The workers would still be paid for the re-facing of the product. Maybe the store would realise that USA made products aren’t worth stocking if there’s more wages required to fix up the shelf aesthetics. Workers are employed to work, if there isn’t work they’ll get sent home or have their shifts shortened. I don’t mind having to work at work, it’s what they’re paying me for.
You most likely didn’t mean it that way, but I’m seeing an alternate, unpleasant interpretation that can be misconstrued from your words.
To use an example, it’s like those people who leave products they reconsider buying in random places due to being lazy, then say something like “I’m helping the workers stay employed by giving them work to do.” Which isn’t a very nice thing to do.
I don’t think that at a personal level there are many people who would say “yay, more work” in this kind of situation…
The difference is the purpose. When people force stores to clean up after them for no reason, it can increase workloads and staffing requirements. It’s pennies on the dollar, but its still a violation of the social contract, especially when you factor in the employee’s personal involvement in cleaning up a mess that shouldn’t exist.
When people force stores to clean up after them for a political purpose, the cost is part of the point. It costs time and therefore money to continuously re-face those products, and therefore encourages the store to reduce its stock and shelving of that product.
Again, pennies on the dollar, so significant inventory changes would require extreme customer participation in the trend, but at the very least you may spread some awareness and find some solidarity in your daily routine. May even find like-minded employees and managers who “didn’t notice” or consistently “forget” to fix it.
I think the framing needs to show that it isn’t going to be “more work”, it’s just different work. The people being tasked with this clean up would’ve been doing something else, not just standing around.
Minimum wage employees indeed would’ve been doing something else, and they will still need to do that something else later. Along with the other things that used to be someone elses job that now falls onto this person. Grocery stores wont hire more workers or be understanding workers cant complete their tasks.
To be blunt, they don’t need to be happy about it. The company is still losing productivity over this situation, even if the employee is mad about it.
In fact, I’m kind of glad they’re mad about it because that means they’re gonna make mistakes and work slower for a while. The company will lose even more money, and assuming they’re paying any attention they’ll realize it’s because of the American products being defaced constantly and it’s just not worth stocking them
The only problem with that logic, at least from my experience working retail, is that no jobs would be added just to face the shelves faster. The existing workers would just be expected to spend less time on every other task during their shift to make up for it.
It’s the same sort of logic as people who just like to leave carts anywhere they feel like in the parking lot. Someone gets paid to retrieve them after all, right?
The workers would still be paid for the re-facing of the product. Maybe the store would realise that USA made products aren’t worth stocking if there’s more wages required to fix up the shelf aesthetics. Workers are employed to work, if there isn’t work they’ll get sent home or have their shifts shortened. I don’t mind having to work at work, it’s what they’re paying me for.
You most likely didn’t mean it that way, but I’m seeing an alternate, unpleasant interpretation that can be misconstrued from your words.
To use an example, it’s like those people who leave products they reconsider buying in random places due to being lazy, then say something like “I’m helping the workers stay employed by giving them work to do.” Which isn’t a very nice thing to do.
I don’t think that at a personal level there are many people who would say “yay, more work” in this kind of situation…
The difference is the purpose. When people force stores to clean up after them for no reason, it can increase workloads and staffing requirements. It’s pennies on the dollar, but its still a violation of the social contract, especially when you factor in the employee’s personal involvement in cleaning up a mess that shouldn’t exist.
When people force stores to clean up after them for a political purpose, the cost is part of the point. It costs time and therefore money to continuously re-face those products, and therefore encourages the store to reduce its stock and shelving of that product.
Again, pennies on the dollar, so significant inventory changes would require extreme customer participation in the trend, but at the very least you may spread some awareness and find some solidarity in your daily routine. May even find like-minded employees and managers who “didn’t notice” or consistently “forget” to fix it.
I think the framing needs to show that it isn’t going to be “more work”, it’s just different work. The people being tasked with this clean up would’ve been doing something else, not just standing around.
Minimum wage employees indeed would’ve been doing something else, and they will still need to do that something else later. Along with the other things that used to be someone elses job that now falls onto this person. Grocery stores wont hire more workers or be understanding workers cant complete their tasks.
No offense but have you worked at a grocery store? Nobody really cares that much. If you think I’m slacking off, then look at the security cameras.
To be blunt, they don’t need to be happy about it. The company is still losing productivity over this situation, even if the employee is mad about it.
In fact, I’m kind of glad they’re mad about it because that means they’re gonna make mistakes and work slower for a while. The company will lose even more money, and assuming they’re paying any attention they’ll realize it’s because of the American products being defaced constantly and it’s just not worth stocking them
Such a revolutionary idea
Work at work crazy haha
The only problem with that logic, at least from my experience working retail, is that no jobs would be added just to face the shelves faster. The existing workers would just be expected to spend less time on every other task during their shift to make up for it.
It’s the same sort of logic as people who just like to leave carts anywhere they feel like in the parking lot. Someone gets paid to retrieve them after all, right?
It’s for a purpose, and it’s not too much of a pita.