More on the big sandwich case, but first: As of this morning, Romeo’s wake-up video had jumped to 19,635 views. That’s just shy of 1,000 added views since yesterday morning at this time.
Now, on to Safeway country.
• Can you believe that I’m almost feeling sorry for Safeway? I’m not sure what’s the worst part for the company–becoming a lead story on national news, or becoming an object of scorn at BabyCenter.com, where other expecting mothers are taking turns giving Safeway’s reputation a good smack and talking boycott?
• Bloggers are abuzz over the incident, if you hadn’t noticed. A quick blog search turned up 1,280 results.
• For those readers who didn’t have any sympathy for the couple arrested by Safeway because “stealing is stealing,” do you also agree that people should be ticketed and fined for going five miles per hour over the posted speed limit? One mile over?? Honolulu’s Talivans were driven out of business by the negative public reaction, as I recall.
• And perhaps you noticed the juxtaposition of the Safeway incident and the case involving the son of an HPD deputy chief accused of stealing $800 of merchandise from Nordstrom?
According to Hawaii News Now:
Some officers questioned whether there was preferential treatment given since the suspect was released at the scene, allegedly after he identified himself as the son of HPD’s second-highest ranking officer, Delbert Tatsuyama. The department denied any special treatment.
I guess there is a little discretion on the part of those officers responding to shoplifting complaints after all!
• The “Ethics Alarms” blog referred to the Safeway sandwich saga as “an example of the kind of injustice that occurs when the law is enforced without concern for proportion, intent, or common sense.”
By what possible reasoning process could it have made sense—to anyone, from the manager to police, to subject a family, including a pregnant woman and young child, to this ordeal as the result of the failure to pay for two chicken sandwiches? Even if the family had been planning a brazen chicken sandwich heist all along, the sensible, logical, reasonable and caring response would be to give them the benefit of the doubt. Is Safeway concerned about a possible rash of sandwich thefts? Did they need to make an example of someone, and decided on the Leszczynskis?
Ethical decision-making is often difficult, but it shouldn’t be difficult in a situation like this. Any thought at all, other than an undifferentiated no-tolerance reflex, should yield the right answer. This is a sub-set of the duty of competence: the duty to think.
Duty to think? That’s pretty radical.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
At first I didn’t blame Safeway, but rather CPS and HPD, because what they did to that kid is criminal. But I’ve changed my mind. Safeway overreacted.
There, are ya happy now??
Yes, very happy. Kudos to you, Nancy. It’s good to know some folks can think rationally and change their minds. You actually give me some hope —– although with 2012 elections fast approaching, my hope is very limited.
Too many posters (and voters) stick with “light is dark, day is night” even when shown otherwise.
And kudos to Ian for using reason and common sense re: a family’s evil failure to pay for sandwiches.
Mahalo for the kudos, Sheesh.
I’m still sick about the kid being taken away for 18 hours. I can’t imagine being a parent in that situation. Even if they’d stolen (actually, not allegedly) a damn stereo, it’s not worth terrorizing a child like that. And I don’t even like kids!
Safeway might have overreacted.
But did the police just go along with the arrest (as they are obligated to if the store pressed charges) or did the police privately express reservations to the management about sending this family into the system and giving the family a criminal history over $5 of food that might not have been deliberately stolen after all? Is there any way of finding out?
Also, was the family in question profiled by the store and the police? What if the couple were not young but middle aged or elderly? What if they were not caucasian but rather of east Asian heritage? What if the husband did not have a pony tail, but rather wore a suit and tie and drove a luxury car? Is there any way of determining whether or not they were profiled? And if they were profiled, could that profiling be an unconscious process on the part of the authorities (the store management, the police officers) that exists but no one is aware of or can document, but it can be inferred from prior incidents where alleged shoplifters are released (e.g., the sons and daughters of high-ranking local police officers). In this case, can HPD and/or Safeway be sued, especially for emotional damages to the child and to an expectant mother in her third trimester?
If I stop by the grocery store on my way home from surfing, I’ve been known to crack open a can of nuts and/or drink a cold soda as I shop.
But I always put the empty back in the cart to be sure I pay for it. It’s easy to blast Safeway, but I’m sure they get tired of people coming in, eating lunch and leaving their trash on the shelves and leaving without paying for it.
FYI, Safeway got its name because it originally had a hardnosed credit policy that was in the best interest of its customers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safeway_Inc.
“Safeway name
“As a result of Seelig’s departure, the company held a contest in 1925 to develop a new name, the result of which was Safeway. The original slogan was “an admonition and an invitation” to “Drive the Safeway; Buy the Safeway.” [8] The point of the name was that the grocery operated on a cash-and-carry basis; it did not offer credit, as had been traditional for grocers. It was the “safe way” to buy because a family could not get into debt via its grocery bill (as many families did, especially during the Great Depression). By 1926, Safeway Stores had 322 stores centered in Southern California.”
The sandwich saga made the late news on Portland OR TV stations last night.
To me, stealing is stealing. My dad whipped me with his belt when he caught me stealing as a 6 year old and 9 year old.
When my 6 year old daughter shoplifted toys and candy, I marched her to the stores and made her return the items and apologize to the store managers.
I guess that’s one way to develop a CONSCIENCE.
I remember a friend of mine that called me with a dilemma, he found his 13 year old daughter with some jewelry from a local department store and asked her how she got it. Being a pretty good kid that she was, she came clean with her father that she had been pressured by her new friends in 7th grade to shop lift those items.
My friend asked me what he should do about returning the items and the consequences of the situation. I told him to contact the store and take the items back with his daughter.
He was very surprised that the big store didn’t come down on her by calling the police or brow beating her. The store manager gave her a lecture and even gave her a guided tour of sorts of the consequences of those who are caught shoplifting.
Needless to say, this situation shows what happens when the management has enough brains to know how to handle a situation. Unfortunately, large national chains, like Safeway, have a corporate play book that the local managers are bound to adhere to or get the boot.
This only shows the problems of getting stuck with national big box retailers versus local businesses who have ability to apply common sense solutions to local environments.
This pretty much fits the description of a position that will never change, without regard to evidence, reason or logic. Best to pass on trying to comment further here.
It appears that certain chain stores like Safeway have a penchant for going after the very vulnerable and involving the police, even for amounts less than the sandwiches in question in this case. The stores have the ability to issue a “trespass” to bar someone for up to a year from their stores if they feel like it–and this seems like a more reasonable course if a store is so bothered by an incident, but even this seems like overkill if based on a one-time questionable event involving little money. (Ever notice how sneaky Safeway is to get you to contribute to a charity through their credit card machine at the check-out?) To involve the resources of the police, etc., seems to be quite an inconvenience for the police and a usurpation of tax dollars and limited resources. One can walk the aisles of Safeway and be pestered incessantly by its staff about “finding things”, only to arrive at the check-out counter where it seems to be, in the main, every man for himself, and the “aisle-aloha” is often nowhere to be found.
If costumers responded to Safeway “mistakes”as this ugly firm did in this instance,there would be far fewer stores to worry about.
I shop 3-4 times a week at the Manoa Safeway. I will never spend another penny there.
One, the incredibly poor judgment of everyone involved at the time is mind boggling. At some point when plans were being made to take the 2 year old away for the night, how can someone, anyone, in the room not say, “Wait a second, let’s take a step back here.” Many parents, I think likely to include me, would have gone down swinging in that situation, only making the whole thing much worse.
Two, Safeway must have the worst Public Relations team on the planet. It is Tuesday, and Safeway still has not come out with a strong statement admitting to the mistakes, apologizing profusely, and doing whatever it can think of to make this up to the family. America will forgive mistakes when they are quickly and honestly owned up to. Even if Safeway thinks it is in the right, from a purely business perspective, its actions even as of today make no sense whatsoever.
Three, I’m all for the Boycott Safeway movement. No one is supporting allegedly accidental theft; that is not the point. Grocery stores know that people eat while they shop and they consciously permit it. Jesus – Manoa Safeway puts drink holders in its shopping carts. It is encouraging you to eat and drink while you shop. The point is that the grocery store is a place where we provide for our families, and the store should take that into account in its dealings with us. We shop for our families there; we take our children there. Safeway showed at the time of the incident, and even now when it has had more than enough time to reflect on what happeneds, that it does not care about Hawaii’s families.
Pau Safeway.
Pau: Your actions will be the only way Safeway will acknowledge their mistake in handling the situation. A good decline of 10% in revenue is the only thing Safeway will understand. Like I said previously, an 800 lb gorilla only understands a crow bar applied above the eyebrow.
Actually, when you think about it, if Safeway cannot handle people issues, what makes anyone think they can handle the food they are selling us.
If you look at the newest Safeway stores you will see sushi bars, delis, sandwich counters, coffee machines, soda dispensers even seating areas. They even provide you a cup-holder on the shopping cart so you can drink your coffee while you shop. So Safeway is encouraging people to eat in the store. They are, in effect, going into the restaurant business to gain additional revenue. Now you absolutely should pay for what you eat but getting all anal about not eating in the store is ridiculous. You can’t have it both ways.
Pau, you need to drop a note to inform Safeway of your personalized boycott to have any effect.You do not need to picket but a notice of intent would be useful.
One of the defects of living beings is the propensity to cheat. So these two may have cheated – maybe not – but should have been given the benefit of the doubt & been allowed to pay.
BTW, this Safeway debacle is now one of Yahoo’s featured stories.
I’m sorry but but what they did is theft. The actions of HPD and CPS were the results of the parents illegal acts. The analogy of speeding is ridiculous as it is a victimless incident unlike theft!!
The speeding analogy is apt because it was another unfortunate attempt to rigidly apply a law without thinking it through. Do you really think it was worth spending thousands of tax dollars in response to Safeway’s alleged–and the world here is alleged–$5 loss? And I believe the discriminatory aspect has to be considered, in that HPD would not make such an arrest with such minimal potential loss in response to an individual citizen’s request.
Several months ago, I put several boxes of “gently used” clothing and household goods at the curb fronting my house for a charity to pick up the next day. But the next morning I found the boxes all gone before the scheduled pickup.
I called the police to report it, just so they’d know about it, especially if it’s an ongoing issue. I was surprised when they sent an officer to interview me and make a report.
I’m confused. You set out items you were donating to people in need, but called the cops when someone (apparently) in need took your donated items?
Seriously?
Seriously.
I also had no reason to believe the person who took the stuff was in need, or at least wasn’t the type of person who was intended to benefit.
How sad for you.
Talivan analogy stinks. The reasons the cameras were hated were 1) because the cameras were shown to be a revenue source for local governments, 2) the assumption that the owner of the vehicle was the driver at the time of the offense, 3) the “gotcha” nature of the program where law enforcement hovered invisibly until an offense was made.
None of these issues has a parallel in the Safeway case. Don’t re-write history, Ian.
The crux of the “victimless incidents” argument is that speeding in a car involves no victims, unlike theft.
There is a hole in that argument as wide as an Amazon.com warehouse.
Speeding is obviously dangerous to other people on the roads and can kill people; that’s why speeding laws are enforced all over the place, to avoid the risk. Enforcing speeding laws carries a cost to the entire public to pay for the police and the courts, just like theft.
If no one sped, we would not need cops on the freeway and court costs would drop. Just like theft. If speeding laws were not enforced, speeding would jump and innocent people would be harmed. Just like theft. There are innocent victims in both cases, regardless of the intent of the person behind the wheel. Like it or not, our country is a public society, not a free-for-all in the plains.
As such, Ian had a very valid question above: “do you also agree that people should be ticketed and fined for going five miles per hour over the posted speed limit?”
Police must apply reason and common sense in deciding whom to arrest for alleged crimes, whether for speeding or stealing. If I were a cop, and someone claimed you stole a $5 sandwich, shall I arrest you on the spot?
That all said ………
I don’t recommend trying to reason much more here, Ian. You emphasized the importance of economic costs in your previous posts. For some people, this is just too complex. As such, no matter how strong your point, it will get met with: “Stealing is stealing is stealing is stealing is stealing is stealing is stealing is stealing is stealing is stealing is stealing is stealing is stealing is stealing” (while covering ears and driving faster on the freeway.)
At least this $5 sandwich-gate is getting national news coverage, if nothing else.
Yes, I’m afraid you’re right about the difficulty in getting people to deal with the economic issues.
One interesting note on the issue of speeding, in places like California, it is being seriously considered that police should not pursue in high-speed chases. Basically, drivers sometimes panic and the fight-or-flight response kicks in when a cop wants to pull them over, so they try to get away, and it escalates. A lot of people can get killed in a high speed chase that was spurred by nothing other than a broken tail light.
My point is that even speeding — and serious speeding at that — is subject to a kind of utilitarian calculus.
Forty years ago, the Hawaii Revised Statutes were only 7 volumes with an index. Now the HRS is 14 volumes with an index. I can pretty much guarantee you that practically everyone of those laws are being violated in one way or another, but society has the resources and ability to enforce and penalize only those which it wants to.
So in this situation, I believe the resources of our society, not to mention the tax dollars wasted on this stupid decision by Safeway, were ill spent and wasteful to say the least. If you believe that every violation of the law should be prosecuted to their fullest extent, the State of Hawaii would be broke and anarchy will reign instead of rationality.
Brian they PAID for $50 so they did make a mistake for $5. Any reasonable judge in a court of law would see this. there is a difference between illegal and unethical. What safeway did was unethical –and stupid.
Also humans are not robots. People make mistakes all the time. The truth is you’ve performed ‘illegal acts’ everyday without even knowing it. Ever spit outside on the sidewalk? illegal. Ever cross the street without lights? illegal. Ever talked loudly in a residential area after 7pm? illegal. Ever run a lawnmower early in the morning because you didnt have time to do that? illegal. Now some items are illegal in some states and others not and so forth. My brother is a lawyer and he explained that if EVERY law was enforced we would all be charged for silly things.
Col Mustard is calling you. he says get a clue Brian.
They take the child away for protective custody but everyday I see dozens of homeless children living on sidewalks with no facilities and most likely not going to school. Their environment is clearly not safe but I don’t see any agencies taking away their kids for “protective custody”….what am I missing? Double standard?
Excellent question. What is a realistic definition (not the current legal definition) of protective child custody? The answer to this question cannot come solely from neglectful, controlling parents or the from public; it also has to come from the human viewpoint of a child who will no longer be a child in about 10-15 years.
Bought a couple of rib eyes and a bottle of decent Meritage at Safeway today. Paid for everything. Got decent service, the place was clean, the inventory was quite good. Not worth getting all habut over the sandwich incident. I’ll save my thundering righteous anger and boycotting for other offenders, like maybe hedge funds and big banks.
Safeway doesn’t pass the sniff test when it comes to public relations recently but remember they do offer entry level positions that are very helpful for kids just starting out.
I was told by one annoyed Safeway employee that their surveillance cameras are monitored from the mainland, not (just?) the store. I wonder who made the call to nab the couple, the local manager or someone sitting in Oregon playing god in front of a bank of television monitors?
Interesting….