Search This Blog

Wednesday, 28 December 2016

Where there is fire there's smoke.

Moral outrage!

You have got to love it.

All it takes is one jerk in a crowd that possesses a knee and the torches are lit and the mob takes form.

The latest spark that has become a hardy flame surrounds the alleged incident of a homeless person having his belongings soaked by a security guard employed by Debenhams.

Facts are a bit bare at the moment of writing, but if this assault, - as that is what it is - happened then I would suspect that the store would instigate an investigation and then act on their findings.

Anything less would be a pr disaster for them.

And yet for so many that is not enough.

A boycott is required.
Not just the threat of one, but a call to withdraw custom from now. RIGHT NOW!

Obviously the abuse of a homeless person is a serious allegation, and if true then I have literally no shred of sympathy for the abuser.

If they lose their job then that is appropriate.

If there were others that were aware of this within the stores hierarchy, and they condoned this behaviour, then I don’t have anything to say to defend them.

They can all reap what they have sown.

There are some things to consider though.

The first being did it happen?

Another being that as it is alleged to have happened on Boxing Day then the time frame of a complaint to a resolution - at this busy time of year - has to be factored in.
From the tone of some it would appear that they would have been happier if this had been addressed on Christmas day, even though it was alleged to have happened on Boxing Day.

It also has to be asked was there an official complaint lodged, and is it true that no one has acted on it.

For all we know Debenhams already have the wheels in motion on an investigation and the threats of a boycott are unnecessary.
When news such as this catches the public eye then it is right and proper that there is a reaction.

The first of those being that the validity of the allegation is confirmed.

Then a letter of complaint should be sent.

Once that has been done then it is only right that the company has time to respond.

If they do address the complaint in a satisfactory manner than we have our internal social warriors stand down.

If they do accept that the incident happened, and do nothing, then a boycott is an appropriate response from the public.

Anytime prior to that then all it is doing is endangering the profitability of the company with that then impacting on the job security of their employees.

Think about that for a second.

The woman on the till who knows nothing about what has happened is at your mercy.
The man who is loading the van in the early hours of the morning and works for a company subcontracted by the store is at your mercy.

Does the power feel good?

If you have signed any petition calling for a boycott now, rather than later when more information is in the public domain then you are a willing participant of the mob.

I think that I will now go and stand outside a store with a placard complaining about an incident that will allegedly happen tomorrow, and they better have it all sorted out by yesterday.

'Have patience with all things, but, first of all with yourself.
Never be in a hurry: do everything quietly and in a calm spirit. Do not lose your inner peace for anything whatsoever, even if your whole world seems upset.
Nothing is so strong as gentleness, nothing so gentle as real strength.

1 comment: