benefits plan, employees unable to work due to mental illness receive up to two years of disability benefits, while workers disabled through physical illness were allowed to continue receiving benefits until age 65.

In the second case, a federal appeals court is considering whether the ADA protects the estimated 650,000 people who are HIV-positive, but have not yet exhibited symptoms of AIDS. The case involves a Maine dentist who refused to treat and HIV-positive patient, even though she was currently asymptomatic.

If the court decides that the ADA does protect people infected with the HIV virus but not yet showing symptoms of AIDS, it could open a can of worms for risk managers in terms of worker disability claims and the public accessibility aspects of the ADA.