Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My Life as a Retail Worker: Nasty, Brutish, and Cheap

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 145 posts

Re: My Life as a Retail Worker: Nasty, Brutish, and Cheap

#81

Post by valar_m »

ufmace wrote: post #58

What struck me as really odd about his job was the obsession with anti-theft measures. How big is is this store that they have enough to hire a full-time loss prevention officer? I've never heard of any retail store giving employees bag-checks and pat-downs every time they entered and left the building either. It's been a long time since I've worked any job like that, but I've never heard of anything like that. From…

Bag checks are fairly common, usually occurring at ends of shift or closing. Pat downs are less so, mostly because it's generally not a good idea to require employees to touch each other.

Retail internal theft really is a serious problem, though. According to the National Retail Security Survey at UF, it costs retailers (read: consumers) $14.9 billion annually [1].

What you may find surprising is that most major retailers do, in fact, have quite extensive controls in place to prevent and detect internal theft -- exception reporting, inventory tracking, etc. That these massive losses still occur should give you an idea of how complex the problem is.

The reason the store requires two employees to take out the trash has nothing to do with watching for thieves or "armed intruders." It's actually a simple and surprisingly effective deterrent to internal theft. Diverting merchandise through non-public exits is a common theft strategy.

Also, Ike was not "fired because [he] got a promotion." He was fired for lying on his job application about a previous conviction for theft. Ike's conviction strongly suggests a tendency to act dishonestly, which is further reinforced by his attempt to cover it up when applying for the job. This is precisely the type of individual that the background check is intended to screen.

Lastly, the author says it happened when Ike was a teenager, so it could only have happened when Ike was either 18 or 19. Juvenile court records are not available to background check services.

[1] http://investors.tyco.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=112348&p=irol-news...

Re: My Life as a Retail Worker: Nasty, Brutish, and Cheap

#82

Post by nsxwolf »

ufmace wrote: post #58

What struck me as really odd about his job was the obsession with anti-theft measures. How big is is this store that they have enough to hire a full-time loss prevention officer? I've never heard of any retail store giving employees bag-checks and pat-downs every time they entered and left the building either. It's been a long time since I've worked any job like that, but I've never heard of anything like that. From…

Having two friends who have careers in "LP", both who have worked at a litany of stores, pretty much any chain you've heard of has a full time loss prevention officer or two.

It's probably the best paying job on the store premises.

Keep in mind their job is also to stop shoplifters in addition to "internal" theft, embezzlement, return fraud, etc.

Re: My Life as a Retail Worker: Nasty, Brutish, and Cheap

#83

Post by primitivesuave »

richardjordan wrote: post #73
dx4100 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say this is easier in a society like Sweden, with a homogeneous culture and relatively small population.

I think the reason it's easier in Sweden is the key cultural value of fairness. America is more of a "mine" society, where everyone cares about what's "mine" and lacks an ability to self-moderate based on what's fair or right.

I wouldn't generalize here since there are people in every society who are above petty desires for material gain. It's just that in the US, we have significantly more wealth-addicts than any other country, and it leads to a bad perception of the nation as a whole.

Another thing about self-moderation: my consulting firm gets an occasional contract at a public school. I know it sounds terrible to say this, but if these kids are the future of the US, I want to move somewhere else. I went to public school myself, and the value system that the kids subscribe to nowadays is bloated by our celebration of people who make immense amounts of money. There's also this fucked up sense of entitlement, an addiction to social media, and a lack of desire to explore anything beyond the assigned schoolwork.

Re: My Life as a Retail Worker: Nasty, Brutish, and Cheap

#84

Post by glesica »

krstck wrote: post #35

It seems to me that working retail has gotten a lot worse since the recession. I worked retail after high school before deciding to go to college, and then worked the same job on summers home from school. What was interesting was that between when I started that job in 2005 and when I left for the final time in 2010, my coworkers went from being mostly high school and college kids to all sorts of folks of varying age…

I've never understood the management attitude that seeks to create such an environment, because workers just end up rebelling against it in hidden ways. I worked in retail in college for a truly terrible company. The work environment was awful and exploitative, but the company wasn't very good at things like inventory control. So, largely in response to this, the people in the stock room would literally throw probably 10% of the merchandise that came off the trucks directly into the garbage compactor. If that's good business, then there's something seriously wrong with our economic system.

Re: My Life as a Retail Worker: Nasty, Brutish, and Cheap

#85

Post by ahoy »

mox1 wrote: post #51
krstck wrote: post #35

It seems to me that working retail has gotten a lot worse since the recession. I worked retail after high school before deciding to go to college, and then worked the same job on summers home from school. What was interesting was that between when I started that job in 2005 and when I left for the final time in 2010, my coworkers went from being mostly high school and college kids to all sorts of folks of varying age…

I'd like to point out that this story takes place in one of the highest cost of living areas in the country. $10 / hour goes a lot further in Kansas than it does D.C. I think a lot of people could live OK in the Midwest on $10 / hour. I wish more people would move away from the super high cost of living areas (California, New England, ...etc) and "vote with their feet" so to speak. If 10% of the populations of Cali a…

I live in a fairly low-cost area(a mid-sized town in the coastal southeast). $10/hr would be a stretch.

Re: My Life as a Retail Worker: Nasty, Brutish, and Cheap

#86

Post by scarmig »

cobrausn wrote: post #27
scarmig wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That'd just push down wages for the parts of your schedule you're actually working, though. Minimum wages are the type of thing where if you push on one side, it incentivizes employers to extract more value by any means possible out of you. I'm a broken record on this, but: an unconditional basic income is the answer to this situation. The only way you can make sure every job has dignity is for every person to be abl…

So, what happens if the unconditional basic income becomes 'the new poverty' as the economy adjusts and the price of basic goods and services change? We'd end up in the same spot - they can treat you like crap, because you are replaceable, and you still need the money. I should say I also have no idea if that's what would happen. Just a concern.

An increase in the cost of living would occur, particularly for people for whom essential goods form the large part of their consumption (luxury goods, in contrast, would likely decrease in price). The details of extent, however, depend on the magnitude of the basic income.

A couple things counteract that increase in price. For one, capital would flow more toward producing essential goods owing to a larger demand: this would prioritize research and development in those goods, and in hunting out inefficiencies that hamper their production and distribution, leading to a lower real cost. For two, most people already consume the bare essentials of life--the real question is just where that money comes from, be it a basic income, a demeaning job, a good job, or debt. (These two counteracting factors are at odds, btw: the more one is a factor, the less the other is. The second prevents inflation from being an issue at all, while the first merely mitigates against it. Two is the larger factor, imo.)

In addition, there's an individual psychological factor that helps. Not having a guaranteed income means that, at a moment's notice, you can have no financial ability to take care of yourself: this puts you into bad situations and leads you to make locally rational decisions that are globally suboptimal (where you do less-than-ideal things to survive today that cost you a lot more down the line than the benefit you got today). And this has a broader deleterious social impact: for instance, you might be forced to abandon all your social networks to move back home (if you have a home to go back to!), which significantly increases search costs and destroys valuable information, making labor markets less efficient. So even if there's been serious inflation because of a basic income, it still allows you to stay afloat instead of throwing your life into radical chaos.

I share your concern about the exact shape of what would happen, and the level of basic income that best improves social outcomes depends on such a number of factors that it seems very difficult to calculate. Phasing it in over a range of increasing values seems like one way to deal with that.

Re: My Life as a Retail Worker: Nasty, Brutish, and Cheap

#87

Post by w1ntermute »

sliverstorm wrote: post #68
w1ntermute wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wish more people would move away from the super high cost of living areas (California, New England, ...etc) and "vote with their feet" so to speak. This is (and has been) happening for years now. Poorer people are reverse-migrating from the denser parts of the country to the Sun Belt. And it's a problem. The high cost of living in many of the "desirable" parts of the country is artificially created by government…

The crux of your argument is unconvincing. Service jobs have to be near the wealthy? What kind of myopia is that? Un-wealthy people go out to eat and get their car repaired just as much as Richie Rich. Yes, if nobody but tech workers come to San Francisco, the city will collapse. But that doesn't mean everybody else has to live there too. It's also awful presumptuous to say, "Well I'm wealthy, this is where I want to…

> The crux of your argument is unconvincing. Service jobs have to be near the wealthy? What kind of myopia is that?

Actually, what's myopic is this:

> Un-wealthy people go out to eat and get their car repaired just as much as Richie Rich.

People who aren't wealthy don't eat out as much and don't spend nearly as much when they go out to eat. They buy food that has smaller margins and expect less in the way of service, meaning lower wages for the workers.

And of course service jobs have to be near the wealthy. When it doesn't matter where a worker is located, that job gets outsourced. Location-dependent jobs are the ones that are least likely to disappear in the future (or to have disappeared already).

> It's also awful presumptuous to say, "Well I'm wealthy, this is where I want to live. You are poor, you don't get a choice, live near me"

It's no more presumptuous than Henry Ford was when he expected workers to move to Detroit to work in the booming automotive industry, rather than setting up a bunch of small factories all across America so he could accommodate them. Moreover, in this case, such a policy would help to keep workers from having to move (to the Sun Belt, or another low-cost-of-living locale) away from their families and communities in the first place.

You can dream all you want of a utopia where people can live in the middle of nowhere and have their ideal job. But that isn't going to make it a reality.

Re: My Life as a Retail Worker: Nasty, Brutish, and Cheap

#88

Post by lotsofmangos »

sliverstorm wrote: post #74
dx4100 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say this is easier in a society like Sweden, with a homogeneous culture and relatively small population.

No kidding. Just think of all the political squabbles that would vanish overnight if the USA was, for example, 99% WASP

I assume you are being sarcastic, given the history of protestantism. Come to think of it, that reminds me of an Emo Phillips joke:

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!"

"Why shouldn't I?" he said.

I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!"

He said, "Like what?"

I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?"

He said, "Religious."

I said, "Me too! Are you christian or buddhist?"

He said, "Christian."

I said, "Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?"

He said, "Protestant."

I said, "Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?"

He said, "Baptist!"

I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?"

He said, "Baptist church of god!"

I said, "Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?"

He said,"Reformed Baptist church of god!"

I said, "Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?"

He said, "Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!"

I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off.

Re: My Life as a Retail Worker: Nasty, Brutish, and Cheap

#89

Post by ojbyrne »

nicholas73 wrote: post #72
danso wrote: post #31

I kind of did a double take at this: > Even though I was living rent-free in a guest bedroom, my every-other-Thursday paycheck couldn’t help me climb out of my hole, particularly after the state took half my pre-tax, $300 weekly salary for child support payments. > * got the opportunity to leave Sporting Goods Inc. for a temporary job as a communications director for a Capitol Hill nonprofit, a gig that paid twice as…

What happened to everyone's math skills here? $300 * 2 * 52 = $31,200.

"... a gig that paid twice as much per week as I'd earn in a month at the store."

So 300 * 2 * 4 *52 = $124,800.

Re: My Life as a Retail Worker: Nasty, Brutish, and Cheap

#90

Post by givemeabreak »

w1ntermute wrote: post #56
mox1 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to point out that this story takes place in one of the highest cost of living areas in the country. $10 / hour goes a lot further in Kansas than it does D.C. I think a lot of people could live OK in the Midwest on $10 / hour. I wish more people would move away from the super high cost of living areas (California, New England, ...etc) and "vote with their feet" so to speak. If 10% of the populations of Cali a…

> I wish more people would move away from the super high cost of living areas (California, New England, ...etc) and "vote with their feet" so to speak. This is (and has been) happening for years now. Poorer people are reverse-migrating from the denser parts of the country to the Sun Belt. And it's a problem. The high cost of living in many of the "desirable" parts of the country is artificially created by government…

The high cost of living is caused solely by liberals and their zoning policies?

Presumably this is why Shanghai, Melbourne, Moscow, Singapore, and Hong Kong are so expensive. Because they're run by liberals.

Nothing to do with private markets. Nothing to do with issues related to installed bases. Nothing to do with market forces. Just liberal governments.

You libertarians are flipping hilariously stupid sometimes. Where by sometimes I mean always.

Post reply on HN