3 ms·

The disagreement on the “devalue” thing is probably one of semantics: I value the employee as a fellow human, but I don’t think the job of cashier is providing

by mwint 4y ago

The disagreement on the “devalue” thing is probably one of semantics: I value the employee as a fellow human, but I don’t think the job of cashier is providing any value to me. The existence of “cashier” as a job is an impediment to my goal: paying and walking out of a store with the goods I want. Any alternative system which involves fewer cashiers works quicker for me, observationally. I think people - including cashiers - are inherently valuable. But having someone do a 1-1 cashier job is both wasting their time and costing the company (and me) unnecessary time and money. Their (valuable) labor would be better spent elsewhere.

peterangular 4y ago
> as a fellow human That's not what we were discussing - we were discussing you valuing them as an employee. Which if you devalue their labor output then, yes, you certainly devalue them as an employee. Saying "I value them as a human" is an entirely different concern/conversation IMO. Sorry about the semantics, but I fully believe you devalue self-checkout cashiers as employees after this conversation. Regardless - we're off in the weeds. I don't think we're in a productive conversation. Respectfully, I'm bowing out.