Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Worked in retail (electronics) during college. Excellent experience - I absolutely thing every teen should have to work a year in retail or hospitality. It's an instant humble.
It was fun having dedicated customers that came back to you, but the schedule completely sucked, especially as a full time student. Would I do it again by choice? No damn way.
Hence the HIGH TURNOVER
As for the Job itself I agree I cherish Customer Service jobs but for Retail especially the hours are not good for a family man or someone who wants every weekend off.
Oh yeah, about the schedule thing. Retail employees now have an additional scheduling issue. Employers have developed a horrid way of abusing the employees schedules. Employers became so bad about cancelling employee shifts at the last minute, putting them on the schedule last minute, or cutting their shifts short that a few states had to put a stop to it by regulating it legally. They do that most with part time retail employees as a way of cutting labor costs as much as possible.
I had that problem with my last job. I did not know how much my paycheck would be or how many hours I would get because my boss was such a cheapskate he wanted to call me in at the last minute or make me clock out when he was slow even though I was scheduled more hours. This causes big problems for employees, who end up not being able to pay their bills, missing shifts, or having problems with childcare scheduling.
Yes and a lot of retailers have done away with traditional scheduling in favor of "on call" instead. They will schedule you 1-2 shifts a week and call you in for the rest. It could be at any time, day or night.
I doubt Amazon is going to kill all retail. We have four grocery chains in a couple of mile radius here, and all of them are packed on weekends where you can't even find a parking spot. All those stores even offer an online ordering and delivery service. The local "lifestyle center" mall is always crowded. People like to go out shopping because it gets them out of their residences.
I'm in the same line of thought. Even though I've been able to measure the time between going to a Best Buy, Barnes & Noble, or shopping mall in many months (one time, it was years!), I still like to go to them for the food court, and to just walk around and get away from the computer screen. That said, walking around in general, or running on a treadmill (if the weather's not ideal), also does the job, but if I'm near a mall, all the better.
However, Amazon and other online retailers have managed to eat up a good portion of the profit pie that all sellers are gunning for, so it's still had detrimental results for them
Quote:
Originally Posted by s1alker
Many don't want to move up because they will lose benefits like their subsidized apartment if they make more money. Why work 60 hrs a week as a manager when you can just work part time and collect the rest thru welfare.
Many in the retail or food service industries have refused promotions due to reasons like this... while their pay would go up, they go from hourly to salaried, and middle/upper management has them work 60+ hours without overtime pay, which makes their pay on par, if not worse then the "underlings". At least with the servers in restaurants, they have the chance to make out even better if they get better tips. Simply NOT worth it.
In another case, people try to work LESS THAN 58 (IIRC?) hours a week because that overtime puts them into the next tax bracket, getting a sort of diminished returns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus
It is not the employers' fault the government sets the standards they have for assistance. An employer has no control over the income requirements the gov has set for people to collect gov assistance.
No, but they still exploit them. If employer doesn't like it, they still have the option to open shop elsewhere.
Weekends can be a plus/minus depending on your perspective. I've had jobs back in college where I'd be off during the week. You can get a lot done during the week when you're off since most people are at work. Shopping, errands etc.
Dealing with the public is easy if you have a strong manager and leadership that supports you and doesn't automatically go with the "customer is always right" line of thinking. Sometimes, customers are just belligerent and you need to be able to set them straight without repercussions. Being pressured to provide A+ customer service and always be polite creates issues when customers know they can complain, act like jerks and then be rewarded with discounts and special favors. The leadership always gets to play the "good guy" because they'll grant some request that you aren't authorized to allow...so it makes you look ineffectual while they look capable and in charge.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,572 posts, read 81,167,557 times
Reputation: 57798
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgn2013
Three drawbacks:
1.) Pay outside of management
2.) Dealing with the public
3.) Working weekends
Weekends can be a plus/minus depending on your perspective. I've had jobs back in college where I'd be off during the week. You can get a lot done during the week when you're off since most people are at work. Shopping, errands etc.
Dealing with the public is easy if you have a strong manager and leadership that supports you and doesn't automatically go with the "customer is always right" line of thinking. Sometimes, customers are just belligerent and you need to be able to set them straight without repercussions. Being pressured to provide A+ customer service and always be polite creates issues when customers know they can complain, act like jerks and then be rewarded with discounts and special favors. The leadership always gets to play the "good guy" because they'll grant some request that you aren't authorized to allow...so it makes you look ineffectual while they look capable and in charge.
This is why it's best for young people without a spouse or kids, in college, starting out or retired people. Most others prefer to be working when their spouse is working and kids are at school, that's daytime Mon-Fri.
Weekends can be a plus/minus depending on your perspective. I've had jobs back in college where I'd be off during the week. You can get a lot done during the week when you're off since most people are at work. Shopping, errands etc.
Dealing with the public is easy if you have a strong manager and leadership that supports you and doesn't automatically go with the "customer is always right" line of thinking. Sometimes, customers are just belligerent and you need to be able to set them straight without repercussions. Being pressured to provide A+ customer service and always be polite creates issues when customers know they can complain, act like jerks and then be rewarded with discounts and special favors. The leadership always gets to play the "good guy" because they'll grant some request that you aren't authorized to allow...so it makes you look ineffectual while they look capable and in charge.
My bosses were great but they were weak when it came to belligerent and problematic customers. They wanted to please everyone to avoid losing business or people spreading negative reviews (though business was booming and always popular - private owners of a popular ice cream chain, it wasn't unusual to make over $6000 on summer nights), and it got to the point where their policies would often contradict. They'd tell us something, we'd do it, but when a customer complained, we heard, "why would you do that?" Uhh, because you said to? Then customers would get free sh*t or gift cards in compensation for stuff they didn't deserve.
The customer is NOT always right. It's a terrible policy to have honestly. It's not okay for workers to be rude and argumentative but it's also not okay for customers to be total as*holes and blatantly wrong about things. And it's true that once they know they can get away with things due to weak ownership or management, they take advantage.
News Flash: Labor is a product. When you apply for work, that is what you are selling. When a corp hires, labor is the product they buy.
Okay but you know it is not a even deal because the employer has the advantage they can just get another employee if you do not work out so they can offer a low wage. Employers have all the power in wage negotiations.
If McDonald's fired them, would they be needing more or less government assistance?
Would you be ok if McD asked applicants during interviews about the applicant's total household income and expenses, to separate the person whose spouse makes a high salary from the single-parent supporting six kids, and only hire the former? Of course not. An employee's financial situation at home is not McD's concern (or legal business).
Either way they need government assistance so neither is a good situation. Just because one is better then the other does not make them both bad. A employee financial situation is everyone's concern if we have to pay tax money because companies want to pay as little as they can get away with. Maybe you do not care about other people besides yourself but others of us do and think if you work you should be at least be able to have food and shelter that is not asking much.
Either way they need government assistance so neither is a good situation. Just because one is better then the other does not make them both bad. A employee financial situation is everyone's concern if we have to pay tax money because companies want to pay as little as they can get away with. Maybe you do not care about other people besides yourself but others of us do and think if you work you should be at least be able to have food and shelter that is not asking much.
Yet another person that is confusing what a person "deserves" to have with who is supposed to provide it.
Admit it, you would be outraged if McD checkout out an applicant's financial situation and simply declined to hire anyone that would still be eligible for welfare, thus eliminating the "issue" you and others are complaining about.
If society wants to guarantee food and shelter then society needs to pay for it.
Yet another person that is confusing what a person "deserves" to have with who is supposed to provide it.
Admit it, you would be outraged if McD checkout out an applicant's financial situation and simply declined to hire anyone that would still be eligible for welfare, thus eliminating the "issue" you and others are complaining about.
If society wants to guarantee food and shelter then society needs to pay for it.
McDonalds IS part of society. They use the same roads, electrical grids, protection, government services, etc. like the rest of us. If you're going to play fast and loose with "deserves", then why not say stuff like nobody deserves emergency services? Nor police protection? These sorts of things at their core are artificial constructs, but as society deem that it'd be nice to include them as something people "deserve".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Then customers would get free sh*t or gift cards in compensation for stuff they didn't deserve. 
