Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Retail Employees Alleged to be Treated as 'Criminals' in Bag Check Lawsuit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The theft opportunity for customers is paltry in financial terms compared with the theft opportunity for employees. To argue otherwise is pft indeed.
Apples employees are by nature "transient" students and such using public transport for short shifts between school or other jobs. The managers can't make time to perform THEIR NECCESSARY duties in a professional manner that respects the employees time. It goes both ways. They expect an employee ready to go at 11am for work, they need to make themselves available at 3pm sharp so the employee can catch their bus on time. The manager picks the time employees work, they should be available in a timely manner of its so important, right.
Ultimately, the better way to handle it would be renting a space outside the retail area with private lockers so that employee bags don't "enter the store" at all. Employees have zero personal items inside the store at all. Problem solved all around.
As an ex Apple Retail employee working two stores in four years this is a load of crap. Bag inspection upon leaving and signing in personal gear is a given. Employee theft in retail is the highest loss any store has. The mere seconds it takes to clear with a manager is insignificant.
A few retail employees at Apple Store locations have complained directly to Apple CEO Tim Cook, saying the company's policy of checking its employees' bags for security reasons was "embarrassing and demeaning." The new record comes from a court filing and is part of a 2013 lawsuit claiming the Cupertino company should compensate its employees for the time the bag checks take (via Reuters).
One of the workers in the lawsuit sent an email to Cook back in 2012, claiming that Apple retail store managers "are required to treat 'valued' employees as criminals." In the filing it was said that Cook then forwarded the complaint to both top retail and human resources executives asking, "Is this true?" No responses to Cook's inquiry were documented within the filing made public this week.
In the original lawsuit, which is seeking class action status after being dismissed last year, Amanda Friekin and Dean Pelle claimed that these bag checks were mandatory every time a sales rep left the store and were meant to discourage theft. In one of the original emails sent to Cook in 2012, the employee simply claims Apple's strict policy breeds an environment of distrust amongst its otherwise loyal workers.
As Reuters points out, in a Supreme Court ruling last December, Amazon won out over a group of its employees who sued the company for monetary compensation in the time they spent going through security checks at the end of their shifts. The Supreme Court's ruling erred on Amazon's side because it found these security checks were not a "principal activity" of the employees' job description.
A hearing in the lawsuit is set for a July 2 date in court.
Article Link: Apple Retail Employees Alleged to be Treated as 'Criminals' in Bag Check Lawsuit
There are conditions of employment with all jobs. Grow up and be responsible.
Agreed they shouldn't check the bags in front the customers, I think that's very unpleasant to do that.
And even though one may have nothing to hide, the feeling of get your bag search before the customer can't be a very good at all.
My wife is a store manager for bath & bodyworks for 13years, and they don't check the employees bags out on the sales floor.
So I don't see why apple can't take a more respectable approach, by not checking there employees bag out on the sales floor.
Most times its not what you say or do to people, but it's how you go about doing things. And Treating the employees in a respectful way will always go over well in most cases.
I genuinely don't agree with this, for several reasons.
1) we live in a society where one is supposedly innocent until proven guilty. This is treating each worker as a suspect.
2) when workers are hired, the hiring manager meets the worker and makes a judgement based upon their perception of the prospective workers character. This doesn't say much about their judgement.
3) notwithstanding, workers are probably background checked prior to engagement to prevent "bad apples (pardon the pun)" entering employment, or to provide greater scrutiny to workers with a particular track record.
4) there are security protocols in place to prevent theft, I.e tagged items, alarms etc. If a store is suffering theft this should be investigated subsequently and the correct party brought to account - I'm sure there are plenty of cameras for e.g. trained on a gold watch or MacBook Pro.
5) many Apple Workers ARE customers - they should be treated as such.
6) Apple should value its workers time of insistent upon security checks. Is it fair and equitable if a worker arrives 30 seconds late and gets deducted 15 minutes (as is common in certain environments) but is then expected to stay for 15 minutes after work no pay?
1) we live in a society where one is supposedly innocent until proven guilty. This is treating each worker as a suspect.
2) when workers are hired, the hiring manager meets the worker and makes a judgement based upon their perception of the prospective workers character. This doesn't say much about their judgement.
3) notwithstanding, workers are probably background checked prior to engagement to prevent "bad apples (pardon the pun)" entering employment, or to provide greater scrutiny to workers with a particular track record.
4) there are security protocols in place to prevent theft, I.e tagged items, alarms etc. If a store is suffering theft this should be investigated subsequently and the correct party brought to account - I'm sure there are plenty of cameras for e.g. trained on a gold watch or MacBook Pro.
5) many Apple Workers ARE customers - they should be treated as such.
6) Apple should value its workers time of insistent upon security checks. Is it fair and equitable if a worker arrives 30 seconds late and gets deducted 15 minutes (as is common in certain environments) but is then expected to stay for 15 minutes after work no pay?
Also this may create a sexual equality issue as I suspect it would mean many women (who may be carrying feminine hygiene products etc.) would be subject to additional scrutiny that men were not. This could cause further embarrassment.
Which is why, in this same society, we can all file onto aeroplanes without going through any forms of security.
Oh, wait...
We're ALL suspects. Retailers have to manage risk, just like anyone else. That's life.
they shouldnt hire people they have trust issues with.
this (and similar news) speaks volumes about the contempt big corporations have for the average worker, their time and pride.
i think treating people like this is a self fulfilling prophecy.
this (and similar news) speaks volumes about the contempt big corporations have for the average worker, their time and pride.
i think treating people like this is a self fulfilling prophecy.
Last edited:
While your individual points are perfectly valid and I generally agree with them, and are "nice to have" at the workplace, I'm not sure where you're going with that in this context - especially because you are saying that you "don't agree with this". The employees' allegations of mistreatment should indeed be taken seriously and investigated, but that is the exception, and not the norm, and that is the issue here.
And just to point out one of the many issues you've listed - "innocent until proven guilty" is entirely irrelevant here. Unless the bag examiners are purposefully throwing suggestions (false or otherwise), the employees are, by definition, "innocent".
Again, I'm not sure what your point is here. It definitely would be inexcusable for an employer to intentionally cause embarrassment unto their employees (or anyone, for that matter). But pointing out a specific cause for concern doesn't seem to be relevant here - I could suggest that men can also be at a disadvantage because they may be more likely to be perceived as potential thieves.
One's trustworthiness is absolutely not (nor should be) a qualifier for sidestepping security protocols - in this case, bag checks.
If you have a crystal ball for employers, then you're all set to become a multi-billionaire.
Otherwise, you're just starting a chicken and egg conversation.
Perhaps it speaks more to the litigious tendencies of US citizens?
I'm not saying I don't sympathise with some of the points (eg searches in public view), btw.
there was a time when people were trusted and by and large if you treat people well theft wont happen. this is also not something that every company on the planet feels the need to do. its a forceful move to show dominance.
if employees are showing a greater tendency to steal than before then society needs to look at itself. a security check where people have to prove their innocence is not the way.
arent US citizens more litigious because they dont have a boatload of alternatives? is this not something that could have been solved internally?
and btw i dont care if its apple or amazon.
You're not in court. You're in a private establishment as an employee.
They don't meet at a singles bar. There are interviews for these kinds of positions.
So, how much background does a 19 year old have? Every first time thief has never stolen before.
And once they're stolen, they have a loss for Apple. A stolen Apple Product has zero value to the recipient, as once it's discovered as stolen, Apple will render it useless*, se there's that. However, Apple can't sell it, once it gets out the door as new. *that's an assumption on my part. Hey, if I'm wrong, so be it.
Preventing theft is cheaper than recovering theft and investigating. It's like diseases.
When they walk in to an Apple store where they don't work, I'm sure they are. I'm sure they're watched by cameras, the security guard at the door, and if they are suspected of stealing something, they are taken to the back and the police are called on them.
I agree with you there. However, this is a multifaceted argument, like the person that brings a duffel bag with them, do they get paid for a 10 minute inspection, but the person that brings just their wallet only gets paid for 10 seconds? As for the person with the epi-pen that leaves it in the locker, that's just silly. I've worked in enough places to know that managers are people, and they generally are accommodating to those with diseases. It just doesn't make sense to have an employee wheeled out in an ambulance, because those EMT's can steal stuff too (just making a joke, folks) in all of the confusion.
I assure you that if businesses can trust their employees and customers to "do the right thing" and save on security measures, they will hop to immediately.
Last edited:
You missed the issue here, trust and building a team environment. How would you feel that if you left your office, school etc you were searched every time ? No privacy issues here? In which case if recommend a holiday to sunny North Korea !!
yes they probably will do pretty much everything except treat the employees in such a way that stealing is never an option.
public bag checks says everything about their view of the employees.
Its not that bag checking should be stopped. It should be done in the back office before the employee clocks out. That way they are compensated for their time and not embarrassed out on the retail floor. There were times were 4 people went out to lunch, manager was busy, and used up 15 minutes of time to finally get a check. The manager manually adjusted our clock, but how many managers don't do this or forget?
Most stores have a back exit that hallway leads to outside or another door into the mall without going outside. That is the path they should take to avoid customers and/or potentially taking something from the store as they walk out.
Most stores have a back exit that hallway leads to outside or another door into the mall without going outside. That is the path they should take to avoid customers and/or potentially taking something from the store as they walk out.
I know - that was my point. The poster I was replying to was suggesting that staff shouldn't be allowed to bring any personal belongings into the store and that they should ALL be stowed in an off-site locker. It was an extreme example, but amply illustrative
Fair enough. I misread the intent of your post.
Plus, there are ADA reasons, in the USA, that would make the bag checking lawsuit look like a walk in the park.
Plus, there are ADA reasons, in the USA, that would make the bag checking lawsuit look like a walk in the park.
Guys, the problem here is not that Apple is requiring bag searches of its employees. I think we all understand that it's a necessary company policy to deter theft. It's that 1) it's done in plain view of the customers and 2) it's done after the employee clocks out or during their break. That is a little demeaning and quite frankly the one stealing is Apple of their employee's uncompensated time.