Shoppers blissfully ignored a sign that only four garments could be taken into a department store dressing room. With armfuls of clothes and bags from other stores, customers entered and exited the fitting area, without supervision. It was a shoplifter's paradise.
Two shop attendants frantically organised returns and refunds in a holiday-sale blur. Nobody enforced the dressing room policy, which is designed to reduce shoplifting risks, or watched customers to ensure goods were returned.
![Shoplifters wouldn't have had a hard time in last year's Christmas rush.](/web/20170119095816im_/http://www.smh.com.au/content/dam/images/1/2/v/o/p/n/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gttpsj.png/1484709726746.jpg)
Whatever happened to department stores having a specialist assistant who manages the fitting rooms and is paid out of the security budget?
Visible signs of extra security – or much security at all, for that matter – were hard to find at this store. The main exit did not have a uniformed security guard. The handful of staff on the floor made no obvious effort to watch for thieves.
![Stocktake sales cause a frenzy that compromises store safety.](/web/20170119095816im_/http://www.smh.com.au/content/dam/images/g/t/h/t/v/8/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gttpsj.png/1484709726746.jpg)
At least the alarm worked, when I left the store. A purchase from another shop triggered the system. I waited patiently for a shop assistant to check my bag and witness the receipt. None came.
A nearby electronics store was marginally better. A security guard on the door reminded customers about the store's vigilance on theft. But as the guard chatted to a friend, shoppers voluntarily showed their bags for inspection, receiving the briefest of glances.
Around the corner, the discount department store was another asking to be robbed. A shop assistant rushed between a dozen self-serve checkouts as customers needed help. Nobody checked if customers scanned all items and the assistant seemed too young to deal with thieves if any emerged.
I could go on with other examples of lax security systems in the year's busiest trading period. The big stores, of course, may have had plain-clothes security guards and technology devices, such as CCTV cameras, tracking customers. But ground-level security was poor.
![Global fashion chains Zara, H&M and Uniqlo racked up around $600 million in sales in 2016.](/web/20170119095816im_/http://www.smh.com.au/content/dam/images/g/t/g/w/k/y/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gttpsj.png/1484709726746.jpg)
Even the best security systems fail when staff do not enforce all aspects of them. In fairness, staff at some undermanned stores barely have enough time to serve paying customers, let alone keep watch on potential thieves or catch those in the act and report them.
If large stores are vulnerable to novice thieves, how can they hope to stop expert crims?
Shoplifting gangs would have had a field day in the stores I visited. So would staff who pilfer goods (employee theft is a key source of retail shrinkage).
Each year we get predictable news stories in the lead-up to Christmas about how shoplifting costs the Australian economy millions and how stores and the police are beefing up their effort to combat thieves. I do not doubt their intentions, but the results are hard to see.
Around the corner, the discount department store was another asking to be robbed.
Some retailers only have themselves to blame. They spend up on advertising sales, yet are too tight to hire a few extra uniformed security guards for their main entry points. They do nothing to remind shoppers that security has been beefed up over the holiday season.
They rely on casual staff, some of whom appear untrained or uninterested, to enforce security policies and deal with shoplifters. Inadequate security back-up potentially leaves young shop assistants vulnerable to violent thieves.
A shop assistant I know who works at a small fashion chain says she has received no training in store security or dealing with shoplifters. Imagine if she confronts a shoplifter and is injured. The store deserves all it gets for not providing a safe workplace.
Larger stores, at least, train staff to spot shoplifters and follow store policy. But are there enough security guards who can quickly come to the aid of a shop assistant who catches a professional thief? If department stores cannot query someone when an alarm rings at their main entrance, what chance do they have in other parts of their operation.
Lax security systems, poor policy enforcement, untrained staff and inadequate back-up leave staff vulnerable to thieves who become violent when confronted and resist apprehension.
Granted, retail shrinkage is a complex area and many stores, under regular attack from thieves, do the best they can with their available resources. Still, there's no excuse for having staff who do not understand a store's security procedures or cannot or will not enforce them. Or not auditing security systems and doing spot checks to test for flaws.
Theft must rise in the next few years as more stores use self-service technology to reduce costs, open longer and have even fewer full-time staff. High youth unemployment in some areas is another factor.
The result: a lift in confrontations between shop assistants and thieves, and greater legal risks for retailers that do not provide a safe workplace for employees.
0 comments
New User? Sign up