Retail Shrinkage

As you know, organized retail theft has become rife across America. More and more young people walk out of stores with whatever they want, not to be caught, not to be prosecuted. The companies tend to absorb the loss through accounting gimmicks. At worst, insurance pays for it.

Now, the Wall Street Journal editorializes this morning, some companies have resorted to euphemism. They refuse to call what is happening by its name; they erase the evidence of the criminal gangs; and they have rebranded it all as-- shrinkage.

One is reminded of the primitive activity known as head shrinking, and of the unflattering term used to describe mental health professionals. Calling it shrinkage means failing to think clearly about the problem.

In the retail world, the word has become ubiquitous:

Foot Locker executives likewise noted on Wednesday that inventory “shrink” has been increasing. Target CEO Brian Cornell last week said that “shrink” remained “well above the sustainable level where we expect to operate over time,” and that the company was facing “an unacceptable amount of retail theft and organized retail crime.” Home Depot execs last week also flagged “pressure from shrink” on earnings. As did Walmart execs. “Shrink has increased a bit this year. It increased last year,” its CFO noted, adding that “shrink” was “uneven” across the country. “There needs to be action taken to help protect people from crime, including theft,” said CEO Doug McMillon.

Calling it shrinkage feels like denial, denial of the reality of what is going on, denial of the damage that this insurrectionary activity is doing to retail establishments, and to everyone else. Because, as you know, someone has to pay for this, and those who are first in line are consumers.

The Journal argues:

Shrink isn’t PC jargon used only by these companies. It’s an industry term that wraps in other losses such as value lost or damaged in transit. But plain language about theft, rather than the euphemism, would help the public better understand how bad criminal theft is and maybe build political support for policies that would do something about it.

Calling it shrink obscures the criminality and makes it seem like something other than an insurrection. Since no one seems to be getting hurt, using a bland term like shrinkage dulls everyone’s moral sense, and excuses local officials from cracking down on it.

For now, as you know, certain officials, like Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, have declared it all to be unacceptable. She has rallied a task force to study the problem.

This sounds good, but talk is cheap. The proof lies in whether or not it stops. As of now, optimism is unwarranted.

It’s common in New York, Chicago and Philadelphia where so-called victimless crimes are rarely enforced. Retailers in some cities now lock up items as basic as toothpaste and shampoo to prevent criminals from clearing out shelves.

Progressives ignore theft out of hostility to corporations. But mom-and-pop stores are pillaged too, and the costs of theft are borne by consumers and workers. Modern corporate culture shrinks from saying anything that might offend anyone, apparently including criminals and organized theft rings. Time for CEOs and CFOs to speak plainly.

But, is organized retail theft a victimless crime? Certain public prosecutors do not want to prosecute certain crimes, because they want to say that the crime rate is going down. And, as the Journal points out, we certainly do not want to offend the delicate sensibilities of our criminal underclass.

In the meantime, in New York City, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani got crime under control by enacting a broken windows policy. He decided that failing to prosecute fare jumpers on the subway was creating an environment of disrespect for the law, and was contributing to a crime wave.

It turns out that he was right. It turns out that the current policy, which supposedly ignores victimless crimes, leads to crimes that hurt victims.