What. The. Eff?

[Prosthetic]

WTFFFFFFFFFFFFF
Seriously... WTF... More reason to keep Wal-Mart off the "Do Not Shop At" list... H&M isn't really my thing so I don't add them... Its not like I could shop there anyways as they are none in my area... But still I think this is a really screwed up thing to do..

I'm going to get a bunch of crap from people saying "Its there store they can do what ever they want because we are America." But still.. Are some of those people really heartless?

 

[Public'sTwin]

Are you really surprised? No offense, but it's kind of a typically corporate-American thing to do.

 

[Famine]

H&M are Swedish.

 

[Prosthetic]

Are you really surprised? No offense, but it's kind of a typically corporate-American thing to do.

Yeah, I kind of am... Whats the point of just destroying perfecting fine clothes... Get back to me when you can think of a logical reason.

H&M are Swedish.

Dang.

 

[McLaren]

Not surprised. We did something similar when I worked at Target, though clothing was always donated.

 

[Public'sTwin]

H&M are Swedish.

. . . And Wal-Mart is American. And it happened at an American branch of H&M.

Whats the point of just destroying perfecting fine clothes... Get back to me when you can think of a logical reason.

Why would I provide you with their destructive reasoning? That makes no sense at all.

 

[Prosthetic]

Not surprised. We did something similar when I worked at Target, though clothing was always donated.

What reason? Why only donate some of it? Why not just donate it all... Its not like it will effect the economy or anything...

 

[Scaff]

I used to work in HMV in the UK (many, many years ago) and unsold CD singles always got thrown out after a certain amount of time.

We were always instructed my management to ensure they were snapped before binning them!

Never made any sense to me at all, stick them in a big floor stand and give them away. Customers would love you, any left give them to a charity shop to shift. Well that's what I would have done.


Scaff

 

[McLaren]

What reason? Why only donate some of it? Why not just donate it all... Its not like it will effect the economy or anything...

Only clothing was donated because the company felt it was the one thing they couldn't be sued for. Food, Baby Stuff, Bikes, toys, etc., if it's not clothes, it gets compacted.

 

[Public'sTwin]

I used to work in HMV in the UK (many, many years ago) and unsold CD singles always got thrown out after a certain amount of time.

We were always instructed my management to ensure they were snapped before binning them!

Never made any sense to me at all, stick them in a big floor stand and give them away. Customers would love you, any left give them to a charity shop to shift. Well that's what I would have done.


Scaff

It's because the store gets credit on the CDs they can't sell. If HMV sold them at discount, they'd have to absorb the hit taken. Simply destroying the CDs because they "couldn't sell them" gets the money back.

I'd expect something similar with clothes, but as far as I know H&M IS the clothing provider, and depending on the brand, the same is true of Wal-Mart. (But not with name-brands like Nike, Adidas, et al.)

Only clothing was donated because the company felt it was the one thing they couldn't be sued for. Food, Baby Stuff, Bikes, toys, etc., if it's not clothes, it gets compacted.

Food gets incinerated. Bicycles typically get sold overseas or in Mexico or something.

 

[Mark T]

It's completely crazy and just shows the horrible attitude that many large corporations have. It's also completely insane from a business point of view. Surely if they just stuck them in a big sale at something like 25 cents a piece or even gave them away you're going to get people in the store who may just purchase something else while there browsing.

 

[Prosthetic]

Ok, I see how it works now.. I still think its weak.. But What evers..

 

[McLaren]

Food gets incinerated. Bicycles typically get sold overseas or in Mexico or something.

Where I worked, that was not the case. There were literally days where I saw a mixture of food, bikes, & beauty products as well as strollers.

As I said, if it wasn't clothes, it all went into a giant compacter if we didn't sell it. 👎

 

[niky]

The appropriate thing would be to slash the tags off and then donate the clothing.

That's what's done at some stores with unsold books. "Destroy" them by ripping the covers, but leave the insides intact so you can still sell them to thrift shops or donate them to poor school districts or libraries.

Not terribly surprising, but incredibly, stupidly wasteful... and stupidly bad P.R. for any corporation in this day and age.

 

[maximumattack]

There's a well known chain of Pasty shops near me who used to throw all their unsold produce out at the end of the day, always around the same time. The homeless people got wise to this and started hanging round to get a free meal, which I thought was fair enough, even though it looked a bit scruffy having them all hanging round waiting for their treats.

Now the company has opened up a "bargain bakery" where they collect all the unsold food from the shops in the area and bring them to one outlet and try to sell it off for cheap the next day.

This seems to have achieved three things;

1. No more homeless people gathering for free meals
2. People getting cheap 1 day old pasties (they must still be ok to eat right?)
3. The company has turned a cost for waste management into a profit for selling "dead stock"

 

[wfooshee]

Calm down, everyone. This isn't a human rights scandal, or corporate greed at work, it's standard practice.

Look at it: it isn't just the return credit hit they'd take by not submitting destroyed goods to their suppliers for credit. If they donated the unsold items, they'd never sell anything. Seriously. Customers would just wait for the stuff to show up at Goodwill, or whatever the equivalent thrift shop is in your area. Why buy it, even on sale, if it's gonna show up in 3 months for free or nearly free?

Some documentation of what was destroyed is submitted to their suppliers for credit. Paperbacks have the covers torn off and returned, while the book is destroyed. (Did you ever notice the "if you bought this book without a cover" notice on the copyright page? Niky, if the retailer did sell or even donate those coverless books, they're in violation of the law.) I think CDs have the front liner returned. Tags or labels from clothing items. The stuff has to be rendered unusable to be classed as destroyed.

It's not a heartless selfish waste of resources. And it's not just WalMart or H&M. You'll find the same process at any major retailer in any country.

Had the New York Times reporter actually asked anyone at the stores about it and reported the answers, the article would have had a much different tone, perhaps not even made the paper. But since the paper (or at least the reporter) had an agenda, that part wasn't published, or perhaps even questioned.

One needs to be able to recognize incomplete news stories, and question the validity of assumptions presented.

 

[Max Powers]

It isn't just the return credit hit they'd take. If they donated the unsold items, they'd never sell anything. Seriously. Customers would just wait for the stuff to show up at Goodwill, or whatever the equivalent thrift shop is in your area. Why buy it, even on sale, if it's gonna show up in 3 months for free or nearly free?

Some documentation of what was destroyed is submitted to their suppliers for credit. Paperbacks have the covers torn off and returned, while the book is destroyed. (Did you ever notice the "if you bought this book without a cover" notice on the copyright page? Niky, if the retailer did sell or even donate those coverless books, they're in violation of the law.) I think CDs have the front liner returned. Tags or labels from clothing items. The stuff has to be rendered unusable to be classed as destroyed.

It's not a heartless selfish waste of resources. And it's not just WalMart or H&M. You'll find the same process at any major retailer in any country.

Had the New York Times reporter actually asked anyone at the stores about it and reported the answers, the article would have had a much different tone, perhaps not even made the paper. But since the paper (or at least the reporter) had an agenda, that part wasn't published, or perhaps even questioned.

One needs to be able to recognize incomplete news, and question the validity of assumptions presented.

Great post, but once again...most people will chalk this up to the 'greed of corporate America'.

 

[Duke]

Calm down, everyone. This isn't a human rights scandal, or coroprate greed at work, it's standard practice.

One needs to be able to recognize incomplete news stories, and question the validity of assumptions presented.

:golf clap:

Invisible +rep.

 

[wfooshee]

In ignorance of facts, one can chalk anything up to anything they feel like! How does that make it correct?

I might refer you to the Creation/Evolution thread for a bit of light reading as an example.

(And thanks for the quote, Duke, I noticed and fixed my typo. )

 

[Biggles]

More reason to keep Wal-Mart off the "Do Not Shop At" list

Do you mean to keep it ON the "Do Not Shop At" list?!

It may be common practice in the corporate world, but it doesn't make it any less disappointing. Surely, with a little effort, a more productive use for the surplus goods could be found. It's similar to just throwing out garbage without re-cycling or composting - it's easier & cheaper, until the effort & organization is put in place to divert the waste...

 

[Solid Lifters]

Some clothes, at least the crap from China that Wal-Mart sells, contains some material that has been known to burn babies and cause a scar. True.

Why would Wal-Mart take a risk of lawsuits? Why would they allow somebody to wade through their trash bins? Why would they allow people the opportunity to take the clothes and go inside and ask for store credit?

They wouldn't. Neither would I.

Again, it seems appalling that they would through out perfectly good clothes. But, I bet they never suffered a lawsuit because they threw the clothes in the trash.

 

[Danoff]

Why on earth should they give their products away? Many of Walmart's customers are also patrons of Goodwill. It makes absolutely zero sense for Walmart to give their customers free goods as a reward for not purchasing them. That's a quick way for Walmart to go out of business - something that does these very same people ABSOLUTELY NO GOOD. Which would you rather have? Good sold at low prices for an indefinite amount of time. Or goods given away temporarily until the business fails.

Sorry folks, I know you want people to get free stuff, but it comes at a cost.

 

[Omnis]

Did this girl ever stop and think that those items could be the result of ninja sabotage? No.

 

[Northstar]

There's a well known chain of Pasty shops near me who used to throw all their unsold produce out at the end of the day, always around the same time. The homeless people got wise to this and started hanging round to get a free meal, which I thought was fair enough, even though it looked a bit scruffy having them all hanging round waiting for their treats.

I used to work for a donut shop and we did crush & throw out the donuts at the end of the day. Sure we could have donated them, than again if someone were to get sick from a 3 day old donut guess who would have gotten sued?

I also love how people always criticize bigger companies for things like this and totally ignore all the charitable contributions they do make(click on the "do"). You probably weren't expecting that, were you?

 

[FoolKiller]

This article screams media hit piece. Short on facts, short on details, and never once calling up the manufacturers and suppliers to see if they are aware of this. The online article even shows the nosy busy body lady that reported it initially holding up a Dora shirt. Maybe the reporter should have called up Nickelodeon and seen if they were aware that their image was tied to this. It even starts with describing the actions of dumpster divers digging through these bags of discarded clothes. Gee, maybe that is why they destroy them?

Here are the only facts this article has: A woman trespassed and illegally took property from a dumpster without asking the owners' permission first, then contacted the reporter. The reporter went to see what she was talking about, sent a request for information from the home offices and rushed to put out the story and drag these "evil corporations" through the mud before more than a preliminary response could be given.

It may be common practice in the corporate world, but it doesn't make it any less disappointing. <snip> It's similar to just throwing out garbage without re-cycling or composting

You would be so disappointed in me, repeatedly, every Wednesday.

 

[maximumattack]

I'm not criticizing here Justin, I was passing on a tale which was along similar lines to the subject of the thread.

As well as saying I thought what they did was fair enough in the paragraph you quoted, I concluded my original post with three things the company has achieved by altering their policy a bit.

I intended my original post to have a positive slant to it, apologies if it has come across another way.

 

[Northstar]

I'm not criticizing here Justin, I was passing on a tale which was along similar lines to the subject of the thread.

The second part was more intended for everyone else. Sorry.

 

[maximumattack]

No problem mate

 

[Biggles]

You would be so disappointed in me, repeatedly, every Wednesday.

I've learned not to get my hopes up when it comes to you Foolkiller - it's just easier that way.

 

[niky]

Paperbacks have the covers torn off and returned, while the book is destroyed. (Did you ever notice the "if you bought this book without a cover" notice on the copyright page? Niky, if the retailer did sell or even donate those coverless books, they're in violation of the law.)

I buy at discount stores that buy them from Libraries or rubbish bins... do note... America's (and Japan's) garbage fuels the rest of the world.

I get some pretty interesting books that way, to read beneath the coconut tree while sipping spring water on a fine day.