I’m seriously thinking about writing a letter to our local Albertsons regarding a problem I’ve noticed recently, explaining why I don’t want to shop there anymore.
There is a smaller Ralph’s that is nearer to my house, and I often will choose that, but occasionally I decide to go up to Albertsons, since they have a bigger selection and the self-checkout lanes, which are awesome.
However, the last several times (at least four in a row) I have gone to the Albertsons, there have been not one, but two tables set up (on either side of the doors) with solicitors. This is one of those things that really, really bugs me. The petitioners I could somewhat stomach if they weren’t so aggressive about it, but the kids selling products for companies that are not-too-subtly skirting the child labor laws (in my opinion, anyway) really bugs me. Always has, and probably always will.
I’m generally not a fan of unsolicited sales in the first place - if I want to buy something, I will seek it out, so do your best to meet me in that process. Trying to push something on me that I have not already expressed an interest in or desire for is distasteful to me.
Adding kids into the mix is just over the top, in my book. Companies that are trying to pawn off fifty cent candy bars for several dollars should be ashamed of themselves in the first place. Since there’s no way they could ever get away with that kind of markup in the real market, they have to employ kids to sell them for them, and play on the guilt factor of needing to “help out” whatever organization the kid is a part of.
Having the company scrape off a part of its huge profit margin (much less than they would have to pay “real” sales people) and give it back to the kids’ organizations should not assuage their guilty consciences in the least. If these companies were really interested in helping kids, they could start by not exploiting them for their own profit.
I’m thinking about printing up little pamphlets to give to the kids (or their parents) that talk about the kids who are exploited on one end of that transaction (the ones picking the cocoa for most chocolate makers in the world), and then asking them to please not contribute to that type of business model on this side of the equation as well.
7 Comments
Forget the grocery stores what about the schools!
the boy got his first school fund raiser. Selling holiday candy from the big chocolate people…and you know who is expected to buy it…his loving-committed family that is already paying $$$’s a month to have him school?
It seriously took everything in me to not rip the form up and place it on the directors desk. I pay a tutition to fund this joint! And it already went up 10% from last year!
yeah, i don’t think the grocery stores should be blamed for not being pricks to the poor glossy eyed kids trying to hawk candy bars. not that every other point above isn’t valid, i’m just sayin’, i like girl scout cookies.
Yeah, I think my point about the grocery store angle got a bit lost in my sidetracked rant about the details of the people selling stuff in front of the stores, but my original point there was that I’d like the stores, as a courtesy to their customers, to chase these people off.
I’ve seen other stores that have signs with that goal stated, and I appreciate it when I do.
On the Girl Scout cookie point, I think they’re decent tasting too, but I won’t support them for the reasons listed above.
I know you didn’t follow up with this “angle” but grocery stores cannot help solicitors from camping outside the store. I’m not sure how solicitors are legally able to stand on private property but I know for a fact the store can’t legally remove these people outside their stores just for soliciting.
Actually, yes they can.
But even if they don’t want to take legal action, they can always put up signs discouraging the practice as well as discouraging customers to support it. Target has done this for a long time.
I doubt store managers know of this ruling, since it’s only been a month. You should include it in your letters.
Trader Joe’s has placed signs directly in front of solicitors for a long time and it has never helped the situation, it’s just more noise for the customer to ignore.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure the news would spread pretty fast among large grocery chains like Albertson’s; I suspect they (somewhere in their corporate organization) watch these kinds of things closely.
If you read further into that link you’ll find that this recent decision was based on precedents set by earlier cases. Oddly enough, the two other cases referenced were involving the stores we’re talking about: Trader Joe’s in 1999 and Albertson’s in 2003.
But there’s no point in arguing about that.
Even if it wasn’t legal for the stores to remove them, if I were a manager of a larger store like Albertson’s, I’d hire a minimum wage guy to stand out in front of the store and disrupt their activities all day.