Receipt Checks coming to Fred Meyer (OMG Why)

[storewanderer]

No, the bag bans are not going to be reversed because of theft. Even if they were reversed, people could still bring reusable bags. Ultimately, theft is the store's responsibility to address, not the government's.

While a store cannot legally compel you to show a receipt upon exit, they can ban you from the premises if you don't comply. This is true whether or not there is a membership involved. Violating the ban can then get you arrested.

The bag bans will be reversed or many stores will be closing in these places that have imposed these rules. Notice the regions having the biggest theft issues all tend to be ones with bag bans? Connect the dots.

Reusable bags are a major vehicle for which theft uses. It is visible in security photos, it is common knowledge when you speak to loss prevention/law enforcement, etc. Already covered this in the past, no use going on again.

Now the other issue here since this is Portland is the fact that Portland had a bag ban in place for the last 10+ years but no bag fee. Since the bag fee was imposed by the State of Oregon in 2021, the theft situation in Portland appears to have gotten out of control. Why is this?

This is because now with a bag fee you normalize not only reusable bags (making it easier for the shoplifter with reusable bags to blend in) but you now normalize the behavior of the customer with unbagged merchandise and entire cartloads of unbagged merchandise. Before in Portland those transactions would have been bagged- in free paper bags. Now since there is a bag fee the customer is not taking any bags. So now the shoplifter who wants to run out with a cart of unbagged merchandise blends in with a bunch of paying customers who don't want to pay 15 cents extra for 3 paper bags and go out with carts of unbagged merchandise.

So now you make it easier for two different groups of shoplifters- first you do a plastic bag ban making it easier for the blending in of the ones who shoplift with reusable bags, and then you impose a paper bag fee to make it easier for the ones who run out with cartfulls full of loose merchandise to now blend in with the many customers who walk out with cartfulls of unbagged merchandise.

You are correct that theft is the store's responsibility to address and if that means they need to bag all transactions to help isolate thefts, that is what it means. If a store wants to self-impose a bag fee as chains like Sprouts have chosen to do, let them, that is fine, it is their business to run as they see fit, and what works in one neighborhood may not work in the next.

[HCal]

The bag bans will be reversed or many stores will be closing in these places that have imposed these rules. Notice the regions having the biggest theft issues all tend to be ones with bag bans? Connect the dots.

Those regions have had theft issues long before any bans. They also have theft issues at non-grocery retailers that are not subject to bag bans, such as clothing and department stores.

Entire states now have bag bans, and theft issues are generally concentrated in a few cities. For example, plenty of parts of California have no major issues with theft.

Stores can whine all they want, but they will figure it out. And if they don't, their competitors will.

[storewanderer]

The bag bans will be reversed or many stores will be closing in these places that have imposed these rules. Notice the regions having the biggest theft issues all tend to be ones with bag bans? Connect the dots.

Those regions have had theft issues long before any bans. They also have theft issues at non-grocery retailers that are not subject to bag bans, such as clothing and department stores.

Entire states now have bag bans, and theft issues are generally concentrated in a few cities. For example, plenty of parts of California have no major issues with theft.

Stores can whine all they want, but they will figure it out. And if they don't, their competitors will.

The system can tolerate a certain amount of theft. The problem is once the theft reaches a certain level the system collapses. This is what is happening in these cities. What has changed in recent years? They've imposed these plastic bag bans and homeless populations have skyrocketed. Blame whatever you want but how much merchandise do homeless people realistically need? Not enough to rocket the theft like this. But retail theft rings who go around and steal stuff to resell have an endless supply need; they can monetize as much product as they can steal. The bag bans have made it infinitely easier for retail theft rings to get the goods and not stand out as they once did, so to speak, more efficiently, using multiple tactics (reusable bags, cartfulls of loose items, etc.).

Those parts of California that have no/few issues with theft (majority of the state outside Los Angeles, Long Beach, and some parts of the bay area) only have a bag ban/bag fee at grocery stores/drug stores/convenience stores. They do not have bag bans/bag fees at any other retailer types.

The environmentalist groups have overplayed their hand insisting that bag bans get imposed and apply to all retailers in an state. The CA ban that only covered a small segment of relatively low theft retailers who went along with the idea because Safeway back in 2012 at its most customer unfriendly state liked the idea of collecting 10 cent bag fees broadly did not cause major theft issues initially because it let all other retailer types make their own decisions on this matter.

San Francisco has a bag ban that applies to all retailers or .25 fee per bag (not just grocery stores). OR/WA statewide bag bans apply to all retailers (not just grocery stores) with .05/.08 fee per bag respectively.

Retailers figuring it out means you will have a Sam's Club style exit at every store with an employee who has a handheld and scans your receipt then scans random items in your cart. I do not believe consumers will tolerate this. Sales will fall. Tax collections will fall. People will eventually tie the increased theft and new resulting difficulty in buying from various stores to these bag bans and that will be the end of these bag bans. But that doesn't mean some stores won't self impose their own bag bans. Which is fine. Let them. Let the store and customer decide what is best.

And maybe the problem that has pushed this theft issue off the edge isn't the "bag ban" per se but the part that has pushed this issue over the edge is the "bag fee." So again, let the stores decide. If a store wants to have a bag fee, let them. If a store doesn't, that is up to them.

So far this year attempts in multiple Democrat-controlled states to impose statewide bag bans have failed. Also attempts in some Republican-controlled states to "ban bag bans" have also failed. So I am getting the sense politicians are getting tired of regulating this topic on both sides. A couple state efforts back east are still pending but expected to fail. There are reasons these efforts are failing and these theft increases are one of the reasons. Sure there are some towns or counties still passing bag bans here and there; as there are also some reworking their bag bans or canceling them entirely.

I am not sure why you are in love with these bag bans so much. Especially given the replacement is those terrible super thick plastic bags in most cases. You know fully that there is more plastic waste with these super thick plastic bags that are rarely if ever being used, than there ever was with the thin bags. You can use your reusable bags. Nobody is saying you can't unless it is COVID. Make sure you use the cloth one 7,100 times otherwise your environmental impact is greater than if you just used single use plastic bags. At least 7,100 times is what the Danish concluded. https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/13/world/re ... index.html
Also not clear if you have to buy trash bags (which you could eliminate buying by re-using the thin free grocery bags) and how the environmental impact of the trash bags is.

[veteran+]

Until retailers decide that more payroll is better than more theft.......................this will never change and they will continue to defer responsibilty and blame eveything under the sun, except themselves.

The resuable bag scheme was a lie (more the plastic and less the cloth). As storewanderer has said: the cloth has to be used over and over again for a very long time to be environmentally responsible.

Plastic is plastic is plastic is plastic. To date, it will never be good for the environment.

Paper is not as big of a problem BUT........................................what about those trees? Our exigent need for them is undenialble.

I cannot believe that science has not been able to find an alternative (sustainable & biodegradable)...................but then again, there seems to be no will to make it happen.

As a former retailer, I was never on board with customers bringing in receptacles to a store to shop with, not even large purses. The whole idea is an enabler and accelerator for theft.

Besides the socio-economic issues that are currently so maligned, 2 actions are required to shift this escalating problem.

1. World class customer service ($$$) supported by technology and uber professional security.

2. Staffing the courts around the country (judges, etc.) to open up more time to hear these cases, in tandem with lowering the criterias ($$$) for misdemeanor or even felony theft.
2a. Compel and/or order officers to respond when called (perhaps a "theft cop" division, $$$).

[HCal]

Those parts of California that have no/few issues with theft (majority of the state outside Los Angeles, Long Beach, and some parts of the bay area) only have a bag ban/bag fee at grocery stores/drug stores/convenience stores. They do not have bag bans/bag fees at any other retailer types.

By that logic, if the bag ban/fee is the issue, why do grocery/drug/convenience stores in the rest of California not have much of an issue with theft?

I think the bag bans/fees are a scapegoat because retailers want to blame politicians for their problems. It's no different from the "Hero Pay" law that Kroger used as an excuse to close stores in Long Beach. When overpriced stores like Safeway and Walgreens cannot compete in large cities where there are plenty of cheaper options, they close the store and blame it on shoplifting and bag bans rather than their own high prices and bad service.

[jamcool]

Until retailers decide that more payroll is better than more theft.......................this will never change and they will continue to defer responsibilty and blame eveything under the sun, except themselves.

The resuable bag scheme was a lie (more the plastic and less the cloth). As storewanderer has said: the cloth has to be used over and over again for a very long time to be environmentally responsible.

Plastic is plastic is plastic is plastic. To date, it will never be good for the environment.

Paper is not as big of a problem BUT........................................what about those trees? Our exigent need for them is undenialble.

I cannot believe that science has not been able to find an alternative (sustainable & biodegradable)...................but then again, there seems to be no will to make it happen.

As a former retailer, I was never on board with customers bringing in receptacles to a store to shop with, not even large purses. The whole idea is an enabler and accelerator for theft.

Besides the socio-economic issues that are currently so maligned, 2 actions are required to shift this escalating problem.

1. World class customer service ($$$) supported by technology and uber professional security.

2. Staffing the courts around the country (judges, etc.) to open up more time to hear these cases, in tandem with lowering the criterias ($$$) for misdemeanor or even felony theft.
2a. Compel and/or order officers to respond when called (perhaps a "theft cop" division, $$$).

You do know that the trees used to make paper are grown for that purpose… in a tree farm.

[BillyGr]

The system can tolerate a certain amount of theft. The problem is once the theft reaches a certain level the system collapses. This is what is happening in these cities.

Retailers figuring it out means you will have a Sam's Club style exit at every store with an employee who has a handheld and scans your receipt then scans random items in your cart. I do not believe consumers will tolerate this. Sales will fall. Tax collections will fall. People will eventually tie the increased theft and new resulting difficulty in buying from various stores to these bag bans and that will be the end of these bag bans. But that doesn't mean some stores won't self impose their own bag bans. Which is fine. Let them. Let the store and customer decide what is best.

I am not sure why you are in love with these bag bans so much. Especially given the replacement is those terrible super thick plastic bags in most cases.

Also, not clear if you have to buy trash bags (which you could eliminate buying by re-using the thin free grocery bags) and how the environmental impact of the trash bags is.

Seems like the scanning thing is a bit of overkill - a much simpler version is a person standing there who simply looks for each customer/cart to have someone hold up a receipt that they can see (without looking closely at it).
That doesn't eliminate all thefts (as they won't catch the people who only paid for 8 items out of 10), but that is the "certain amount of theft" that the system can tolerate, while still getting rid of the large (entire cartful of stuff) thieves (since they would have no receipt to show) and would thus be stopped by a security person once they pass the door (as they are now outside the store with no proof of payment for the items they have with them).

Note also that people do not have to be "in love with bag bans" - they simply don't want to have to pay for bags they don't need (if the reusables weren't allowed) or forced to do double the work (ringing up the purchase, putting it back in the cart then repacking it a second time at the car into the bags they have). Also note that not all areas use any type of plastic to replace them.

As long as the stores are no longer providing bagging materials at no cost (be it their choice, which is the case in some places such as much of NY, or be it rules that require them to charge or, like NJ don't allow plastic OR paper bags for groceries), the customers must be able to use SOMETHING for their items that they can supply themselves or obtain without cost or with a one time payment (though even the reusables can be gotten without fee - I think we've gotten 5 or 6 in the last couple weeks in the mail from groups soliciting donations).

Some people did, apparently, use grocery bags for trash, but that certainly wasn't universal - for instance here we take trash to a drop off center run by the local county and pay by the bag.
They used to sell specific bags, but now sell stickers instead, and the cheapest one is good for up to a 30-gallon bag - not too many people would put that on a tiny grocery bag, kind of a waste of money!

[BillyGr]

Paper is not as big of a problem BUT........................................what about those trees? Our exigent need for them is undenialble.

You do know that the trees used to make paper are grown for that purpose… in a tree farm.

And that any tree that might be cut can easily be replaced, where it is a bit harder to grow new oil and other things to make plastic ones

[storewanderer]

By that logic, if the bag ban/fee is the issue, why do grocery/drug/convenience stores in the rest of California not have much of an issue with theft?

The same reason as more remote stores (in any state) have fewer/no locking shelves, no uniformed security guards, no entry/exit gates, etc. There are fewer customers, it is easier to get police/sheriff response to shoplifting in those smaller towns as there is less going on for them too, and there is not as large of a market to resell stolen merchandise because there are fewer people around to resell to.

I don't think you fully understand how these organized retail crime rings work. They are like retailers. They are no different than a standard retailer- they work on volume. The more they can steal, the more they can sell in a busy highly populated area.

In Denver I witnessed a group that goes around to various fast food places around the core of Denver and sets up inside on the existing tables selling various items like Tide, personal care items, sometimes they have shoes or clothing, etc. Nobody does a thing about it, police do not come out, management of the businesses may kick them out after they've already been inside 30 minutes and after some of their employees have gone and bought items from them, but they are back the next day like clockwork.

As I said before the system is set up to accept a certain amount of theft. The kid who pockets a candy bar or some trading cards, the elderly customer who can't bend well and can't see well who leaves a small bottle of pepper in the bottom corner of the shopping card, the person with no money who steals a loaf of bread, the high school kids who show up and steal an 18pk of beer- the system is set up in a way to absorb those types of thefts as they are low value and infrequent. Also those little petty thefts do not create out of stocks that cause lost sales due to their nature in the majority of cases. Sometimes you get rough stores that have a ton of petty thefts, a lot of slip and falls, and a lot of property damage issues and those stores tend to end up closing and while the petty theft isn't the only reason the stores closed it was a big reason. This has been going on since the 70's and areas like that are often called "food deserts." I don't think bag bans/bag fees have much if any impact on this kind of theft. However, if now that person with no money who before just stole one item thinks gee I can bring in a reusable bag and fill it with 4 items now and get away with it because I'll look like a normal customer... then this theft increases.

These organized retail crime rings who show up and wipe entire shelves in 5 minutes, the system is not set up to absorb that. Also when they take all of the inventory of various items/categories, this creates an out of stock situation where sales from paying customers are lost until the theft is noted, on hand adjusted, and items reordered. Plus the labor cost to sort the situation out. Most of these retailers use computer based ordering from POS scan data so if items are stolen they are not recorded as sold in the POS and not reordered promptly after leaving the building with a shoplifter. It will take weeks or months before the items are even flagged as out of stock when an on-hand is finally done. Many retailers have a task that an employee is supposed to walk the store and scan out of stocks daily or on some frequent schedule but you know how staffing is at many stores since COVID... doesn't always happen.

So again there is theft, there is always going to be theft. It is a matter of discouraging theft to prevent as much theft as possible, especially larger thefts. So when you normalize the behavior of reusable bag use on the sales floor, normalize the practice of taking loose items out of the store in shopping carts unbagged since you now have a bag fee and a lot of customers don't want to pay for bags, now you have made it very easy for the big thieves to steal more and blend in with normal customers so fewer of them will be caught. So while a store may have been able to accept the above casual/small thefts these new additional large thefts are the straw that breaks the camel's back for the store. So did the bag ban/fee "cause" all of the problems? No- but it was the final push that got a bunch of retail executives talking to the investment community about what a problem theft has become...

Add in the fact that these bag bans are accomplishing nothing for the environment thanks to the use of those super thick plastic bags and these bag bans have nothing to do with the bags, or the environment. They seem to have some other meaning, to symbolize something, it seems to be a hate for plastic out of some people, or a hate for big oil, or a hate for anything "single use" - yet the reusable bags are made out of plastic in most cases (and even if cloth they need the 7,100 uses as the Danish study CNN found noted).

These bag fees/bag bans have only served two parties: the plastic companies who are selling more plastic than ever thanks to super thick plastic "reusable" bags (that nobody reuses) and these shoplifter groups.

If 100% of customers used reusable bags and followed the rule of not shopping into them on the sales floor, it may be different, but that is not how this has played out.

I think the bag bans/fees are a scapegoat because retailers want to blame politicians for their problems. It's no different from the "Hero Pay" law that Kroger used as an excuse to close stores in Long Beach. When overpriced stores like Safeway and Walgreens cannot compete in large cities where there are plenty of cheaper options, they close the store and blame it on shoplifting and bag bans rather than their own high prices and bad service.

This is nothing like the "Hero Pay" situation. That was a nasty little temper tantrum to try and scare other cities from passing similar "Hero Pay" laws under the threat if you do it we may close a store in your city...

Back to my comment above about "food deserts" - consider the situation I described above, one example of what created "food deserts" in the 70's and 80's, and how it has taken decades and a lot of subsidies to get grocery stores back into many of those "food desert" neighborhoods? There are not "plenty of cheaper options" in these locations and you may also want to remember those "cheaper options" are often not full service/full line stores, are non-union operations, pay lower pay rates, and have more limited store hours than the major chains like a Safeway or Walgreens, or in a hypothetical case where a Target is lost due to theft/other issues, I am pretty sure there isn't a "cheaper option" so there will be a price increase for the consumer to shop at whatever is still there.

[storewanderer]

Seems like the scanning thing is a bit of overkill - a much simpler version is a person standing there who simply looks for each customer/cart to have someone hold up a receipt that they can see (without looking closely at it).
That doesn't eliminate all thefts (as they won't catch the people who only paid for 8 items out of 10), but that is the "certain amount of theft" that the system can tolerate, while still getting rid of the large (entire cartful of stuff) thieves (since they would have no receipt to show) and would thus be stopped by a security person once they pass the door (as they are now outside the store with no proof of payment for the items they have with them).

Note also that people do not have to be "in love with bag bans" - they simply don't want to have to pay for bags they don't need (if the reusables weren't allowed) or forced to do double the work (ringing up the purchase, putting it back in the cart then repacking it a second time at the car into the bags they have). Also note that not all areas use any type of plastic to replace them.



Some people did, apparently, use grocery bags for trash, but that certainly wasn't universal - for instance here we take trash to a drop off center run by the local county and pay by the bag.
They used to sell specific bags, but now sell stickers instead, and the cheapest one is good for up to a 30-gallon bag - not too many people would put that on a tiny grocery bag, kind of a waste of money!

The flashing of the receipt has been tried. What happens is people pick up a receipt off the floor, or bring a receipt from last time, or similar, flash it, and exit the store. Remember the old days when Costco hole punched a receipt to exit? This was exactly why. This is why Costco studies your receipt. This is why Wal Mart (before COVID) and Sam's Club had that receipt scanning system made.

The large cart full of stolen items will just walk right out the door while the 5 honest customers with receipts and carts of reusable bags/carts of unbagged items receipts line up for a receipt check... this is the thing. Under the old model where all customers had their purchases bagged by the store the 5 customers would just walk out and leave. The one shoplifter with an unbagged full cart of items would stand out and be noticed and be stopped or at the very least at least stand out due to being unusual (no bags). This is what I am saying- these bag bans make it so the shoplifter blends in with too many paying customers. The #1 rule of anyone trying to commit a crime is they need to blend in as much as possible; that is how someone successfully commits a crime.

Every apartment complex I've ever been at has had dumpsters full of grocery bags filled with trash... (super thick plastic ones now in CA/OR/WA...). Some places are very strict that you need to bag your trash in order to make it more difficult to attract rodents (not sure I follow this as rodents can eat through a bag).

Also almost all of the reusable bags being sold at major retailers everywhere with bag bans in place are made of plastic. Very few are 100% cloth. Even in places like NJ or Philadelphia or NY that prohibit the "super thick reusable plastic bags" they do allow reusable plastic bags to be sold as long as they have a stitched handle so many of these reusables are still plastic even it is if a tarp-like plastic that is still plastic and lots of it (enough plastic to make hundreds of thin bags).