Boycotting Self-Checkouts

People Are Refusing To Use Self-Checkout Because It Will “Kill Jobs”

Do you envision a future filled with nanotechnology, robots, and faster, smarter computers?

Dreams for this type of future may be slowed to a halt, as groups of concerned citizens resist the increasingly present self-checkout. Fear of economic downturn and job loss ward off shoppers from using such automated tellers.

Canadians Proudly Resist Self-Checkout

Canadians Proudly Resist Self Checkout

A Canadian university, sharing results from a national grocery shopping study, was the first to raise the red flag on mounting consumer worries of the rapidly multiplying self-checkout kiosks.

Of Canadians surveyed in the study, more than 1/4 said they had never used the self-checkout stall, not even for a small purchase at the grocery store. Their motivations for avoiding the machines?

The primary mission of these Canadians is to save cashier jobs.

One northern shopper, Dan Morris, told CBC, “They’re trying to basically herd everyone in, get everyone used to the self-checkouts to continuously cut down on staff”.

Some Canadians have taken additional action against the self-checkouts, starting petitions and sharing memes on social media, to get the word out: “never use a self-checkout – they kill jobs.” (1)

Shopping In America

Federal data shows that store cashier is the second most common job in the U.S., employing about 3.5 million Americans. (2)

Despite the significant number of cashiers nationwide, it is surprisingly not all doom and gloom in the U.S. on the self-checkout front.

In fact, the self-checkout concept is spreading and growing at a rapid pace. Sure there have been setbacks, as seen with Wal-mart’s Scan & Go services, but Stores like Sam’s Club and Amazon Go have already presented a working model for completely cashier-less stores.

A few Americans dislike the prospect of job downturn due to automation, but it has not been as pronounced as in Canada or stopped the momentum of the movement. (3)

Shoppers seem to enjoy the experience at these automated stores, marveling at the technology, and they still see a few humans during their visit. For example, cashier-less stores employee ‘Hosts’ who offer in-store assistance to shoppers and software developers.

Overall, embracing technology can reduce your time needed to shop and still bring you in contact with dedicated employees who will meet your customer service needs. (1, 4)

Fighting Automation – An Uphill Battle?

The grocery store is not the only place of business modernizing and automating redundant jobs with machines.

Roles like the bank teller and payroll clerk, as per the World Economic Forum, are “expected to become increasingly redundant” over the next four years.

Are the many people staving off self-checkouts fighting ATM use too? (5)

Ultimately, increasing competition with online stores and mounting labor costs (increasing minimum wage) challenge the financial success of nearly all brick-and-mortar stores.

Automatic tellers could keep the doors open longer, and among more grocery businesses in small cities across America, who already work on thin profit margins.

As evidenced by other technological advances of the past, there is a strong reason to believe that more jobs will be created in the same or other sectors as automation increases.

Ultimately, no machine can replace the services provided by one human for another. (1)

By Crystal Phyllis Mcleod, Guest writer

from:   https://humansarefree.com/2020/01/people-are-refusing-to-use-self-checkout-because-it-will-kill-jobs.html

On Co-ops

Just the Facts: What’s So Good About Co-ops?

Why support the co-ops in your community? The benefits might be further-reaching than you think.
posted Feb 20, 2013

Just the Facts 65

 

This infographic is excerpted from How Cooperatives Are Driving the New Economy, the Spring 2013 issue of YES! Magazine.

 

 

from:    http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/how-cooperatives-are-driving-the-new-economy/just-the-facts-what-s-so-good-about-co-ops

Nick Meador on Money, Survival, Integrity

Funding My Existence

gold.jpg 

It appears we are living at the dawn of a new era. Throughout our culture we see signs of change, progress, and evolution. A “Creative Class”  is on the rise that — with the help of the Internet and other related technologies — will reportedly transform our entire socio-economic system.

And yet, at the same time, something is amiss. Much of this so-called Creative Class can only prosper by finding work within the current corporate infrastructure, resulting in very little actual creativity or innovation. The very ones who might create the necessary change in society must expend their time and energy worrying about “making a living.” Those who can keep a job have to sacrifice ideas that contradict the wishes of bosses and the company’s stockholders.

For those who have been diagnosed “abnormal” by our society, this problem is especially prevalent. Such people are variably labeled anti-social, eccentric, introverted, highly sensitive, ADD, bipolar, neuro-atypical, differently abled, gifted, or one of many other similar terms that have a derogatory effect. The trouble is that the only people who ever made any worthwhile changes in this world belonged to one of these categories.

The most creative visionaries often cannot function adequately in modern society. This makes it extremely hard to avoid unemployment, let alone to feed and shelter oneself. But admit that you feel this way, and you’re instantly labeled lazy, arrogant, elitist, etc. We’re evidently not ready to admit on a mass scale that the current definition of a “normal” human being is not only imaginary, but impossible.

It is time that we break out of this double-bind. One idea how to do that has sat dormant in the cultural underground for the last few decades. In 1969, R. Buckminster Fuller (a.k.a. Bucky Fuller) published his short volume, Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth. As Fuller writes:

“…we must give each human who is or becomes unemployed a life fellowship in research and development or in just simple thinking. Man must be able to dare to think truthfully and to act accordingly without fear of losing his franchise to live. […] For every 100,000 employed in research and development, or just plain thinking, one probably will make a breakthrough that will more than pay for the other 99,999 fellowships.”

This will never be possible in a purely capitalistic system that runs according to the tenets of selfishness and greed — or the misapplied motto “survival of the fittest.” The Internet has allowed for certain non-traditional funding platforms, but the most popular ones are oriented around funding creative projects — not funding a creative life. And taking out any kind of loan seems dangerous when there’s no way to be sure about the possibility of paying it back.

For some of us, a “job” or a “career” is not the answer. For some, it’s time to admit: “What I really need is help FUNDING MY EXISTENCE.” Fuller also used the term “mind fellowships.” His purpose was very clear:

“Through the universal research and development fellowships, we’re going to start emancipating humanity from being muscle and reflex machines. We’re going to give everybody a chance to develop their most powerful mental and intuitive faculties. […] What we want everybody to do is to think clearly.”

With this spirit in mind, let’s give birth to an online community designed to provide existential funding to the people who need it. Recipients will have to demonstrate what value they have contributed to society in the form of ideas, projects, art, innovation, social movements, etc. Donors will be able to choose which individuals interest them the most.

We’ve spent enough time talking about futuristic visions of society. Some feel an urgent drive to manifest it in reality. It is time to enable those people by funding their existence, allowing them to worry about more pressing matters — like changing the world.

from:    http://www.realitysandwich.com/funding_my_existence

Job Discrimination Based on Zodiac Signs

Scorpios Need Not Apply: Zodiac Signs Inspire Job Bias

Benjamin Radford, Life’s Little Mysteries Contributor
Date: 02 December 2011 Time: 03:33 PM ET
Figure 2. If you were born between March 21 and April 19, your astrological sign is said to be Aries. But this was only true for a while, back when the system was set up in 600 BC. Today, the Sun is no longer within the constellation of Aries during much of that period. From March 11 to April 18, the Sun is actually in the constellation of Pisces!

Everyone knows (or should know) that it’s illegal for businesses to discriminate against people because of their gender, race, religion and other things, at least in the United States. But what about rejecting an applicant based on their astrological sign?

According to a job listing in the Chutian Metropolis Daily newspaper in Wuhan, China, a language training company there is seeking qualified applicants — as along as they’re not Scorpios or Virgos. The Toronto Sun reported that Xia, a spokeswoman for the company, said that in her experience Scorpios and Virgos are often “feisty and critical.” Xia said, “I hired people with those two star signs before, and they either liked quarrelling with colleagues or they could not do the job for long.”

She preferred potential applicants who were born under certain constellations, such as Capricorns, Libras and Pisces. To some it may seem like a bad joke, but it’s not funny to qualified applicants desperate for a job who get turned away because of the company’s credence in astrology.

It’s not the first time an employer has come under fire for zodiac sign discrimination. In 2009 an Austrian insurance company advertised, “‘We are looking for people over 20 for part-time jobs in sales and management with the following star signs: Capricorn, Taurus, Aquarius, Aries and Leo.”

That advertisement prompted an investigation by authorities. Remarkably, they concluded that the company’s stated preference for certain astrological signs was not illegal: not because there was any validity to astrology or because the practice was not discriminatory, but because at the time, Austrian laws regulating equal opportunity in hiring only applied to discrimination by gender, age and race. In other words, it was legal because the law was not specifically written to include applicants being denied jobs because of their astrological sign.

There are very strong similarities between astrology and racism. The idea behind astrology is that people born at certain times and places share specific, distinguishing personality characteristics (in the Chinese case, that Scorpios and Virgos are hard to get along with and that Libras and Pisces are not). The idea behind racism is that people who were born with a certain skin color or with certain racial features share specific, distinguishing personality characteristics (for example that African-Americans are lazy, or that Chinese are bad drivers).

Astrology and racism are rooted in the same basic worldview: That people can be categorized and judged based not on their individual merits, talents or abilities but instead by their skin color or when they were born. One other similarity between the two: Neither should disqualify a person from getting a job.

from:    http://www.livescience.com/17291-astrology-job-discrimination-china.html