I am wondering when teachers will get these. Little Timmy literally took a bite out of another students neck? No, you can't say it was someone else, I have it on video!
this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024
279 points (98.3% liked)
News
23266 readers
3019 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This is part of a growing trend in the retail industry, as stores respond to an increase in organized retail theft(1) and violence against workers(2)."
The first has been proven to be a lie. The second is true, especially since the pandemic began.
It's a sad state of affairs when retail workers need to wear cameras to protect themselves, but that is the only value. Not an alleged increase in organized theft. That is just the line being brought out by big companies like Target to excuse bad behavior on their part.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Hey! Who want's to shop at a retailer where someone follows you around with a camera and the merchandise is overpriced? Raise your hand now! [crickets] Consumers will shop elsewhere. Making your business like the DPRK is not a winning strategy.
Worked for London.
Lovely.
The company I work for has some of the general managers of stores carrying tasers.
Sounds like they would be in for an assault/battery charge if they ever used them.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I noticed in my local supermarket in the UK they started wearing cameras too it's really weird. I'm really not sure what their goal is - it will never help shoplifting as much as static cameras, and seems a lot of effort to safeguard against abusive customers.
I just want to say that I appreciate how your comment has made me understand that writing run-on sentences without punctuation isn't a strictly American English language thing.
This sounds mean-spirited of me, but I actually mean it. Everybody always makes fun of the Americans for it. And I'm not saying I'm perfect, either. Poor grammar can bring us all together.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I'd hate that as an employee. Imagine knowing that every time you talk to a coworker, it's recorded. Every time you sit for a few minutes to reset, it's recorded. Every time you check your phone, it's on camera.
this is the real reason why they're doing it.
Don't want them to unionize!
Seriously.
Like if you think mass-shoplifting hurts them- that shit's already baked into the price of goods being sold before it ever happened.
Unionizing will hurt their profits far, far more than shoplifters ever will.
load more comments
(6 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
100% it's really for anti-union bullshit because who the fuck is stealing in full view of an employee where the employees having body cams would make a lick of difference?
Or is it meant to deter the employees from stealing? 🤔
They have a big issue with internal shrink.
In other words, they have a systemic issue is where the threat of prosecution isn't enough to deter employees from supplementing income with theft.
I wonder what kind of conditions led to that.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Most likely it is there to blame the employee for not being busy enough or not doing everything perfectly with a customer.
They think price gouging is going to increase theft and they wanna be ready. They'd rather waste money on this (and on advocating the govt for harsher penalties) than lower them.
Friendly reminder: if you see someone stealing from target? No you didn't. That goes for target employees too. Here's hoping your bodycams up with as much "lost" footage as the cop's.
The primary responsibilities of one job at a Marshalls in Miami Beach, Florida, are to maintain a “proper and professional stance” at the front of the store, act as a “visual deterrent to prevent potential loss/dishonesty” and wear a company-issued body camera. The description says that the camera is to record “specific events involving critical incidents for legal, safety, and training purposes.”
These employees, who wear a company-approved black vest, black pants and black shoes, are instructed not to stop or chase after shoplifting suspects.
It's the same reason I made sure the security cameras on my house are visible from the street. People with bad intentions just move on to easier targets.
They may have seen the studies down on police forces who adopted cameras. They saw a drop in complaints against officers, as well as fewer escalations by the public against officers. Likewise, they're hoping this translates to retail.
One massive MASSIVE problem with that logic. TJ Maxx/Marshalls employees don't have a pre-existing stigma as being known for beating and killing black people and getting away with it. These employees aren't known to single people out, harass them, stalk them, and make life hell for them.
So if the cops behavior changed because they'll be held accountable, it's not quite the same thing as store employees already surrounded by cameras, and always have been held accountable for their actions. If they wanted to use this for shoplifting purposes they'd hire more back of house people to actively monitor cameras, and more human security guards to react live as it happens to theft.
As it stands, all they're doing is getting yet another video angle of what they already have footage of. This time with a fisheye lense.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It’s the same reason I made sure the security cameras on my house are visible from the street. People with bad intentions just move on to easier targets.
no they don't.
they wear a hoodie. or a ball cap. or they have a package to block their face. or any of a hundred other ways of making a camera useless on the cheap.
Your highly visible cameras only tell them you can afford some good shit. I'm not saying you shouldn't have cameras- and they'll usually be visible if you know what to look for... it's kind of necessary for them to function... But cameras are not a deterrence, and neither are they an active element in your security. They are passive, and really only useful when dealing with insurance or explaining what actually happened in the first place.
Stores are already full of security cameras. Shoplifters are generally aware of this. I'm not sure what this adds to that. I suppose it keeps someone employed.
You could spend a lot of money on body cameras, or you could reduce your prices to being affordable again. I'd say either one has a decent chance of dissuading shoplifters.
But I suppose you can only write off the former.
honestly, body cameras are more about liability after the fact. There's really only two reasons to strap a camera on somebody- liability defense (cops, armed security guards, etc,) and being able to monitor what the fuck they're doing. both are important when the individuals in question are armed. Not so much when the expected response is constructive cowardice.
There's absolutely no way a body camera would act as a deterrent when traditional and AI-enhanced security cameras that they're absolutely already using won't. Also, I'm not entirely sure I believe that there's massive waves of organized shoplifters.
There is- as noted in the article- a massive wave of unionization, though. and that would probably hurt their profits far more than any wave of shoplifting ever will.
I'm pretty sure you can write off shoplifted items as lost assets, so maybe just let them get shoplifted?
It’s probably more due to the lack of staff than price of goods, something else they could’ve addressed with that camera money.
I haven't been to TJ Max in forever. Aren't they a low cost clothing store?
Nothing is low cost anymore.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Don't forget to turn on your body cam before clocking in!
They legally can’t require you to do that. They can only require it to be on your person, as part of uniform, prior to clocking in. Operating the camera is considered a compensated task.
Yet some supervisor or manager will argue that you "have to turn it before you clock in to make sure that it records everything." Wage theft is nothing new.
They can say that. I’m just saying the employees will win a class action suit if they do.
If they want to protect the company against time theft, they can install a camera near the time clock.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Yeah, I feel like this is more about keeping tabs on the employees instead.
load more comments
(2 replies)