I have learned that anytime I see something in the media that makes me think "Why would they do that?) There's probably something I'm missing.
I note the statement from the bank said:
"At U.S. Bank, we have policies and procedures in place to protect our customers and employees,” the statement read. “Ms. James was terminated following an internal investigation into her interactions with a customer. During this review it was determined Ms. James did not use the available solutions to remedy the customer’s situation and instead put herself and the bank at risk with her actions.”
Gotta wonder what those solutions may have been. I also kinda understand why the bank would have a pretty broad blanket, "Call center employees don't tell customers where they are, or go out to customers" policy. Is firing harsh? Maybe, or maybe there was a viable solution that would have solved the problem inside the banks policies.
Follow on question: What would Ms. James relatives have done if she had been hurt while on the clock and galivanting down to the gas station (presumably in her POV)?
There's always (at least) two sides to any story.