How worrisome. I hope it hasn't been anything serious - and if it is, then it's only right that something be done about it.
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.
Lynwood, Washington Apple Retail Store Employees May Stage Walk-Out
- Thread starter samcraig
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
wow. surely apple will take care of this before the walk-out actually happens. that would be a lot of bad press
I got my iPod from that store! The employees were very nice, but the place is so freakin' busy. I think it would be really cool to do that...
That's the Apple store I go to. I didn't know the employees were "victims". They are always nice, they certainly don't show it like McDonald's employees. The store is always busy, I could see how if there weren't enough employees that managers would push more hours. Which I suppose would be considered "abusive" management.
In all fairness, I had a couple good managers, who felt bad when I quit and about the way I was treated by the other managers. But that did not make amends for me, so quitting was the best way to go. (My story is on page 3 i think).
At a small Apple Store, in a year and a half I had 2 senior managers, and probably 6 diff. assistant managers.
I only got any respect from senior manager when I was in the top 2 sales positions. Rest of the time, I was just a number, metaphorically.
I had one assistant manager that really pissed me off morally and ethically, 3 times. So 3 strikes I QUIT.
Guess you could say that at my store, most were good, compassionate, but every know and then you get a really bad apple that ruins everything for you. Just like life I guess.
I too was at one of the smaller stores for almost two years and I was the #1 sales in our store and I never got respect from my senior manager, only a couple of my assistant managers. But yes, there was one assistant manager that pissed me off as well. Unfortunately they found other ways to deal with me before I could find another job (though I didn't really want to leave because I love my staff so much).
Perhaps they should talk to the staff at Foxconn and count them self lucky that they arent being thrown out their apartment windows.
You want stress?! I'l give you stress. Every single one of my employees (including myself) had a mental breakdown during the iPhone 3G launch last year. And these aren't people who need to "grow up and find a real job", may of them have their degree and have had real jobs but are now unfortunately stuck in a retail position for the time being.
The 3G launch was the worst product launch I have ever seen. We were severely understaffed and no one was given their breaks on launch day itself (because, really, the 3G launch lasted about 3 months) and some of my staff worked over 12 hours. We were given inadequate training and inadequate information leading up to the event (that's what happens when you work for a company that always wants to be "secretive")
This is slightly off-topic, but I thought I'd throw this out there...
Remember when Apple was a struggling computer company?
My original Sr. Manager said at the launch of the original iPhone "This is the reason Apple Stores were built, Steve built these store for THIS moment when we launch the iPhone."
All stores want to make money, but you know how I took that statement: "Steve's happy because now he has an iPhone showroom where he doesn't give employees commission like most cell phone stores, and now he has a huge monthly check from AT&T which he does not have to share with the sales people who bring the product to the market." Apple might as well pay minimum wage, it was slightly over for me as a Specialist, but still a huge joke.
Proof: look at any Apple store, how much of the floor space is dedicated to iPhones? How many computers have iPhones attached. Most and most.
It appears you failed to sort.
The article cites no examples of abuse, so why is this a story?
Would not having a paying job be preferable to having a paying job in the present economy? If having to work without a break is part of the abuse, then they are entitled to complain. Employees who are rested are better employees when they have to deal with people/customers. No manager should ask an employee to give up a break, no matter how busy the store may be. However, the employee should not expect to go to break just because the clock shows it is his/her scheduled break time if he/she is with a customer.
Sad, but hardly news.
Retail staff are almost always treated very poorly, simply because they can be relatively easily replaced. High workload, low wages, little chance of meaningful progression. If they don't like it, the company will find someone else to take the job.
Not just retail either, a large ferry company here got in a nasty PR storm when it tried to fire its staff and replace them with immigrant workers on minimum wage.
Retail staff are almost always treated very poorly, simply because they can be relatively easily replaced. High workload, low wages, little chance of meaningful progression. If they don't like it, the company will find someone else to take the job.
Not just retail either, a large ferry company here got in a nasty PR storm when it tried to fire its staff and replace them with immigrant workers on minimum wage.
what is with all the anti union BS? this is about workers wanting to be treated with respect, I did not see anything saying they were trying to unionize, just get the respect they deserve.
also for your information, since most people spouting anti union BS are just as ignorant as you. EVEN in a "right to work" state you can join a union, the ONLY difference is that they cannot have a closed shop, meaning it is an employees decision whether or not to join.
perhaps a less demanding profession is what you need....
i don't doubt that apple is secretive even with their own staff and as a result people are unprepared for certain product launches. however, working for 12 hours without a break isn't cause for "[having] a mental breakdown during the iPhone 3G launch].
there have been times that i have worked for 6 weeks straight with no days off on the road away from my apartment. during that stretch i worked over 600 hours. yes, i was exhausted when i finally got to take a break but i made it through and did what i had to in order to get the job done. it seems to me that many people today whine way too much about work without knowing what real work is.
that being said, if apple is abusing or mistreating it's employees then more power to the walkout. however there isn't enough info being provided on this to make a judgement for or against.
i don't doubt that apple is secretive even with their own staff and as a result people are unprepared for certain product launches. however, working for 12 hours without a break isn't cause for "[having] a mental breakdown during the iPhone 3G launch].
there have been times that i have worked for 6 weeks straight with no days off on the road away from my apartment. during that stretch i worked over 600 hours. yes, i was exhausted when i finally got to take a break but i made it through and did what i had to in order to get the job done. it seems to me that many people today whine way too much about work without knowing what real work is.
that being said, if apple is abusing or mistreating it's employees then more power to the walkout. however there isn't enough info being provided on this to make a judgement for or against.
Mental breakdown????
Learn to cope or find another career. Sheez!
I'll ask again. What are the specific issues with the Lynnwood store?
If the company is breaking labor laws, then yes. What they are doing is fine. If they are just unhappy with it... good luck! If they are playing by all the rules and you refuse to work you are toast!
On the otherhand, if they are breaking labor laws, I'm pretty sure you can refuse to break them and are protected. For example, making you work through lunch. You are entitled to a break and if you refuse to work through your break time you cannot be punished.
Keep in mind, nobody likes someone who fusses about missing a lunch break every once and a while when things are busy. If it's a consistent problem then I'd say something.
I had similar thing happening to me when I was hired for a part time job where they said we'd be expected to work no more than 12 hours a week. They let a bunch of people go and where giving us 25-30 hour weeks. I would normally like to work and get paid more, but I had another part-time job and couldn't do this.
So what I don't get is if the manager of the store realized that the employees were unhappy because the manager was forcing them to work time that they shouldn't be... Instead of having them form a walk-out, why not just hire more people? Think about it in Man-hours... If you need 12 people working at all time and have 12 employees... You are paying 12 employees an hour... If you have 24 employees you are still only paying 12 employees an hour but everyone works half the time... After you finish training new people the store is full of win!
On the otherhand, if they are breaking labor laws, I'm pretty sure you can refuse to break them and are protected. For example, making you work through lunch. You are entitled to a break and if you refuse to work through your break time you cannot be punished.
Keep in mind, nobody likes someone who fusses about missing a lunch break every once and a while when things are busy. If it's a consistent problem then I'd say something.
I had similar thing happening to me when I was hired for a part time job where they said we'd be expected to work no more than 12 hours a week. They let a bunch of people go and where giving us 25-30 hour weeks. I would normally like to work and get paid more, but I had another part-time job and couldn't do this.
So what I don't get is if the manager of the store realized that the employees were unhappy because the manager was forcing them to work time that they shouldn't be... Instead of having them form a walk-out, why not just hire more people? Think about it in Man-hours... If you need 12 people working at all time and have 12 employees... You are paying 12 employees an hour... If you have 24 employees you are still only paying 12 employees an hour but everyone works half the time... After you finish training new people the store is full of win!
The store is not full of win, because those original 12 workers will likely be upset that their hours have been cut so that the 12 newbies can get some hours, lol.
Also, I would guess that individual Apple Store Managers do not have the authority to hire as many employees as they wish.
Most retail operations have productivity goals and standards that are carefully managed through the number of employees allowed to work at any given time. For example a store may sell $500/hour with 5 employees working at that time ($100/per hour/per employee). Doubling the amount of employees does not automatically mean that sales will double. So say the store hires 10 people. Sales increase to $800/hour but with 10 employees ($80/per hour/per employee). Doesn't mean the company is losing money, but productivity is down and they are likely making less profit. And we as all know, profit is the Prize for Apple or any other retail operation....
When one resorts to name calling its usually because they aren't able to support their position. I'm sorry that you were not able to comprehend my statements. What I said was: "So typical of "union" mentality." My point was that the Apple employees' actions were typical of those that subscribe to the rhetoric and actions that unions are famous for. I never said that the Apple employees were trying to unionize. Just because your not capable of comprehending what I said does not make ME ignorant, however it does say something about your mental prowess.
In a Right-To-Work state, unions rarely exist, and when they do they are impotent. This is because the unions aren't able to force everyone that works at the company they "organized" to pay union dues; those employees that choose not to join the union (usually a large number) don't have to pay dues. The unions just don't find it profitable to unionize a company in a Right-To-Work state in most cases. Therefore, business owners are free to hire and retain only competent, hard working staff members and only reward those that are productive with full-time positions, higher pay, benefits and promotions.
The action that these employees are threatening to take, "the walk-out," is a "union-type" extortion tactic. However, in this case, the employees may not be protected from dismissal (unless they are in-fact unionized). If they walk-out I hope that Apple fires every one.
I have owned a number of businesses over my lifetime. All but one of them was located in Right-To-Work states.
The first was located in a northern state that allowed "union shops" where everyone had to pay union dues; even those employees that did not want a union and did not want to belong to a union. It was such as nightmare to try to operate a company profitably there due to union actions that I moved it to a southern state. We left every employee that worked for the company when it was located in that northern state behind because we did not want the "union attitude" to move with us to the new state. Unionization worked out great for the employees at the original location...they all lost their jobs.
I have never again done any business in a state that was not a Right-To-Work state. All of my Right-To-Work state businesses have been profitable, not only for me and my partners but for our productive employees. Those employees that were not productive were terminated when necessary, as they should have been, which is all but impossible when unions are involved. Dead wood has no place in a corporation.
Productive employees are held back when a company is unionized. This is especially true for bright, young, and/or recently hired employees who have to watch employees with "more time" receive promotions they do not deserve since they are not as qualified and/or successful as the bright, young, and/or recently hired workers. Most productive workers receive better pay, benefits and promotions when they work for a non-unionized company. In my experience, more often than not, it is lazy, uneducated, untrained, poor quality workers that favor a union...for this is the only place they can remain "employed" in spite of their poor qualities and work-ethics.
Yea, I understand that there needs to be a balance of employees... but I think it's crazy that people would complain both sides.
Employee: "You have me working too much!!!"
Management: "Ok I'll hire more people."
Employee: "You're giving all my shifts to other people!!!"
Manager: "GTFO"
Glad I'm not in retail.
Beyond that, my guess isn't "once in a while." It's unofficially "expected" and "par for the course."
I worked in MS one summer in college - they certainly do know how to treat their staff very well, and create a good working atmosphere.
(Shame about the OS)
All of these "employees" posting here make me sick! Try having a job where someone is always trying to kill you!!! Yes I was a solider that was shot at and now I put satellites into space.
So make your "horror" stories but don't bitch at me for laughing at you when kids today are dying for their job!
Keep that thought in mind while working in this depressed economy.
So make your "horror" stories but don't bitch at me for laughing at you when kids today are dying for their job!
Keep that thought in mind while working in this depressed economy.
Why do people have to be so mean and dismissive?
It adds nothing to the conversation and puts you in bad light.
He gave a detailed and thoughful answer describing his views.
I happen not to agree with him. But there is no need to be rude.
If you can't answer him based on facts and reason, you're kind of admittiing you lost the debate.
I'm guessing that Peter made a point slightly too succintly, so I'll try and flesh it out a little.
I'm guessing that Peter is referring to 19th Century chimney sweeps in London who were notorious for exploitation of workers. He can of course correct me if necessary.
It's pretty clear that the poster has a strong anti union bias, and doesn't regard unions as a legitimate counterweight to the imbalance in bargaining power in the worker-employer relationship, as any pure economist will recognise (it's a shame that modern economics has been enslaved to a certain type of ideology). He admitted shutting a business and moving somewhere because "his" people got too shirty and didn't do what he wanted, or maybe, God forbid, wanted a decent level of remuneration for their work. He also went on a rant questioning the qualities and personal attributes of people who choose to be members of unions that are frankly quite derogatory and insulting. To me that makes Peters comparison with early English capitalists apt, if somewhat succinct.