7 ms·

You're claiming that 1/2 to 1/3 of employees are criminally stealing time or product from their workplace. I need some robust citations for that, because it's r

You're claiming that 1/2 to 1/3 of employees are criminally stealing time or product from their workplace. I need some robust citations for that, because it's ridiculous on its face.

ApolloFortyNine 6y ago
When I worked at Kmart, on more than one occasion they were forced to first to fire a large number of cashiers (10+) due to stealing. And the Kmart I worked in was definitely in the 'good' part of town. Now Kmart also paid literally the minimum wage, but it still shocked me the number of people who would steal when they clearly had video, and regularly fired people for doing so. And some of the people who stole got caught for stealing bottles of soda to drink while at work... As for stealing time, that was much more common, but I actually never saw anyone fired for that, no matter how often they took half hour long bathroom breaks, or spent an hour putting away 5 items. I guess Kmart understood they had to put up with something when paying literally as little as possible.
- elliekelly 6y ago
  Maybe if Kmart paid their employees a little more they could afford to buy themselves something to drink at work.
  - supergeek133 6y ago
    I think the total amount of people who steal would go down if paid more, but I think there is just a "base amount" of the population who will always do this regardless what job/how much they get paid.
    - jshevek 6y ago
      If thieves figure out that stealing incentivizes the employer to pay more (in an effort to reduce stealing), they now have a new motive to steal. That is, to increase the pressure on the employer to raise wages further. This new motive can even 'feel righteous', as it benefits the other low paid workers as well.
  - Emanation 6y ago
    Why pay them more when you can offer some of what they're stealing as a benefit for working there. It's probably a lot cheaper and creates goof faith.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    If Kmart paid their employees more, people would shop at Walmart. And they did. Sears paid their employees very well, and consumers rewarded sears by shopping at their new competitors that offered lower prices.
    - jabedude 6y ago
      I don't think that logically follows. Costco is well-known for generous compensation and are doing well.
      - lotsofpulp 6y ago
        Costco serves a limited range of items to middle and upper middle class areas only. As it already fulfills this segment of the population that can pay a little bit extra for quality, no competitor to Costco exists. The same dynamics exist with Nordstrom/Apple/Trader Joes. There’s a few brands that can afford to offer more quality and better paid workers, but they don’t exist in poorer parts of any city, and there’s only one of each type of store. Everyone else has to offer the lowest prices.
        robotnikman 6y ago
        Not to be nitpicky, but wouldn't Sam's Club be considered a competitor to Costco?
        lotsofpulp 6y ago
        It is, but last I heard Walmart was downsizing Sams Club operations. I also don’t think it’s known for quality and treating its employees well like Costco is. If you put a Sams Club next to a Costco, I would bet people choose to go to Costco.
    - elliekelly 6y ago
      Ironically enough Sears paid their employees well until they were bought by Kmart. When Lampert (Kmart CEO) took over he cut wages and jobs at Sears and then proceeded to run the company into the ground. Customers didn’t stop shopping at Sears because employees were paid too much. Sears had more customers at the time they were paying higher wages. Customers stopped shopping at Sears because extreme cost cutting efforts by a former hedge fund manager with no retail experience eroded the company’s customer-oriented quality brand.
  - ApolloFortyNine 6y ago
    We had water fountains in the back, you can always bring your own drinks, etc. It's hard to make an excuse for someone stealing a bottle of soda, a luxury. It's not like anyone was stealing TVs, and that's what blew my mind about the stealing. It tended to be drinks and candy bars, stuff that not only was low value, but just simply wasn't necessary. It was stealing for the sake of stealing, because they thought they could get away with it.
    - ahaferburg 6y ago
      That's an employees way of saying just how much they care about the job. It's a two way street.
  - Vrondi 6y ago
    They can't afford to bring an empty bottle from home and fill it with the free water from the water fountains? You surely jest. Soda is not a life necessity owed to employees. Particularly if part of your business is selling soda. Every K-Mart I every saw had an employee lounge with fridge where you could bring your own drinks or lunch and store them as well.
- griffinkelly 6y ago
  I worked with a gas station chain and they had a similar approach. They cumulatively lost thousands of dollars from cashiers stealing from the registers, but I guess it was less than having to pay them more? They usually recouped the stolen money through store surveillance, but still, it was a surprisingly high amount of time and effort; I figure an easier solution would be just to pay people more. Now working with grocery stores, they commonly tell me how difficult it is to find cashiers. Pre-COVID, I was at one, and they had 10+ cashier openings, and no applicants.
supergeek133 6y ago
My comment was pure anecdote from years spent in retail (Best Buy) and co-owning a pizza restaurant. I'll update it if it helps. A quick google finds a number of stats referencing what I'm talking about, but probably nothing scientific. Here is an example: https://losspreventionmedia.com/theft-by-employees-more-common-than-theft-by-customers/ https://losspreventionmedia.com/theft-by-employees-more-comm... Reliable help in "low skill" jobs (although I don't believe they are low skill) can be notoriously hard to find.
- ianjsikes 6y ago
  And yet wage theft (by employers) seems to be the largest form of theft in the US by far. Is it really a wonder that people would steal / slack off when they are so consistently getting screwed at their workplace? https://www.nelp.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/BrokenLawsReport2009.pdf?nocdn=1 https://www.nelp.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/BrokenLawsRe... https://www.deseret.com/2014/6/24/20543670/wage-theft-how-employers-steal-millions-from-american-workers-every-week https://www.deseret.com/2014/6/24/20543670/wage-theft-how-em...
  - supergeek133 6y ago
    Yep, the most egregious daily example is Wal-Mart and basically showing their employees how to apply for welfare versus paying them a livable wage. Corporate welfare at its best. But how does an individual combat that? I personally just don't shop at Wal-Mart...
    - Aunche 6y ago
      Wal-mart already pays well above the minimum wage. By your logic, they're actually saving the government billions of dollars in welfare that the government would have to pay to take care of their own citizens.
    - lotsofpulp 6y ago
      Walmart advising employees to receive benefits they are lawfully eligible for is not theft.
downerending 6y ago
I suspect that those of us who worked our ways through school at menial jobs can think of many examples right off the top of our heads. In my experience, "1/2" is too much (depending on how you define stealing). But it was quite common for both employees to steal from their employer, and for employers to steal (wages) from the employees. It was also quite common for employees to simply walk off when they felt they'd had enough.
- Frost1x 6y ago
  If you consider employee and employer a resource exchange (time and abilities for money) then theft can also be tucked in as underemployment. If a task takes 10 minutes to complete an employee intentionally draws it out to 4 hours, is that theft? They were there, they were working, but didn't do it at maximum efficiency. If an employer can afford to pay an employee $20/hr and was even expecting to but was able to get labor at $10/he, is that theft? Those in power define the rules and define things like 'theft.' Theft in the traditional sense is taking physical tangible resources that aren't yours. When we move to intangibles like time, businesses have defined all the rules around theft, not people.
  - logfromblammo 6y ago
    There's a handy chart out there that plots change in worker productivity and change in purchasing power by income percentile over time that answers this in a single graphic. If a task normally takes 10 minutes, and an employee completes it in five, is that a donation of effort? Is it theft to titrate the productivity of your labor to fit the rate of pay you receive for it? Employees do not get paid more for effort that exceeds par. If I get paid $7/hour, I can easily reduce my productivity until one hour of my labor produces $21 for the employer. Or maybe I work two hours to produce $160 and slack off for six. Two consecutive generations of not being rewarded for contributing additional effort for the benefit of the company has taken its toll, culturally. Nobody is willing to uphold a string work ethic for an unethical employer. The employers burned through all their credit with labor, and are trying to refinance by redefining all the rules. It won't work. It's time for them to pay up.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

You're claiming that 1/2 to 1/3 of employees are criminally stealing time or product from their workplace. I need some robust citations for that, because it's ridiculous on its face.

ApolloFortyNine 6y ago

When I worked at Kmart, on more than one occasion they were forced to first to fire a large number of cashiers (10+) due to stealing. And the Kmart I worked in was definitely in the 'good' part of town. Now Kmart also paid literally the minimum wage, but it still shocked me the number of people who would steal when they clearly had video, and regularly fired people for doing so. And some of the people who stole got caught for stealing bottles of soda to drink while at work... As for stealing time, that was much more common, but I actually never saw anyone fired for that, no matter how often they took half hour long bathroom breaks, or spent an hour putting away 5 items. I guess Kmart understood they had to put up with something when paying literally as little as possible.

elliekelly 6y ago
Maybe if Kmart paid their employees a little more they could afford to buy themselves something to drink at work.
- supergeek133 6y ago
  I think the total amount of people who steal would go down if paid more, but I think there is just a "base amount" of the population who will always do this regardless what job/how much they get paid.
  - jshevek 6y ago
    If thieves figure out that stealing incentivizes the employer to pay more (in an effort to reduce stealing), they now have a new motive to steal. That is, to increase the pressure on the employer to raise wages further. This new motive can even 'feel righteous', as it benefits the other low paid workers as well.
- Emanation 6y ago
  Why pay them more when you can offer some of what they're stealing as a benefit for working there. It's probably a lot cheaper and creates goof faith.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  If Kmart paid their employees more, people would shop at Walmart. And they did. Sears paid their employees very well, and consumers rewarded sears by shopping at their new competitors that offered lower prices.
  - jabedude 6y ago
    I don't think that logically follows. Costco is well-known for generous compensation and are doing well.
    - lotsofpulp 6y ago
      Costco serves a limited range of items to middle and upper middle class areas only. As it already fulfills this segment of the population that can pay a little bit extra for quality, no competitor to Costco exists. The same dynamics exist with Nordstrom/Apple/Trader Joes. There’s a few brands that can afford to offer more quality and better paid workers, but they don’t exist in poorer parts of any city, and there’s only one of each type of store. Everyone else has to offer the lowest prices.
      - robotnikman 6y ago
        Not to be nitpicky, but wouldn't Sam's Club be considered a competitor to Costco?
        lotsofpulp 6y ago
        It is, but last I heard Walmart was downsizing Sams Club operations. I also don’t think it’s known for quality and treating its employees well like Costco is. If you put a Sams Club next to a Costco, I would bet people choose to go to Costco.
  - elliekelly 6y ago
    Ironically enough Sears paid their employees well until they were bought by Kmart. When Lampert (Kmart CEO) took over he cut wages and jobs at Sears and then proceeded to run the company into the ground. Customers didn’t stop shopping at Sears because employees were paid too much. Sears had more customers at the time they were paying higher wages. Customers stopped shopping at Sears because extreme cost cutting efforts by a former hedge fund manager with no retail experience eroded the company’s customer-oriented quality brand.
- ApolloFortyNine 6y ago
  We had water fountains in the back, you can always bring your own drinks, etc. It's hard to make an excuse for someone stealing a bottle of soda, a luxury. It's not like anyone was stealing TVs, and that's what blew my mind about the stealing. It tended to be drinks and candy bars, stuff that not only was low value, but just simply wasn't necessary. It was stealing for the sake of stealing, because they thought they could get away with it.
  - ahaferburg 6y ago
    That's an employees way of saying just how much they care about the job. It's a two way street.
- Vrondi 6y ago
  They can't afford to bring an empty bottle from home and fill it with the free water from the water fountains? You surely jest. Soda is not a life necessity owed to employees. Particularly if part of your business is selling soda. Every K-Mart I every saw had an employee lounge with fridge where you could bring your own drinks or lunch and store them as well.
griffinkelly 6y ago
I worked with a gas station chain and they had a similar approach. They cumulatively lost thousands of dollars from cashiers stealing from the registers, but I guess it was less than having to pay them more? They usually recouped the stolen money through store surveillance, but still, it was a surprisingly high amount of time and effort; I figure an easier solution would be just to pay people more. Now working with grocery stores, they commonly tell me how difficult it is to find cashiers. Pre-COVID, I was at one, and they had 10+ cashier openings, and no applicants.

supergeek133 6y ago

My comment was pure anecdote from years spent in retail (Best Buy) and co-owning a pizza restaurant. I'll update it if it helps. A quick google finds a number of stats referencing what I'm talking about, but probably nothing scientific. Here is an example: https://losspreventionmedia.com/theft-by-employees-more-common-than-theft-by-customers/ https://losspreventionmedia.com/theft-by-employees-more-comm... Reliable help in "low skill" jobs (although I don't believe they are low skill) can be notoriously hard to find.

ianjsikes 6y ago
And yet wage theft (by employers) seems to be the largest form of theft in the US by far. Is it really a wonder that people would steal / slack off when they are so consistently getting screwed at their workplace? https://www.nelp.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/BrokenLawsReport2009.pdf?nocdn=1 https://www.nelp.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/BrokenLawsRe... https://www.deseret.com/2014/6/24/20543670/wage-theft-how-employers-steal-millions-from-american-workers-every-week https://www.deseret.com/2014/6/24/20543670/wage-theft-how-em...
- supergeek133 6y ago
  Yep, the most egregious daily example is Wal-Mart and basically showing their employees how to apply for welfare versus paying them a livable wage. Corporate welfare at its best. But how does an individual combat that? I personally just don't shop at Wal-Mart...
  - Aunche 6y ago
    Wal-mart already pays well above the minimum wage. By your logic, they're actually saving the government billions of dollars in welfare that the government would have to pay to take care of their own citizens.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    Walmart advising employees to receive benefits they are lawfully eligible for is not theft.

downerending 6y ago

I suspect that those of us who worked our ways through school at menial jobs can think of many examples right off the top of our heads. In my experience, "1/2" is too much (depending on how you define stealing). But it was quite common for both employees to steal from their employer, and for employers to steal (wages) from the employees. It was also quite common for employees to simply walk off when they felt they'd had enough.

Frost1x 6y ago
If you consider employee and employer a resource exchange (time and abilities for money) then theft can also be tucked in as underemployment. If a task takes 10 minutes to complete an employee intentionally draws it out to 4 hours, is that theft? They were there, they were working, but didn't do it at maximum efficiency. If an employer can afford to pay an employee $20/hr and was even expecting to but was able to get labor at $10/he, is that theft? Those in power define the rules and define things like 'theft.' Theft in the traditional sense is taking physical tangible resources that aren't yours. When we move to intangibles like time, businesses have defined all the rules around theft, not people.
- logfromblammo 6y ago
  There's a handy chart out there that plots change in worker productivity and change in purchasing power by income percentile over time that answers this in a single graphic. If a task normally takes 10 minutes, and an employee completes it in five, is that a donation of effort? Is it theft to titrate the productivity of your labor to fit the rate of pay you receive for it? Employees do not get paid more for effort that exceeds par. If I get paid $7/hour, I can easily reduce my productivity until one hour of my labor produces $21 for the employer. Or maybe I work two hours to produce $160 and slack off for six. Two consecutive generations of not being rewarded for contributing additional effort for the benefit of the company has taken its toll, culturally. Nobody is willing to uphold a string work ethic for an unethical employer. The employers burned through all their credit with labor, and are trying to refinance by redefining all the rules. It won't work. It's time for them to pay up.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]