The intended usage in my opinion is up to the governance to decide. They can vote on things related to how things should work. The project can be taken any way the governance decides and if the governance decides that it wants to send all of the funds to a single person I don't see how that is outside the indented usage. The exact same action could benefit all the users in case the smart contract had a vulnerability and he wanted to save everyone else's funds from being stolen.
In regards to your example if the employee truly does have the power to do that and the intention for that power is not stated. I think it's fine for them to take actions which cause the store to lose money.
Edit: As a sibling comment mentioned it's more like if a owner of the business decided to add these discounts.
A majority shareholder in a company isn't allowed to take all the assets even though they have the votes. The minority does have rights. Like, this is what the eternally misunderstood fiduciary duty is about: the company isn't your personal piggie bank just because you're at the wheel.
In regards to your example if the employee truly does have the power to do that and the intention for that power is not stated. I think it's fine for them to take actions which cause the store to lose money.
Edit: As a sibling comment mentioned it's more like if a owner of the business decided to add these discounts.