Regarding this point: > Sacks repeatedly comes back to the idea that retailers could give away unsold or lightly used, returned (but still good) items to their

Regarding this point: > Sacks repeatedly comes back to the idea that retailers could give away unsold or lightly used, returned (but still good) items to their low-wage employees, instead of tossing them, or jumping through bureaucratic hurdles to donate them. This could be an “added perk”, she says, or an additional form of compensation, to bolster employees’ wages. This perversely incentivizes the employees. I had an acquaintance who worked in retail in college. This was a large Midwestern store that sold everything from groceries to car parts to home stereos and TVs. They had a policy that if something was damaged it couldn’t be sold and the employees could take it for a significant discount. It wasn’t long before lots of items started having just enough damage to not be sold, but always on a part of the item where it wouldn’t be noticed when installed in your home. He was eventually fired for intentionally damaging stock.