Retail chains like TJX, the parent company of TJ Maxx and Marshalls, are equipping some store employees with body cameras to deter shoplifting and improve safety. This is part of a growing trend in the retail industry, as stores respond to an increase in organized retail theft and violence against workers. However, some criminologists and worker advocates argue that body cameras are unlikely to be an effective deterrent and that retailers should focus on improving training, staffing, and other safety measures instead. There are also concerns that the body camera footage could be misused, such as to monitor and discourage union organizing. Overall, the implementation of body cameras in retail is a complex issue with pros and cons that retailers will need to carefully consider.
Summarized by Kagi Universal Summarizer
Seriously.
Like if you think mass-shoplifting hurts them- that shit’s already baked into the price of goods being sold before it ever happened.
Unionizing will hurt their profits far, far more than shoplifters ever will.
(Fuck poverty and those who promote and embrace it)
Tomorrow’s recipe adjusted based on yesterday’s shrink? 👨🍳
Question assumes a greedy entity will refuse to allow reduction of its profit margin.
Nope. They have fancy overpriced mathnerds (“actuaries”) that build models to predict future shrinkage and price that into today’s prices.
The shrinkage is paid for before it ever goes out the door. Probably, before it ever came in the door in the first place.
These mathnerds that work for these corporations are some of the best in the business of risk modeling. Second only to insurance companies.
Them actuaries 🤓
Just called all my friends and we decided to start a TJX shoplifter training school franchise. If we’re successful this year, do we stand a chance at adding a penny to prices next year?
My magic 8 ball says “most likely they get arrested before that happens”.
I’m probably substituting the specific example here, but once somebody grabbed a huge stack of napkins they weren’t even going to be able to eventually use. When confronted about waste, they replied:
It’s wild I can still remember this anecdote. I mean, after 20 years?! You can imagine how much it bothered me. No, not a few napkins. The logic, or lack thereof.
(It’s self evident the napkins were previously manufactured - they currently exist in front of our eyes!)
Taking one extra napkin means napkins will be re-ordered one napkin sooner. Much easier to defend: “sorry, it’s just one napkin.“
We need to unionize so bad, yes, but the particular argument being made re: shrink struck me as totally illogical. Surprising because it sounds like you really know your stuff! So maybe I’m missing something. Thanks for diving into the smallest thing with me here.
I’ve worked in contract security for too long.
Not with retailers. We charge too much for them, and they really wouldn’t like my recommendations.
And take it from a manager- Unions are vital. Corporations would ratfuck their own mother if it would increase their profits by a buck.
But their attitude is a bit more like “shrinkage is unavoidable.” So they plan to mitigate its effects before it ever happens. Unfortunately the easiest and most cost effective way to do it is to bake it in and pass that cost onto customers.