Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MADem

(135,425 posts)
3. Yes, the approach that this could have been mitigated by "communication" is not entirely valid.
Fri Aug 8, 2014, 01:11 AM
Aug 2014

They may have bullshitted their way for a time, but they would have ended up losing customers. They were intent on selling the franchise to some jerk who would ruin it. In the interim, they wanted to cut costs in any way possible. They were intent upon firing workers, reducing benefits, cutting salaries, divesting themselves of their part-time (surge) staff--nothing like a crew of high school kids stocking shelves before a snowstorm--and raising prices/cutting product inventory, which is the whole reason why people GO to the store in the first place; for their varied selection and the ability to really stretch a buck there.

However, the communication from the aggrieved workers--and the impromptu communication from the supportive customers--is nothing short of astounding. I've never seen anything like this--it's like Norma Rae on steroids!

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»An article that says it a...»Reply #3