'Maybe we cried too much' over shoplifting, Walgreens executive says • Hacker News Board

Re: 'Maybe we cried too much' over shoplifting, Walgreens executive says

#11

Post by bdcravens » Mon, Jan 09, 2023, 6:41 PM UTC

blacksmith_tb wrote: post #10

bdcravens wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The context of where I assume you are making that conclusion from reads differently to me: they are saying they believe their security posture is excessive. > But a year later, Kehoe said Thursday that the company added too much extra security in stores. > “Probably we put in too much, and we might step back a little bit from that,” he said of security staffing. The company has found private security guards to be “la…

Yes, though that's an interesting phrase - how can the company "put in" more police / LE officers? Aren't they assigned patrols or dispatched for specific incidents?

Most municipalities allow companies to hire police for overtime hours in addition to their assigned duties.

Re: 'Maybe we cried too much' over shoplifting, Walgreens executive says

#12

Post by mansion7 » Mon, Jan 09, 2023, 7:26 PM UTC

_fat_santa wrote: post #5

Wallgreens is a national retailer, so excess shrinkage at one or a series of locations is offset by below average shrinkage in other locations. Just because a national retailer can absorb something like this does not mean a local retailer with many fewer locations can. It's still a massive problem, just not for national retailers.

Even though Walgreens is a national retailer, non-thieving locations should not be made to subsidize the thieving locations.

A Walgreens in small town Illinois with extremely low shrinkage ought not see any negative effects such as price increases because other, more lax on crime cities, perpetuate an atmosphere of lawlessness and tolerance of same.

Re: 'Maybe we cried too much' over shoplifting, Walgreens executive says

#13

Post by mrguyorama » Mon, Jan 09, 2023, 7:30 PM UTC

phil21 wrote: post #6

wiseleo wrote: post #3

With sufficient staffing and instant mobile checkout, stores can implement a fully secure experience. The caveat here is "sufficient staffing" of people who can use a mobile checkout solution.

How do you imagine this working? I live a few blocks away from a Walgreens that is now closing at the end of the month. I've personally witnessed a shoplifter actively shoplifting nearly every time I was in the store over the past year to year and a half. This was a half dozen encounters at least, of varying degrees of audacity from teenagers stealing some makeup to outright crews doing a mini flash mob style raid. I…

The "amount" of shoplifting you see while stores continue to REDUCE attempts to intervene should show you just how much of a non-issue shoplifting is to most businesses. It's more expensive for a company to pay for insurance that would cover an employee being injured trying to detain a theif or pay for an actual security guard than just to say "fuck it" to a small percentage of goods. Average shrinkage for retail is like 2%. A permanent security guard would cost like $60k to $100k a year, and yet is still super uncommon.

>Police and prosecutors would have our backs strongly. Prosecutors still have your backs. The idea of NOT prosecuting a shoplifter is pretty much a non-consideration anywhere, and even in the small part of california that people claimed the DA did prosecute saw them voted out. It's police that just seem to ignore crime in some jurisdictions. In my local supermarket growing up, the store manager and local police RELISHED going after shoplifters. It was stupid easy, a few cameras and a bored officer is all it takes.

Re: 'Maybe we cried too much' over shoplifting, Walgreens executive says

#14

Post by runnerup » Mon, Jan 09, 2023, 7:39 PM UTC

blacksmith_tb wrote: post #10

bdcravens wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The context of where I assume you are making that conclusion from reads differently to me: they are saying they believe their security posture is excessive. > But a year later, Kehoe said Thursday that the company added too much extra security in stores. > “Probably we put in too much, and we might step back a little bit from that,” he said of security staffing. The company has found private security guards to be “la…

Yes, though that's an interesting phrase - how can the company "put in" more police / LE officers? Aren't they assigned patrols or dispatched for specific incidents?

Police officers are generally available for hire for private security work -- they are still allowed to use their full police authority during this private work. However, they'll cost about $40 to $176/hour (from very low-paid super rural areas to NYC/SF rates, and can depend on the rank of the officer), which is quite prohibitive.

The "main issue" driving demand for this very high hourly cost (relative to typical $10-15/hr retail worker and security staff wages) is that liability insurance and corporate legal departments generally won't allow anyone without qualified immunity to restrain or detain anyone suspected/known to be stealing.

Therefore hiring police officers who do have qualified immunity and can act in their official capacity "outside of the employment contract". So Walgreens can put in the police officer private contract "do not restrain, detain, or prevent free movement of any individual". Then when a suspected shoplifter is identified, the police officer can say "I quit!"/"I am leaving for 1 hour"/"break the employment contract" to act in their official police capacity to arrest the individual, and if the individual is harmed they can't sue Walgreens because Walgreens was no longer employing the police officer. Also the police officer can't be sued because of qualified immunity.

This is currently the most-proffered way for corporations to physically stop lawbreakers on premises before they leave.

That said, when I was a bartender we used to apprehend/restrain/detain patrons on a weekly basis in a very leftist college town and never found ourselves in any legal quandary (though we were very Patrick-Swayze-in-Roundhouse about it).

http://www.offdutyhouston.com

https://upd.tamu.edu/Pages/Find-the-cost-for-hiring-an-offic...

https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/special-event-security-bulks...

Personally I'm super against the concept of public authorities being able to be hired for private protection but it's important to be aware of the reality and the driving forces involved which "make it so".

Re: 'Maybe we cried too much' over shoplifting, Walgreens executive says

#15

Post by mancerayder » Mon, Jan 09, 2023, 7:41 PM UTC

phil21 wrote: post #6

wiseleo wrote: post #3

With sufficient staffing and instant mobile checkout, stores can implement a fully secure experience. The caveat here is "sufficient staffing" of people who can use a mobile checkout solution.

How do you imagine this working? I live a few blocks away from a Walgreens that is now closing at the end of the month. I've personally witnessed a shoplifter actively shoplifting nearly every time I was in the store over the past year to year and a half. This was a half dozen encounters at least, of varying degrees of audacity from teenagers stealing some makeup to outright crews doing a mini flash mob style raid. I…

> Society starts failing when the answer to every problem is call mommy and daddy (the police) and stops enforcing basic societal norms by

Complex societies seem to have a few basic options:

1 - Enforce social laws 'locally' without official government sanction; neighborhood heroes if you're polite, the mob if you're looking at the U.S. big cities in much of the 20th century. Behaviors change through fear.

2 - Enforce statutory laws via government punishment: fines or community service, imprisonment for repeat offenders, etc. Behaviors change through removing people from the society, or scaring them into fearing punishment.

3 - Don't enforce any laws. After all, shoplifting is a victimless crime. People need to eat and they need medicine. It's not against the law to be poor.

4 - Change societal norms through shaming and education. After all, people don't realize the impact they're having, if you finger wag and lecture to them, they will understand the bigger societal reason to be nice.

In cities like NYC, SF, Philly and Chicago I seem to be seeing all of these, with a de-emphasis on traditional #2, the government punishing people. We like to blame police for not showing up, but district attorneys are specifically avoiding to prosecute [1], so police aren't going to waste their times and risk themselves.

We have judges attempting diversion programs like making defendants write essays or attend some event where they can meet victims to gain empathy.

Then we have a huge number (according to voting patterns) of Millennial-age folks who are deeply against police, against incarceration ("the carceral system" as they refer to it) at any cost, both as they're viewed as historically racist.

What will happen now? Well as usual the middle class and poor will suffer - the rich will always have their deliveries, private security, and seclusion from the street thuggery we're pretending is inevitable and perhaps only started during the pandemic (an argument being made by our politicians).

1 - See page four of https://www.manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Day-O... ("The Office will not prosecute the following charges...")

Re: 'Maybe we cried too much' over shoplifting, Walgreens executive says

#16

Post by mancerayder » Mon, Jan 09, 2023, 7:46 PM UTC

mrguyorama wrote: post #13

phil21 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you imagine this working? I live a few blocks away from a Walgreens that is now closing at the end of the month. I've personally witnessed a shoplifter actively shoplifting nearly every time I was in the store over the past year to year and a half. This was a half dozen encounters at least, of varying degrees of audacity from teenagers stealing some makeup to outright crews doing a mini flash mob style raid. I…

The "amount" of shoplifting you see while stores continue to REDUCE attempts to intervene should show you just how much of a non-issue shoplifting is to most businesses. It's more expensive for a company to pay for insurance that would cover an employee being injured trying to detain a theif or pay for an actual security guard than just to say "fuck it" to a small percentage of goods. Average shrinkage for retail is…

This is actually false. There are security guards in all the non-mom-and-pop pharmacies in Manhattan. Clearly it's worth it to pay for a guy to sit in a chair by the door as a (very loose) disincentive to steal.

Re: 'Maybe we cried too much' over shoplifting, Walgreens executive says

#17

Post by monkeydreams » Mon, Jan 09, 2023, 7:49 PM UTC

mansion7 wrote: post #12

_fat_santa wrote: post #5

Wallgreens is a national retailer, so excess shrinkage at one or a series of locations is offset by below average shrinkage in other locations. Just because a national retailer can absorb something like this does not mean a local retailer with many fewer locations can. It's still a massive problem, just not for national retailers.

Even though Walgreens is a national retailer, non-thieving locations should not be made to subsidize the thieving locations. A Walgreens in small town Illinois with extremely low shrinkage ought not see any negative effects such as price increases because other, more lax on crime cities, perpetuate an atmosphere of lawlessness and tolerance of same.

> Even though Walgreens is a national retailer, non-thieving locations should not be made to subsidize the thieving locations.

This is all part and parcel of society, of corporations, of any multi-site organisation. Each node has its own advantages and disadvantages. High "shrinkage" sites often have high sales and a corporation that sticks to "small town Illinois" is never going to be able to offer the economies of scale of Walgreens.

Re: 'Maybe we cried too much' over shoplifting, Walgreens executive says

#18

Post by j0hnyl » Mon, Jan 09, 2023, 7:53 PM UTC

prottog wrote: post #2

Funny. They closed stores and put in annoying security measures in high-theft locations and shrinkage dropped, and now they're walking it back a little bit because the additional security measures are costing them money in expenses and lost sales.

My local rite aid keeps the ice cream fridge and soaps (among other things) locked. There's no way this actually helps them. It might make more sense to just not carry these products if they're being stolen so much.

Re: 'Maybe we cried too much' over shoplifting, Walgreens executive says

#19

Post by prottog » Mon, Jan 09, 2023, 7:54 PM UTC

phil21 wrote: post #6

wiseleo wrote: post #3

With sufficient staffing and instant mobile checkout, stores can implement a fully secure experience. The caveat here is "sufficient staffing" of people who can use a mobile checkout solution.

How do you imagine this working? I live a few blocks away from a Walgreens that is now closing at the end of the month. I've personally witnessed a shoplifter actively shoplifting nearly every time I was in the store over the past year to year and a half. This was a half dozen encounters at least, of varying degrees of audacity from teenagers stealing some makeup to outright crews doing a mini flash mob style raid. I…

> Society starts failing when the answer to every problem is call mommy and daddy (the police) and stops enforcing basic societal norms by itself.

I cannot emphasize this enough. There is no amount of police presence that will make society work if enough members choose to violate the law and each other, and that "enough" is a smaller percentage than most people think.

Re: 'Maybe we cried too much' over shoplifting, Walgreens executive says

#20

Post by prottog » Mon, Jan 09, 2023, 7:57 PM UTC

mancerayder wrote: post #15

phil21 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you imagine this working? I live a few blocks away from a Walgreens that is now closing at the end of the month. I've personally witnessed a shoplifter actively shoplifting nearly every time I was in the store over the past year to year and a half. This was a half dozen encounters at least, of varying degrees of audacity from teenagers stealing some makeup to outright crews doing a mini flash mob style raid. I…

> Society starts failing when the answer to every problem is call mommy and daddy (the police) and stops enforcing basic societal norms by Complex societies seem to have a few basic options: 1 - Enforce social laws 'locally' without official government sanction; neighborhood heroes if you're polite, the mob if you're looking at the U.S. big cities in much of the 20th century. Behaviors change through fear. 2 - Enforc…

> ("The Office will not prosecute the following charges...")

It's absurd that a sitting DA can just choose not to prosecute whole sections of the law. I get that prosecutorial discretion is a thing, but that has to be on a case-by-case basis, and not declared outright that a whole class of crimes is unilaterally decided by the DA to no longer be a crime.