B&H Has Lost My Business

astroNikon · Mar 1, 2017

alexis.alvarez said:
So, what is it? Please provide the other side.

you can normally search the court sites for information. Then pay some $$ to obtain the public filed papers and resolution papers for both parties.

Or just read the news articles.

SCraig · Mar 1, 2017

As long as internal policies don't affect their business practices I'll continue to order from them.

Everyone working there did so BY CHOICE and I don't see a parade of Hispanics trying to get out the door. If they didn't like the working conditions they were free to leave yet chose to stay.

Destin · Mar 1, 2017

SCraig said:
As long as internal policies don't affect their business practices I'll continue to order from them.

Everyone working there did so BY CHOICE and I don't see a parade of Hispanics trying to get out the door. If they didn't like the working conditions they were free to leave yet chose to stay.

This is exactly how I feel about it. If it was such a problem, they'd have left, and they'd have made a MUCH bigger deal of it in the media. Employment is voluntary... there is strong favoritism at some of my employers as well based on factors I may not agree with.. and guess what: if I don't like it, I can leave.

It's not my job to play social justice warrior and boycott a company, especially when doing so would force me to shop somewhere with inferior customer service.

I think we should all tread very carefully at present because this thread is drifting into politics and could easily slide downhill and get locked.

KmH · Mar 1, 2017

A basic tenet of American law is that you're considered innocent until you're proven guilty.

Unfortunately, it seems that for most people accusation is tantamount to guilt, or you're guilty until proven innocent.

Hermes1 · Mar 1, 2017

It is more than accusation at this point.

DarkShadow · Mar 1, 2017

Scrolling B&H now to see what else I might want before prices go up.

480sparky · Mar 1, 2017

KmH said:
A basic tenet of American law is that you're considered innocent until you're proven guilty.

Unfortunately, it seems that for most people accusation is tantamount to guilt, or you're guilty until proven innocent.

More to the point, you're guilty and no amount of evidence will prove your innocence as it will all be ignored.

Designer · Mar 1, 2017

Hermes1 said:
It is more than accusation at this point.

"B&H Photo & Electronics treats it (sic) minority warehouse workers unfairly — including forcing its Hispanic warehouse employees to use a separate “unsanitary” bathroom — according to a US Labor Department lawsuit filed Thursday."

BTW: I wonder why someone doesn't simply clean the bathroom. I've had to clean restrooms in at least two jobs I had in the past. It did not kill me.

astroNikon · Mar 1, 2017

Designer said:
Hermes1 said:

It is more than accusation at this point.

Click to expand...

"B&H Photo & Electronics treats it (sic) minority warehouse workers unfairly — including forcing its Hispanic warehouse employees to use a separate “unsanitary” bathroom — according to a US Labor Department lawsuit filed Thursday."

It looks as though it is at the accusatory stage right now.

FYI that article is a year old

a tad bit past simple accusations.
If you read the entire article about half way down ...
US Dept of Labor investigated them in 2013-2014
attempted to get B&H to agree to corrective actions or a general settlement.
B&H refused, and thus they are now taking court action.

Here is the government's general news release
US Labor Department sues B&H Foto & Electronics Corp. for hiring, pay, promotion discrimination; harassment

anti-discrimination Executive Order for vendors/ contractors ==> U.S. Department of Labor - Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) - Compliance Assistance Executive Order 11246

MSnowy · Mar 1, 2017

Now if you choose not to shop at a store because of their belief aren't you then being discriminatory

Derrel · Mar 1, 2017

MSnowy said:
Now if you choose not to shop at a store because of their belief aren't you then being discriminatory

30 years ago I read a think piece, in which the author said the most mis-understood word in the English language was "discriminating". He said that being discriminating was often a GOOD thing. Like being discriminating, and not associating with known felons, drunkards, druggies, etc, Like being discriminating by refusing to participate in dubious activities in business, by choosing one's associates and friends in a manner where discriminating behavior regrding WHO one would associate with, was actually a good thing.

Refusing to give a few million dollars worth of cash to a group of people whose ethics and whose business practices are considered unacceptable seems like a reasonable course of action to me. Google for past lawsuits AND past penalties this crowd has been slapped with...there's a long, long history here. This is not just a "new thing".

Being "discriminating" in who ones does business with is a good thing, not necessarily a bad thing.

sscarmack · Mar 1, 2017

I'll still buy from them. Just like people will continue buy from Starbucks for their beliefs and actions. Who cares.

smoke665 · Mar 1, 2017

Gary A. said:
Others have passed judgement

Not necessarily I could rattle off list after list of companies that have agreed to a "CONSENT DECREE" it's an agreement where you pay to make them go away without an admission of any guilt.

tirediron said:
Okay, but that doesn't actually mean that they were guilty of anything. It's very common for large businesses to pay settlements just to make a problem go away.

40 years in business and I can't tell you how many times I've been shook down by one or another state or federal agency, not to the tune some companies have been. I had one Federal Agency tell me after spending 3 days auditing me that a software rounding mistake caused an error of 1/10th of a percent which resulted in an infraction. They had the audacity to tell me I could pay them $6,000 and I wouldn't see them again, or I could refuse and they would not only come after me for treble amounts, but would continue with audits every other month. Had another state income tax agency claim that they "estimated" I owned them $60,000 in state income tax (with accumulated penalties) even though I had never done business in the state. Some of these agencies are ruthless, because they know they can force you to spend more in legal fees to contest, then it will cost to settle. In the case of the income tax, the specialized attorney needed to defend the case was billing $2500 per hour. I could have won hands down, but the legal expense would have been more than the settlement and you don't re-coop legal fees from the feds.

KmH said:
Unfortunately, it seems that for most people accusation is tantamount to guilt, or you're guilty until proven innocent.

In the case of federal agencies is not about guilt or innocence.

DarkShadow · Mar 1, 2017

40 years in business and I can't tell you how many times I've been shook down by one or another state or federal business not to the tune some companies have been. I had one Federal Agency tell me after spending 3 days auditing me that a software rounding mistake caused an error of 1/10th of a percent which resulted in an infraction. They had the audacity to tell me I could pay them $6,000 and I wouldn't see them again, or I could refuse and they would not only come after me for treble amounts, but would continue with audits every other month. Had another state income tax agency claim that they "estimated" I owned them $60,000 in state income tax (with accumulated penalties) even though I had never done business in the state. Some of these agencies are ruthless, because they know they can force you to spend more in legal fees to contest, then it will cost to settle. In the case of the income tax, the specialized attorney needed to defend the case was billing $2500 per hour. I could have won hands down, but the legal expense would have been more than the settlement and you don't re-coop legal fees from the feds.