6 ms·

I think the article in question spins a very positive light on surveillance - in the given context, theft has been occurring and is curtailed by the change in b

by jka 13y ago

I think the article in question spins a very positive light on surveillance - in the given context, theft has been occurring and is curtailed by the change in behaviour of staff, regardless of whether or not action is taken based on the surveillance being present. The larger problem with surveillance is that there is no global notion of what is 'right' and 'wrong' - theft is assumed wrong to almost everyone, but few readers here will have been at the poverty line, where it might appear a little more ambiguous whether taking a small cut from a very successful business which pays minimum wage is so clearly immoral. These changes in behaviour push us to comply and work 'in-line' with whatever the watching power signals as being appropriate; and at least in the U.S., that largely appears to be increased revenue margins and employee efficiency - which has a very dull and power-imbalanced end game. There is more to life than work and producing value for someone else.

WalterBright 13y ago
I don't agree with the notion that someone is entitled to steal just because they make minimum wage.
- lmakeppleave 13y ago
  You don't have to agree with it for it to be happening. Though, understanding that side of the argument can help solve the problem for both sides of the equation.
  - WalterBright 13y ago
    I understand it happens. I was disagreeing with the attempt at justifying it as acceptable behavior. The moral way to improve your pay is to find a way to make your labor worth more to the employer. For a restaurant worker, that could be things like finding ways to boost sales, reduce wastage, find less expensive vendors, improve efficiency, etc. It's highly unlikely that any restaurant has successfully optimized all aspects of their operations.
    - saraid216 13y ago
      > For a restaurant worker, that could be things like finding ways to boost sales, reduce wastage, find less expensive vendors, improve efficiency, etc. It's highly unlikely that any restaurant has successfully optimized all aspects of their operations. What, for free? He isn't being paid to do that.
      - WalterBright 13y ago
        Perhaps you misunderstood that the point of it was to demonstrate your higher value and hence you were worth more pay. If you choose to do as little as possible, it does make for a tough negotiating position when asking for more pay. When I've gone into my boss's office and negotiated for more pay, I'd come in prepared to show how I'd already demonstrated higher value to the company. Sometimes I walked out with a raise, and other times I failed and started looking for another boss who did value what I could do for him.
        fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
        Forgive me for making assumptions about you, but, you sound as though you have never even known anyone who worked this kind of job. What you're describing would likely earn you enmity or a very antagonistic working relationship with your coworkers.
        WalterBright 13y ago
        I do understand that demonstrating higher value and then successfully negotiating for a raise can earn you the enmity of your coworkers. People are only human, after all. On the other hand, I knew coworkers who were thieves and justified it with their notions of entitlement. I didn't exactly feel inclined to trust them, either, and trust is a basic element of friendship. So I guess we all get to make our choices and accept the consequences.
        fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
- fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
  "When someone pays you minimum wage he is trying to say he would pay you less if it wasn't against the law." -- Chris Rock I agree, but it is hard for me to find sympathy for businessmen who hold wages so low. This behavior is widespread in the restaurant business, and it isn't limited to the staff stealing from the restaurant.
  - WalterBright 13y ago
    Sympathy has nothing to do with it. If you feel your wages are too low, negotiate for higher ones. If that doesn't work, accept it or quit. If you've been wronged, you have access to redress from the courts, and the courts are very sympathetic towards workers in disputes with employers.
    - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
      I said I agree with you. >If you feel your wages are too low, negotiate for higher ones. If that doesn't work, accept it or quit. I wish more people would do just that. It's what I did, after about a month of working as a barback. >If you've been wronged, you have access to redress from the courts, and the courts are very sympathetic towards workers in disputes with employers. No, you really don't, and the courts aren't. Where did you get that idea?
      - WalterBright 13y ago
        > Where did you get that idea? Details of cases I am familiar with, and talking with lawyer friends who tell me that, although it is not supposed to be that way, jurors and judges often give the benefit of any doubt to the perceived underdog. There's a reason why lawyers carefully dress their clients in certain ways, select jurors based on socioeconomic status, etc.
        fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
        You think a person who makes minimum wage-ish + tips can hire one of your friends to sue their manager / boss / restaurant owner over wage / tip discrepancies? Do you think your coworkers who depend upon their waitstaff job to support their family / college education will agree to testify or be deposed in proceedings against their employer? Have you really thought about this?
saraid216 13y ago
> few readers here will have been at the poverty line, where it might appear a little more ambiguous whether taking a small cut from a very successful business which pays minimum wage is so clearly immoral. WalterBright's comment indicates some confusion with this, so I'll help explain. There's a basic notion of fairness that what you've contracted to do (your job) in return for money (your wages) is fair. But a lot of people don't see minimum wage as a fair wage: it's simply better than no wage. As such, in the context of a business whose payroll policy is perceived as unfair, then the notion of "what's fair" begins to tolerate theft: what you're being paid for isn't fair, so you're making it fair by stealing. I don't agree with this, but I do understand it.
- rustynails77 13y ago
  I don't agree with it, nor do I understand it. I see the same behaviour in corporate bankers are are earning many millions per year. It's OK to steal because I deserve more. People like this are common thieves - and nothing more. Growing up, my family went from poor to middle class. We did the hard yards. We never stole. Why? Because its about principals and ethics. Never, never excuse a thief. If your statement were true, i'd rip off the volunteer organisations that I _volunteer_ in ... because they don't pay me enough.
  - sn41 13y ago
    I don't agree with your hardline ethics. This is one of the big points raised in "Les Miserables". Stealing a loaf of bread when you're starving is qualitatively different from corporate banking behavior. Humane empathy to the unfortunates is bigger than priniciples. Here's another twist - by refusing to pay fair wages, the employer is stealing from the employee. "Hark in thine ear: change places and, handy-dandy, which is the justice, which is the thief?" - King Lear
  - saraid216 13y ago
    > If your statement were true, i'd rip off the volunteer organisations that I _volunteer_ in ... because they don't pay me enough. Presumably, you volunteer because you aren't interested in getting money from them. In that case, you wouldn't feel that the wages you're getting are unfair and thus wouldn't feel motivated to steal.
fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
> positive light on surveillance Positive for whom? Do you suppose NCR offers a product that helps waitstaff recoup tips stolen from staff by restaurant owners/managers?
- jka 13y ago
  Quite the opposite - a positive for restaurant managers and business owners: "The software is intentionally set so that a restaurant manager gets only an electronic theft alert in cases that seem to clearly be misconduct. Otherwise, a manager might be mired in time-consuming detective work instead of running the restaurant." Equals: "managers: persuade your boss to buy our product and you will have more free time" "The impact, the researchers say, came not from firing workers engaged in theft, but mostly from their changed behavior. Knowing they were being monitored, the servers not only pulled back on any unethical practices, but also channeled their efforts into, say, prompting customers to have that dessert or a second beer, raising revenue for the restaurant and tips for themselves." Equals: "restaurant owners: we will improve your bottom line, and nebulously your staff may end up working harder for tips, so it's all good, here's an argument you can use if anyone complains" Interesting that customers are arguably pressured into consuming more by the new configuration as well.
  - jka 13y ago
    In fact, it's conceivable that this may be a PR piece commissioned by NCR - the author is a freelance writer/photographer, and I know from experience that PR staff/agencies do contact writers to craft positive articles for newspapers. Could be wrong - either way, this kind of stuff does happen unfortunately (a huge network of incentives which generally have negative impacts on the uninformed/powerless).
    - jka 13y ago
      And if I was being even more cynical, I might theorize that they chose the subject of surveillance (even though this is far removed from ubiquitous monitoring, even if the implications can be similar) because they know it's a hot topic for social media discussion and SEO value at the moment.

by jka 13y ago

WalterBright 13y ago

I don't agree with the notion that someone is entitled to steal just because they make minimum wage.

lmakeppleave 13y ago
You don't have to agree with it for it to be happening. Though, understanding that side of the argument can help solve the problem for both sides of the equation.
- WalterBright 13y ago
  I understand it happens. I was disagreeing with the attempt at justifying it as acceptable behavior. The moral way to improve your pay is to find a way to make your labor worth more to the employer. For a restaurant worker, that could be things like finding ways to boost sales, reduce wastage, find less expensive vendors, improve efficiency, etc. It's highly unlikely that any restaurant has successfully optimized all aspects of their operations.
  - saraid216 13y ago
    > For a restaurant worker, that could be things like finding ways to boost sales, reduce wastage, find less expensive vendors, improve efficiency, etc. It's highly unlikely that any restaurant has successfully optimized all aspects of their operations. What, for free? He isn't being paid to do that.
    - WalterBright 13y ago
      Perhaps you misunderstood that the point of it was to demonstrate your higher value and hence you were worth more pay. If you choose to do as little as possible, it does make for a tough negotiating position when asking for more pay. When I've gone into my boss's office and negotiated for more pay, I'd come in prepared to show how I'd already demonstrated higher value to the company. Sometimes I walked out with a raise, and other times I failed and started looking for another boss who did value what I could do for him.
      - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
        Forgive me for making assumptions about you, but, you sound as though you have never even known anyone who worked this kind of job. What you're describing would likely earn you enmity or a very antagonistic working relationship with your coworkers.
        WalterBright 13y ago
        I do understand that demonstrating higher value and then successfully negotiating for a raise can earn you the enmity of your coworkers. People are only human, after all. On the other hand, I knew coworkers who were thieves and justified it with their notions of entitlement. I didn't exactly feel inclined to trust them, either, and trust is a basic element of friendship. So I guess we all get to make our choices and accept the consequences.
        fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
"When someone pays you minimum wage he is trying to say he would pay you less if it wasn't against the law." -- Chris Rock I agree, but it is hard for me to find sympathy for businessmen who hold wages so low. This behavior is widespread in the restaurant business, and it isn't limited to the staff stealing from the restaurant.
- WalterBright 13y ago
  Sympathy has nothing to do with it. If you feel your wages are too low, negotiate for higher ones. If that doesn't work, accept it or quit. If you've been wronged, you have access to redress from the courts, and the courts are very sympathetic towards workers in disputes with employers.
  - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
    I said I agree with you. >If you feel your wages are too low, negotiate for higher ones. If that doesn't work, accept it or quit. I wish more people would do just that. It's what I did, after about a month of working as a barback. >If you've been wronged, you have access to redress from the courts, and the courts are very sympathetic towards workers in disputes with employers. No, you really don't, and the courts aren't. Where did you get that idea?
    - WalterBright 13y ago
      > Where did you get that idea? Details of cases I am familiar with, and talking with lawyer friends who tell me that, although it is not supposed to be that way, jurors and judges often give the benefit of any doubt to the perceived underdog. There's a reason why lawyers carefully dress their clients in certain ways, select jurors based on socioeconomic status, etc.
      - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
        You think a person who makes minimum wage-ish + tips can hire one of your friends to sue their manager / boss / restaurant owner over wage / tip discrepancies? Do you think your coworkers who depend upon their waitstaff job to support their family / college education will agree to testify or be deposed in proceedings against their employer? Have you really thought about this?

saraid216 13y ago

> few readers here will have been at the poverty line, where it might appear a little more ambiguous whether taking a small cut from a very successful business which pays minimum wage is so clearly immoral. WalterBright's comment indicates some confusion with this, so I'll help explain. There's a basic notion of fairness that what you've contracted to do (your job) in return for money (your wages) is fair. But a lot of people don't see minimum wage as a fair wage: it's simply better than no wage. As such, in the context of a business whose payroll policy is perceived as unfair, then the notion of "what's fair" begins to tolerate theft: what you're being paid for isn't fair, so you're making it fair by stealing. I don't agree with this, but I do understand it.

rustynails77 13y ago
I don't agree with it, nor do I understand it. I see the same behaviour in corporate bankers are are earning many millions per year. It's OK to steal because I deserve more. People like this are common thieves - and nothing more. Growing up, my family went from poor to middle class. We did the hard yards. We never stole. Why? Because its about principals and ethics. Never, never excuse a thief. If your statement were true, i'd rip off the volunteer organisations that I _volunteer_ in ... because they don't pay me enough.
- sn41 13y ago
  I don't agree with your hardline ethics. This is one of the big points raised in "Les Miserables". Stealing a loaf of bread when you're starving is qualitatively different from corporate banking behavior. Humane empathy to the unfortunates is bigger than priniciples. Here's another twist - by refusing to pay fair wages, the employer is stealing from the employee. "Hark in thine ear: change places and, handy-dandy, which is the justice, which is the thief?" - King Lear
- saraid216 13y ago
  > If your statement were true, i'd rip off the volunteer organisations that I _volunteer_ in ... because they don't pay me enough. Presumably, you volunteer because you aren't interested in getting money from them. In that case, you wouldn't feel that the wages you're getting are unfair and thus wouldn't feel motivated to steal.

fnordfnordfnord 13y ago

> positive light on surveillance Positive for whom? Do you suppose NCR offers a product that helps waitstaff recoup tips stolen from staff by restaurant owners/managers?

jka 13y ago
Quite the opposite - a positive for restaurant managers and business owners: "The software is intentionally set so that a restaurant manager gets only an electronic theft alert in cases that seem to clearly be misconduct. Otherwise, a manager might be mired in time-consuming detective work instead of running the restaurant." Equals: "managers: persuade your boss to buy our product and you will have more free time" "The impact, the researchers say, came not from firing workers engaged in theft, but mostly from their changed behavior. Knowing they were being monitored, the servers not only pulled back on any unethical practices, but also channeled their efforts into, say, prompting customers to have that dessert or a second beer, raising revenue for the restaurant and tips for themselves." Equals: "restaurant owners: we will improve your bottom line, and nebulously your staff may end up working harder for tips, so it's all good, here's an argument you can use if anyone complains" Interesting that customers are arguably pressured into consuming more by the new configuration as well.
- jka 13y ago
  In fact, it's conceivable that this may be a PR piece commissioned by NCR - the author is a freelance writer/photographer, and I know from experience that PR staff/agencies do contact writers to craft positive articles for newspapers. Could be wrong - either way, this kind of stuff does happen unfortunately (a huge network of incentives which generally have negative impacts on the uninformed/powerless).
  - jka 13y ago
    And if I was being even more cynical, I might theorize that they chose the subject of surveillance (even though this is far removed from ubiquitous monitoring, even if the implications can be similar) because they know it's a hot topic for social media discussion and SEO value at the moment.