this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
41 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

217 readers
27 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This is what happens when you try to "save" money by forcing people to use self-checkout.

top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They can afford these insane security measures, and buying all the equipment that goes with it, but lowering prices? Paying their employees more? No no, that's too much money.

I get when a company puts wheel locks to ensure carts don't leave the property, believe it or not, buying new carts is quite expensive; each one is several hundred dollars and the store likely has nearly 100 of them, if not more. It's not a cheap asset. I get that.

Loss due to theft is also a non-trivial problem for obvious reasons, though there's plenty of loss due to damage, best before expiry, bad handling by workers, defective products, etc.

I've worked in grocery and every store I worked at had a bin on a pallet overflowing with damaged or otherwise unsellable stuff. It happens.

But, criminalizing your shoppers? The vast majority of them are people who live local, and are regular shoppers spending thousands a month on products. In business, this is the 80/20 rule. 80% of your sales comes from 20% of your clients (the ones who shop there regularly). I'm betting for grocery stores, that number is a bit different, but the concept stands. Start alienating those regular shoppers, and they will walk, and 80% of your sales get flushed down the drain as a result. It's both shocking, and completely unsurprising to me that Loblaws doesn't seem to understand this.

[–] PenguinTD@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

maybe hard for some region or if your next store is another 20km away. I think those store probably rip off their local customer most.

[–] AmosBurton_ThatGuy@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yeah, I live in a small town/city of 40k and there's 4 Loblaws stores and one save on, and save on is considerably more expensive than any of the other options so it's either give Loblaws money or stretch an already limited budget to give even more money to a different company. Lose - lose for me. There's a Wal mart but they have 4 shitty aisles of packaged food a pathetic selection of food so they don't count for groceries up here for the most part.

[–] PenguinTD@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

I don't know if it's possible but if you have some local resident that can band together and buy fresh product directly from the farmers? or do a group buy for common household supplies that should be cheaper with bulk order(ie, a costco account that helps to buy stuff for 10 household and everyone shares the cost) . I know it would replace all the purchase required, but in less competition area, at least you would have some form of "competition" from your own independent source.

[–] SirDankbud@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The reason they aren't responding on social media is they recently fired a friend of mine who worked as their social media manager. She was the only person I know who refused to say anything negative about Galen Weston. I personally think they're adopting a policy of ignoring everything the public says about them and fucking us all as hard as they can until the government steps in. Stop giving them your money!

[–] mPony@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

They believe in the Ivory Tower model of accountability: let people say what they want but under no circumstances will they respond to any criticism.

They can keep saying "Let them eat Weston Foods brand cake" because there are no guillotines in sight.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago

Anti-theft or not, these strategies absolutely deter me from spending more money in these places.

It's incredibly frustrating that a simple errand run feels like you're travelling through a maximum security airport. The only thing missing are armed guards.

[–] Dearche@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

I've never seen security gates (at least anything more than the basic magnetic beeping ones), but locking shopping carts are a must. Hundreds or even thousand dollar equipment get stolen even a few times a year can seriously hurt a store's viability, and I used to see stolen carts everywhere before locking wheels were invented. Half the time, it wasn't even to be used personally, but because someone just wanted to use the cart to carry their groceries all the way home, then dumped the cart on the side of the road to rot afterwards, only to do it again the next week. This extreme was not common, but I did see it as a child.

And at my store, security guards have become mandatory, if only to protect against stealing beer. I think the guards catch a dozen people trying every week. When they were fired hired, I heard a story that most of the people they caught weren't even homeless. One of them was a pensioner who was doing it only for fun. Some old woman who wanted the adrenaline rush because she was plenty wealthy, but bored.

On the flip side, they generally ignore regular shoplifting as long as the product isn't expensive, and I've heard one guy who grabbed a shoplifter, only to take out the beer and leave the food in the guy's bag after kicking him out of the store.

There are serious issues going around, but putting the blame purely on corporate greed is unfair, as they're not the reason why there's so many desperate people about these last few years.

[–] Killer57@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I will more than happily use self checkouts over waiting for a cashier, we only have so much time in this life and i refuse to waste it standing in line.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Maybe, but technically the company is getting free labour out of you. if you are fine with your labour being free then continue on and enjoy

[–] Pyro@pawb.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ist shopping on the sales floor free labor. Back when you would hand your shopping list to a worker and the would give you all your stuff. (funny enough online pickup has kinda brought that back). Things change over time

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As someone else mentioned doing online pickup forces them to hire staff. I don't mind wandering because sometimes I'm not buying, I'm comparing etc. But eliminating 10 cashiers to have customers scan their own, only helps the corporations steal more money from workers.

[–] Pyro@pawb.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, much more staff is hired for online shopping

However funny enough some store increased the hours they had for the front end, I worked for a Walmart that did a conversation and they added like 400 hours to the schedule for monitoring and running the registers. Biggest thing is now they can have 20 registers open and pay for 4 cashiers, before they would have just only had the 3 cashiers and 3 registers. So I would not say the self checkout took jobs, it changed how the job is done

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

I wish we had that out here, but here it used to be 15-20 lanes open, now it is maybe 4 and 20 self scan, but only two employees doing self scan. you get 2 people mess up and those employees are busy and so now you are stuck waiting in line for your self scan that went weird. also only a quarter of self scan actually are usable, the rest have the red light saying it is messed up

[–] PenguinTD@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

do the order online thing(for anything that's not fresh product), so they have to hire people do the shopping, scan, and bag/box and you just go pick up. (it's mostly free atm for pick ups just need to be above certain amount of dollar spent.) So you go, buy fresh product, then go pick up the bagged ones.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Good plan actually. However I noticed the store here has different prices online vs instore, they have a built in markup online.

[–] PenguinTD@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

That should be illegal since eventually they will try to charge the service, and guess who would use this kind of service more? People with disabilities or have less time to do shopping in store. They should just list the same price and put service charge in the bill.(so I know how much they charge for paying the person that did the shopping for online orders. ) Inflating online price should be called out and make blog post, send to media etc and shut down that behavior.

[–] Killer57@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As far as I'm concerned time is worth far more than money, money only has value because people give it value.

[–] TheDonkerZ@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

This. And the same goes for work in general. Doing work only has value because we attached money to it. People saying that scanning your own 10 items at the grocery store is labor and you should be paid accordingly... I'll always respect peoples' opinions and values, but something has to give if we feel as a society that that is worth compensation.

That is to say, the free labor for the corporations is not lost on me, I'm just thinking bigger picture. The budding socio-anarchist in me wants to burn the system to the ground and watch what rebuilds.

We were doomed from the start, damn those dank river valleys for establishing commerce and social hierarchy!

load more comments (1 replies)