Let's check the database first:
"For Keesha Goode, $34.97 in missing merchandise was enough to destroy her future in retailing."
"Theft databases blacklist retail workers; Practice raises privacy concerns" by Stephanie Clifford and Jessica Silver-Greenberg | New York Times, April 03, 2013
Facing a wave of employee theft, retailers across the country have helped amass vast databases of workers accused of stealing and are using that information to keep employees from working again in the industry.
Just accused? What if you had a vindictive boss?
(Of course, there is no thought of that in the corporate pre$$, or by the $lavish mouthpiece who has internalized their values)
The repositories of information, like First Advantage Corp.’s Esteem database, often contain scant details about suspected thefts and routinely do not involve criminal charges. Still, the information can be enough to scuttle a job candidate’s chances.
And you thought it was just you and your failure at not finding a job.
Some of the employees, who submit written statements after being questioned by store security officers, have no idea that they are admitting committing a theft or that the information will remain in databases, according to interviews with consumer lawyers, regulators, and employees.
Welcome to the total surveillance society, 'eh?
Ain't technology grand? I think I'll stay of the Twitter and Facebook, thanks.
The databases, which have tens of thousands of subscribers and are used by major retailers like Target, CVS, and Family Dollar, are aimed at combating employee theft, which accounts for a large swath of missing merchandise. The latest figures available, from 2011, put the loss at about 44 percent of missing merchandise, valued at about $15 billion, according to a trade group, the National Retail Federation.
Related:
"CVS Caremark Corp. said Tuesday that its third-quarter earnings climbed 16 percent [to] $1.01 billion.... CVS earned $1.13 billion in the three months that ended Dec. 31."
Yeah, that's billion with a B, readers, in two consecutive quarters. Imagine how much more they would be making if employees weren't stealing everything in sight?
Can't lower prices any though?
Retailers ‘‘don’t want to take a chance on hiring somebody that they might have a problem with,’’ said Richard Mellor, the federation’s vice president for loss prevention.
But the databases, which are legal, are facing scrutiny from labor lawyers and federal regulators, who worry they are so sweeping that innocent employees can be harmed. The lawyers say workers are often coerced into confessing, sometimes when they have done nothing wrong, without understanding that they will be branded as thieves....
Welcome to 21st-century AmeriKa!
LexisNexis agreed last week to pay $13.5 million to settle a class action on behalf of 31,000 people that accused the firm of violating consumer protection laws by selling background checks to debt collectors. The company did not admit wrongdoing.
Since the recession, lawsuits have proliferated against the companies that operate retail theft databases, like LexisNexis, which owned Esteem until this year, HireRight and GIS, according to a review of court records....
Some retailers are moving away from the databases....
So how many billions and trillions have banks stole through debt financing, boss man?
--more--"
And you thought it was references that got you the job?
