Segregated Products, yes a legal political issue

[743 roadmasterParticipant]

https://nypost.com/2018/01/29/mom-sues-walmart-over-segregated-beauty-products/

Mom sues Walmart over ‘segregated’ beauty products

A California woman is suing Walmart for racial discrimination because it allegedly keeps its hair and skin products primarily used by African-Americans in a locked, glass display case — unfairly perpetuating a stereotype that black people are thieves, according to her attorney.

——–This is a small part of what is wrong with our legal system. A normal lawyer should have told her no case here. Gloria Allred ironic last name that fits, takes it and makes it news.
Will Walmart cave and take down the cases on the items that get the five finger discount?

mgtow is its own worst enemy- https://www.campusreform.org/

[Secret Agent MGTOWParticipant 22598]

Loss prevention records are colorblind, they just show what products are being stolen, and the store adjusts its security accordingly.

If Walt Whitman and Conroy Twitty albums were being stolen all the time they too would end up behid locked cabinets.

Women want everything, but want responsibility and accountability for nothing.

[GrumpyParticipant]

Ah yes.
Perpetual victimhood raises its ugly, beauty product requiring, head yet again.
High value and attractable items are normally under lock and key.
The growing trend I see when I actually go out to buy anything is empty “display” boxes whether it be power tools, computers, auto parts, and even condoms. It is theft prevention measures, not racial/ethnic/age defined.
The only people that complain are the thieves or potential thieves.

There was a time in my life when I gave a fuck. Now you have to pay ME for it

[CrankgankerParticipant 466]

Its very simple. They account for every number of every piece of product that enters the store. The amount of product out on the shelf are called On Hands. The product in the back room is back stock.

Whenever an item is scanned and paid for in the system it subtracts that count form the OH so when they get low, employees know to restock from the back room, which makes the BS count go down. When there is low product in the back the system orders more product form the warehouse.

However when somebody steals something the system doesn’t update and therefore the whole system gets messed up, which is why there are people hired to go around and physically count the number of product to make sure it matches the system, and when it doesn’t they are responsible for manually changing the counts so the product keeps coming in steady supply.

They also keep track of how many items are not accounted for. So when a large number of a certain product is continually coming short, that means people are stealing that item or the item gets damaged easily or is lost.

The fix for those issues is to lock the product up.

Also WalMart, or any retail space, does NOT own the product in the store. Aside for the specific store brand items. When Clorox wants to sell their product they pay companies like Walmart to use space in the stores to sell Clorox products, and they expect Wal-mart to keep track of their product and to prevent losses at any cost. Its all contracted.

I use to work in a high theft grocery store, and they had to keep Red Bull locked up in alpha keepers. The store only sold a very limited number of items compared to others of the same name due to this as well.

They should be glad its locked up so that way they know that the product they want will always be in stock, and that it isn’t getting stolen by people who don’t care enough to pay. In short, if they didn’t plan on stealing it, then there would be no issue.

You want to make me angry? I will take a bite out of that anger and shit out success.

[Anonymous 42]

WAAAAAAA!

[OldBillParticipant]

Back in the mid-90s, I was part of a part of a project at Gillette involving razor blade packages. They were flying off the shelves and out of the stores in numbers that were effecting the retailers’ margins.

The reports I read mentioned a practice called “sleeving”. The thief walks wearing a heavy coat up to where a dozen or more blade packages are hanging on a metal rod. They slip the sleeve down the rod over the packages, grab the last one in line, pull their sleeve back, and strip all the packages off the rod in a matter of seconds. At 10 USD or more per package, they’d leave the store with over a hundred USD in products they could easily sell around the neighborhood.

The loss rates were so bad that CVS, Walgreens, and other retailers had finally told Gillette that either the packages get tagged or the product would be locked in display cases. That got Gillette’s attention because they had reams of data showing razor purchases are mostly an “also” decision. No one goes to the store to buy blades, they’re always there for something else and “also” get blades because they happen to walk by them. Gillette had 6 months to start “tagging” packages with shoplifting tech or the stuff would start to be locked up in stores.

One reason Gillette had to tag the packages was because the stores couldn’t trust their own staffs to do so. I saw report after report putting the employee pilfering rate at around 50% and, the more a product was handled by employees, the higher the pilferage rate. If CVS had their employees tag the packages, they’d run the risk of losing more blades.

Gillette had other reasons for wanting the tags inside the packages. First, applying the tags on the outside meant the package looked like s~~~. Second, a tag applied outside could be easily removed. Third, hiding the tag meant the “halo effect” would apply.

The “halo effect” meant not every package needed to have a tag in it. As long as enough tags were in enough packages to catch enough thieves enough times, the possibility of being caught would “protect” those packages which weren’t tagged. The exact percentage of tags needed was determined statistically via known loss rates, cost of the product, and other factors. Not having to tag all or even 50% of packages saved a lot of money because Gillette was going to have to “eat” the cost of the tags. Raising blade prices to the consumer to add the technology which prevents the consumer from stealing blades would have been a PR disaster.

My group got the project done in time and, as silly as it seemed, I found the entire process fascinating. Nearly all of my experience before and since has been in “heavy” industries, so working with Gillette was nicely different.

Do not date. Do not impregnate. Do not co-habitate. Above all, do not marry. Reclaim and never again surrender your personal sovereignty.

[Author]

Posts