Self-Checkout at Supermarkets, Are You Usually Honest?

bluedufflecoat on 29/09/2016 - 14:04

This article: http://www.news.com.au/finance/money/budgeting/coles-to-intr…

I read the above article, and was a bit disappointed to find out that quite a lot of people steal from the supermarkets at the self-service checkouts. Do you do this?
Do you somehow justify the theft by saying, e.g.

  • that's the cost of your time vs employing someone to man the checkouts
  • the supermarkets earn too much money anyway
  • the supermarkets are screwing everyone, especially the farmers, so they deserve it

Unless your situation is really dire / desperate, do you really think it's right to steal, just because someone else is doing it, or the "hurt" party deserves it?

Poll Options

  • 737
    I scan everything at the checkout
  • 30
    I sometimes don't scan everything at the checkout
  • 23
    I select a different item from the options (not the one I'm buying) at the checkout
Food & Grocery

Comments

  • alz on 29/09/2016 - 14:12
    +12

    It's theft at the end of the day so its on your conscience and between you and the lord what you end up doing :-0

    • poboy on 29/09/2016 - 15:03
      +129

      The Lord's too busy giving kids malaria to care if you swap your apples for potatoes.

      • BigTed on 29/09/2016 - 16:40
        +9

        I am pretty sure he has time for both.

      • BertieBrown on 30/09/2016 - 07:47
        +1

        Ricky, is that you?!

      • KevinFine on 30/09/2016 - 14:02
        -1

        Oh! how athiesm has grown as the new religion of the world

        • macrocephalic on 30/09/2016 - 15:38
          +36

          Not a religion. It's specifically the lack of religion.

        • macrocephalic on 30/09/2016 - 15:45
          +14

          @KevinFine: People's disbelief in faery tales is so strong that you think it's a religion?

        • quanticism on 30/09/2016 - 18:27
          +3

          @KevinFine: Does that mean that I'm also part of the Unicorns-Don't-Exist religion?

        • apey2000 on 30/09/2016 - 19:20
          +1

          Jedi FTW

        • bowdo on 30/09/2016 - 19:28

          @KevinFine:

          If stamp collectors behaved like many religions do the 'non-stamp collectors' would likely be a large movement too.

        • El Cap on 30/09/2016 - 19:59
          +2

          @Methotical: Based on your view we could as well be Frankensteins.
          What matters is what you make yourself.

          It is perfectly fine to mock fictional characters, specially the vindictive ones.

        • tryagain on 30/09/2016 - 23:37
          +2

          @macrocephalic: People also don't go banging on about how fairy tales are false on forums either. Antithiests on the other hand would be a more correct label for those that do and they tend to carry on just like overbearing religious types, normally with levels self righteousness off the charts.

        • El Cap on 01/10/2016 - 00:39
          +2

          @Methotical: Fictional character is the god; I am sure there had been a person called Jesus.

        • quanticism on 01/10/2016 - 01:14
          +1

          @tryagain:

          People also don't go banging on about how fairy tales are false on forums either.
          That's probably because people don't go banging on about how fairy tales are real.

        • ClawShrimp on 01/10/2016 - 07:38
          +1

          @Methotical: it's not cool to mock Christians, but it sure is easy.

        • boredofficeworker on 01/10/2016 - 09:54

          @macrocephalic: In saying "the specific lack of relgion" you more closely describe Agnostic, the defining characteristic of being an atheist is to have a firm belief that relion is nonsense.

        • callum9999 on 02/10/2016 - 01:15

          @Methotical: It's not just cool, it's very entertaining and also quite nice to reaffirm that you're not one of the stupid ones. Though I can't say I've spoken to many Christians - just a bunch of people with staggering ignorance of their own "holy book" who coincidentally believe the bits they like and don't believe the bits they don't like.

          No. I can happily confirm that neither God made us nor are we stardust or bacteria. We are distantly related to bacteria I'll give you that, but in case you haven't noticed, we are no longer bacterial cells.

        • Methodical on 02/10/2016 - 12:38
          +1

          @callum9999: That's a problem. People of another faith ( Atheists ) thinks it's cool to slander other people's belief and they are the smart ones and anyone who believes in a higher power is stupid. Believing we got here by dumb luck doesnt make you smart. You also say you can confirm God didn't make us … I don't think so.

          Something timeless , spaceless , immaterial and powerful created the universe. You shouldn't completely rule out that could be God. Atheism has no good answers for the why the universe exists ,origin of life , morals , etc.

          Anyway… Back to the bargains :)

        • callum9999 on 02/10/2016 - 12:59
          -1

          @Methotical: Ignoring the moronic stuff you believe about invisible beings in the sky, you believe in even more "dumb luck" than the typical atheist given you have no explanation for how God came to exist in the first place…

        • Methodical on 02/10/2016 - 14:28
          +2

          @callum9999:
          Invisible beings in the sky? Im saying something eternal created this universe. Let's leave it here cause it will go on forever and this is a bargain site. Peace :)

        • callum9999 on 02/10/2016 - 21:45
          -6

          @Methotical: You can leave whenever you want, I've never tried to stop you… I know full well what you're saying - which is why you probably belong in a mental institution.

          (Which no doubt seems incredibly harsh, but I'm getting sick to death of "moderates" such as yourself who are effectively providing cover for extremists and therefore have blood on your hands - no doubt not something most/any here would agree with though!)

        • fruit on 03/10/2016 - 21:36

          @Methotical: top kek I'm going to share your comment with my Atheist church friends.. oh wait

        • smux on 04/10/2016 - 00:47
          +4

          @callum9999: Blood on his hands? That's a bit.. extreme? I don't get why atheists are such douches. I don't go around preaching whatever it is I believe. Most of the preaching I hear these days is from these annoying idiots. How times have changed.

        • alz on 04/10/2016 - 09:31

          @Methotical: Google Allah

        • KevinFine on 04/10/2016 - 11:43

          @callum9999:
          May His peace and Mercy be with you Brother.. clearly you need help !

        • callum9999 on 05/10/2016 - 01:41
          +1

          @zaidoun: Why are you asking me if that's extreme when I clearly stated it was? It's certainly uncomfortable for most, but it seems quite obvious to me that if believing in horrifically violent magic sky fairys wasn't made socially acceptable by the moderately religious, there would be far fewer extremists. Ergo blood on their hands.

          Your rant makes no sense given I was replying to a preaching Christian… I can only assume you're taking advantage of selective hearing given its patently absurd that atheists preach more than the religious (though I would consider that a good thing anyway).

        • callum9999 on 05/10/2016 - 01:44

          @KevinFine: Peace and mercy!? Like you're ever going to find that in any major religion…

          If you can find a flaw in my reasoning then I'm all ears. No doubt you just don't want to think about it and pretend everything's all OK though.

        • singlemalt72 on 05/10/2016 - 10:24
          +1

          @Methotical:

          Atheism is not "another faith" it is lack of faith.

          Nobody can confirm the non-existence of God - it is an impossibility whereas existence could be proven if a God existed and wasn't all hidey-faithey.

          Atheism does not explain the existence of the universe, science does or is in the process of.
          Atheism does not explain morals - Philosophy and Anthropology (amongst others) do
          Origin of life - once again, not in the sphere of atheism, this is science yet again.

          You don't need religion to have morals, all morals are not derived from religion. Science is getting closer and closer all the time to the origins of the universe and life - just because the definitive answer is not yet at hand does not mean it isn't there.

          This is the funny thing with believers - harping on about "You can't explain the origin of life" and then use "Magic" as your explaination……

        • KevinFine on 05/10/2016 - 13:52

          @callum9999:

          A real man never 'Lol's - but with a hard heart and severe consequences - there is nothing more comforting !

          I was where you are now less than 2 years ago

          Look at my life now - ask me how !

          @Methotical: tagged you here just in case

        • callum9999 on 05/10/2016 - 15:20
          +2

          @KevinFine: While I don't have the slightest idea what most of your post means, it seems like "where you are now" is some kind of brainwashing cult so no, I can't say I'm too eager to join you!

        • Methodical on 05/10/2016 - 19:25
          +2

          @singlemalt72: Well atheism is a lack of faith in God but faith that the earth , life etc is a fluke creation.

          In my opinion , origin , meaning, morality and destiny is best explained by the christian worldview. Atheism is a hope-less world view. From no where , going no where.

          Also couldn't begin to on about all the testimonies , spiritual experiences that people have which I know from a hard atheist can just be dismissed.

          Anyway your reply was well worded and thankyou for answering the objections without being rude and disrespectful like some other atheists on this site.

        • singlemalt72 on 06/10/2016 - 08:45
          +3

          @Methotical: "Fluke creation"

          And with that you show your ignorance - why does it need to be directed? The wonder and appreciation in the understanding of the science behind the birth of the universe, the evolution of life to me is a wonderful thing that easily matches any faith-based happiness.

          Athiesm is hope-less???? I have all sorts of hope for the world and for people - I can see the improvements we can make to slow the destruction of our planet, destruction too often denied by believers. I volunteer, I support secular charities, I work with people who live in poverty with their faith. Atheism is in no way a lack of hope.

          Spiritual experience can be explained in much the same way as drug induced euphoria…. it is in no way evidence of a higher power. A spiritual feeling in no way is empirical evidence, any more than a LSD trip is.

        • Methodical on 06/10/2016 - 10:41
          +1

          @singlemalt72:

          So everything was just undirected and came to be = That's faith my friend.

          Yes atheism worldview is a hope-less one. According to atheists the universe will either one day collapse on itself or seize to exist. Ultimately everything is meaningless then. No justice , no external love , nothing.

          Yes I to give to multiple charities ( several thousand a year not just chump change) , volunteer and have been overseas on medical mission trips. My wife has been several times overseas as a nurse in remote villages. But kudos you are being generous with your time and money. Unfortunately many atheists I know just get drunk every weekend and indulge in their illegaly downloaded media.

          The spiritual experiences I was referring to were not just people claiming to have feelings etc. I meant multiple people having the same vision , NDE claims where they recall events in the other rooms , etc and we're verified. Too many other examples to mention but enough for me to believe there is more going on. I never said it was empirical evidenced.

          Basically there are two types of people in this world. Those who seek God and those who seek to avoid him. Both will be successful.

    • subywagon on 29/09/2016 - 15:49
      +8

      And you seriously don't want to piss of the lord…

    • NickosFoivos on 30/09/2016 - 11:27
      -8

      God does not mind if you steal from the ones who steal from you in the first place.

    • onetwothreefour on 30/09/2016 - 20:57
      +9

      Everything is part of gods plan so it's him who's making me steal.

      • poboy on 01/10/2016 - 08:07
        +1

        Likewise, if someone says 'thank God she wasn't killed!' you must also accept that God created that evil and put together that situation just for kicks.

        • smux on 04/10/2016 - 00:48

          I think only an atheist with a stick up his a** would be so pedantic as to interpret that statement literally. It's a figure of speech - get over it.

        • poboy on 04/10/2016 - 11:35

          My comment was rational. If you are having an emotive response, then assess why you are frustrated.

    • Pacify on 01/10/2016 - 14:28
      +1

      On the other hand, Coles/Woolies are removing jobs for these things. I have no sympathy at all if people decide to abuse them, its not like there wasn't other options. Reap what you sow imo.

      Besides, the amount of theft is obviously near insignificant compared to the cost savings the machines bring. Merely an integrated cost the supermarket has to bear.

    • ahara on 01/10/2016 - 22:53

      Wow, Ozbargain is really split between pro religion and again religion users.
      36+ and 32- votes. Surprise surprise

    • alz on 06/10/2016 - 15:06

      To all the thieves out there, the police is watching you: http://www.smh.com.au/business/retail/retailers-police-crack…

  • cypher67 on 29/09/2016 - 14:17
    +9

    I remember when the self check out first came out, you had to wait for the register to weight each and every item (the green light) you just scanned before you can proceed to the next (everything not just produce). In recent times they no longer weigh the item, making it quicker but at the same time easier to put stuff in your bag without weighing it. They just have someone watching over you to ensure you are scanning everything. They are asking for trouble and no doubt bumped up prices to over the amount getting stolen.

    • Pinchie on 29/09/2016 - 20:44
      +15

      Big W definitely still checks bag weight addition.. or at least the one near me does.

      Thought I'd buy some Animal Crossing Amiibo cards without anyone seeing the 32 year old trying to get his favourite animals. Scanned fine, didn't register in the bag. Had to get the girl over to punch in the override code. Then I had to ask her to stay while I scanned the other two packs.

    • TheBird on 30/09/2016 - 10:18
      +13

      I had one of those checking you scan everything inform me I failed to scan an item.

      After I do a quick look "Nope, I didn't miss anything."

      "Yes you did." She spends the next 5 minutes checking the 10 items over and over again looking for the missed item, scurried off in a huff both without saying a word and without finding the error. Some places need to train their staff better.

      As the the OPs original question. It's possible, however it would be unintentional. I'm sure I've done less errors than some of the errors I've seen checkout chicks/dicks do.

      • Slippery Fish on 01/10/2016 - 15:16
        +3

        Never stolen but havr been accused by some 14yo cow. Screetched at me "you didnt pay for half your order!"

        Payed for half my card half the work one, no appology, didnt care she had embarassed me. I dont go to that shop anymore but if I did id play hide the item in the bag as much as possible lol

    • Pacify on 01/10/2016 - 14:29
      +2

      On your last point, not at all. These machine saving them SIGNIFICANT money, otherwise why would they buy them? Any theft is far, far outweighed by wage savings

  • [Deactivated] on 29/09/2016 - 14:56
    -5

    less checkout chicks, higher priced products, what do you think the average consumer will do……………………….

    • bluedufflecoat on 29/09/2016 - 14:58
      +8

      that's why I'm asking…

      does the average consumer have some integrity? I get it if a person is hungry / desperate, I'm not going to judge. But would the average consumer have integrity?

      • Tasmaniac on 30/09/2016 - 03:29
        +6

        The thing that always gets me with this high and mighty attitude is the presumption that democracy is a perfect and fair system created for the well being of all. Perhaps we should spend a day discussing the definition of integrity and whether it's even applicable to your scenario. Does a CEO have integrity if people are starving while he rakes in the millions ?. Take the time to educate yourself and form an independent set of morals and ethics, you might find that a truss tomato from Woolworth's is the least of the world's problems.

      • Artkin on 30/09/2016 - 09:08
        +4

        Taking a step back..I would say this article is a pr plant into a d grade "news" paper to encourage self policing by encouraging water cooler discussion to an end (invoking guilt) where behavioural changes improve the bottom line. See following for a really article.
        http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36190557

      • JH100 on 30/09/2016 - 14:07
        +3

        In a dishonest world dishonesty is integral.

        I wouldn't judge anyone for it.

      • centrelink on 30/09/2016 - 15:07

        What if hey don't want food? But they want ciggies? Is it ethical hen?

        • Yarkin on 30/09/2016 - 20:26
          +10

          No, it's ethical rooster.

        • centrelink on 30/09/2016 - 23:35

          Dunno what you mean but I was being sarcastic trying to recall a quote from the Simpsons

      • poppit88 on 05/10/2016 - 02:13

        Perhaps the question we should asking is do our supermarkets have integrity? They spend a lot of time telling us how great they are, yet dish the consumer up with processed crap in the middle isles, that has nutritional value of a burnt rubber tyre. The end isles of so called 'fresh' produce need a good dose of CPR to make them viable.

        Is is any wonder that many customers have become cynical and are out for what they can get.

        The demise of big business. They got rid of check out operators to boost profits and now find themselves hoisted by their own petard!

    • smartazz104 on 30/09/2016 - 14:56
      +1

      Not everyone's a damn thief, but if people think they can get any with it, they will try.

    • macrocephalic on 30/09/2016 - 15:40
      +1

      I just avoid the self checkout if I can.

    • neil aus on 30/09/2016 - 22:24
      +3

      For me, I avoid Coleworths with a passion and ship at ALDI and farmers markets where possible. I end up spending way less that way.

  • fruit on 29/09/2016 - 15:06
    +6

    Haven't we had this thread before?

    • Baysew on 29/09/2016 - 18:14
      +4

      Yes 22/01/2016 Ok Fess Up.. Who Has Stolen Something Through a Self Serve Checkout?

      Poll Results

      69 Yes I have forgotten to pay for something

      72 Yes I have intentionally stolen something

      613 No I am absolutely honest

      • [Deactivated] on 29/09/2016 - 20:06

        10% of OzBargainers are thieves … pathetic

        • [Deactivated] on 29/09/2016 - 20:12
          +24

          Thieving is the ultimate bargain

        • nikey2k27 on 29/09/2016 - 21:15
          +6

          @taylorn8r: five finger discount are best kind of discount 100% off. joke only

        • itbargainhunter on 30/09/2016 - 12:42

          @taylorn8r:

          Jail food await and it is free so it is a bargain?

        • Pacify on 01/10/2016 - 14:32
          +1

          Its the supermarket's choice to use them, personally I think I've forgotten an item once or twice, but if people are abusing the supermarket's poorly designed system, I don't really see the issue. Its not like the supermarket arent cutting jobs and wages by using these shitty machines in the first place

        • payton on 03/10/2016 - 08:38
          +1

          @Pacify:
          At my local coles I think the number of checkout registers are the same, its just that not all of them are manned in quiet times, makes sense.

          For those saying that self-checkout took away people's jobs etc, I see those Coles staff are now busily restocking shelves, fulfilling online orders for click & collect et all, its not just 'ZOMG they stole our jobs, lets shoplift the hell out of them, yeah people powah!'

  • [Deactivated] on 29/09/2016 - 15:12
    -6

    i call bs just another excuse for them to ramp the prices up on us.

    these checkouts were meant to be faster but i reckon you spend more time there when you place light items in the bag and they dont register so you have to wait for the staff to come and fix it.

    "For the 2014-15 financial year, Coles revenue was reported as $38 billion, while Woolworths reported sales of $61.1 billion.
    Industry estimates are that up to 3 per cent of these profits disappear in theft, potentially costing the big supermarkets as much as $2.97 billion annually."

    i'm not condoning theft of anything at all.

    it's obvious these big department stores are ripping the farmers off bigtime, i consider this a form a theft.

    power to the people

    • Dacs on 29/09/2016 - 15:29
      +2

      these checkouts were meant to be faster

      Who said the checkouts were meant to be faster than having an experienced person do it? It is faster if there are open self check-out terminals compared to a long queue at the (wo)manned checkout. But ultimately it's cost saving for the supermarket which can be passed on to consumers (if there's real competition).

      Coles revenue…Woolworths reported sales…these profits

      Revenues are not profits

      power to the people

      Then join a community cooperative whose ethics are aligned with yours. That's what I've done

      • [Deactivated] on 29/09/2016 - 16:32
        -1

        and this is supposed to mean?

        thanks for the negativity

        mark my comments down i really don't care

      • payton on 03/10/2016 - 08:44

        The self checkouts are a real time saver when you only got 1-5 items and you're there at peak hours. Even the 12 self/c machines are at full capacity then. Sure beats having to line up behind 2 people with full carts or the longer queue at the 12 item or less lane.

    • arcticmonkey on 30/09/2016 - 09:28
      +1

      All those profits while screwing so many people. It's disgraceful.

    • smartazz104 on 30/09/2016 - 14:59

      There's no item light enough that the machine won't register it, sounds like an excuse TBH.

      • [Deactivated] on 30/09/2016 - 16:48
        +1

        really? are you being that petty?

        try hair pins

  • geek001 on 29/09/2016 - 15:27
    +4

    I think it also comes to greed at the supermarket's end too. Each self checkout has at least 6 stations and only one person manning the stations. They should have at least 2 people manning the self checkouts. And supermarkets are not stupid, they must have figured out that the cost of theft is smaller than the profits from having less manned checkouts.

    • sobes on 29/09/2016 - 19:52
      +1

      This post's question seems to be more about ethics than the amount of money Coles has lost in theft. If someone steals, they should take 100% of the responsibility. I don't buy the excuse that the supermarkets carry blame because they don't do enough to stop people's stealing.

    • nikey2k27 on 29/09/2016 - 21:20

      It shop it area they store that Theft problem and put more staff on i know supermarket was have problem. My mate (black) was told his job customer service he job was walk around behind other black kids check do not seal and ask them nicely to leave if known to the store.

    • Pacify on 01/10/2016 - 14:34

      Not only smaller, but much, much smaller. Automated checkouts save a LOT of wages, and also cost a lot of jobs too

  • [Deactivated] on 29/09/2016 - 15:30
    +2

    Can not cheat because their is always someone there to watch over the shoulders, would feel very embarrassing if get caught weighting potatoes instead of lamb

  • Dacs on 29/09/2016 - 15:31
    +42

    It never occurred to me to not be honest. That's just shoplifting

    • Diji1 on 29/09/2016 - 15:35

      Larceny aka shoplifting.

    • shanakatak on 29/09/2016 - 22:09
      +15

      Why the downvotes? they said they could care less, implying that they do care.

  • bluedufflecoat on 29/09/2016 - 15:35
    +8

    Just for the record, I'm not negging any posts. Just wanted some healthy discussion. Thanks for contributing your thoughts.

  • Findo on 29/09/2016 - 16:15
    +27

    Let's see if I get put into the penalty box again. Thieves are the scum of the earth.

    • joshykins on 30/09/2016 - 16:23

      rich thieves are, maybe.

      • Findo on 30/09/2016 - 18:47
        +1

        Poor thieves are still scum.

      • Findo on 30/09/2016 - 18:48
        -2

        On that note, I would rather associate with white collar criminals than your average lowlife scumbag petty criminal

      • [Deactivated] on 05/10/2016 - 07:51
        +1

        How is being rich anything to with it? It's stealing whoever you are.

    • frewer on 04/10/2016 - 12:25

      Not sure you are trolling or not, but I just used up all my negative votes

      • Findo on 04/10/2016 - 13:35

        Good on you, well done. I'm not trolling btw, I meant exactly what I wrote.

        • frewer on 04/10/2016 - 15:15
          -2

          This is the kind of logic I dont understand.

          A hates B because hates C, therefore A and B are haters
          A and B are thieves but C like B more because B has flashy suit, hmmm ok

        • Findo on 04/10/2016 - 17:02

          @frewer: I assume I am C in this example. C hates A and B, but C likes B a little more because C is less likely to be mugged for low sums of money.

  • [Deactivated] on 29/09/2016 - 16:17
    +2

    I remember when I was younger and my mates worked in the deli and I'd walk out of the store with 5 or 6 different packs of "devon".

    I know you're on camera all the time so I've never done anything that you couldn't pass off as an honest mistake, like buying portabello mushrooms and putting them through as plain mushrooms, or picking the cheaper kind of cabbage or something.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join