To think people are quite petty to object to charity shop staff getting "first dibs" when they are BUYING the items?

[SorcererGaheris]

For context, I am a volunteer in a charity shop myself, and if I see something that I want, I will purchase it. The shop doesn't give staff discounts, either; staff pay full price - the last item I bought, a book, cost me £40.

Anyway, I COMPLETELY understand people objecting if volunteers were to just take donated items for themselves, but I've seen some online discussions in which people complain about the staff getting first pick of donations when they are paying for them. I really don't see the problem in this case, and think people who object are rather out of line. Other retail workers surely sometime purchase items from the shops they work in, so I don't see why volunteers should be begrudged that. A volunteer is a customer as much as any other.

I've never been aware of anyone objecting to this, but considering the people give their time for free, I think it's a reasonable perk!

I didn’t say she was fancy 🤣 no it’s large jars of coffee. boxes of chocolates, and no she isn’t back filling anything. She’s a thief isn’t she. She’s just taking what she perceives to be the “good stuff” from the homeless. To me, that’s low but we all have different standards.

I spent two years in the charity retail sector and sadly I had to report 30% of paid shop managers for theft. The volunteers in the main were very humble and always asked if they could buy certain things. Our volunteers were mainly retired nurses as we were a hospice charity. However I did eventually leave after a member of the senior management team stole a clock. It would have made £500. The CEO refused to confirm the person had paid for it or not. They'd removed it from one of my stores but no payment was made or store credit given.
I had no issue with anyone buying anything but quite a few donors did. They wanted to see their things in the window.

@SorcererGaheris

I am certainly not "skimming the cream" when I buy books from the shop I volunteer in, and I'm not doing so to sell on Ebay either. I'm buying the books because I want to read them.
Why are you basing your view on what you do. Do you really think everyone is as ethical as you are?

I also don't see how it qualifies skimming when we are paying for the items - at the exact same price as other people would. Again - volunteers are customers as well, not just the other members of the public who do not work there.
There are plenty on posts on here where people have witnessed staff grabbing things the minute they come in and sometimes just relocating it straight into their cars. Might they go back in and put money in the till? Who knows?

As many others have pointed out, the eBay thing DOES happen whether you are party to it or not. And poor quality stock means vintage hunter won't frequent the shop. So sales overall fall. It's not just about the two or three items the staff purchase first. It's the effect this has on footfall

It's sooo common for managers to have secret ebay accounts and take all the good stuff to sell on. Put me off donating to charity because it feels like it's not going to anyone who needs it.

Where on earth did I say people were taking it for resale? I've never mentioned resale.

People don't only buy for themselves in charity shops - that size 6 or 8 Armani dress might be being bought for a daughter, niece, or friend.

I disagree that people won't buy a kettle etc. if they already have one. If they're into high end electricals, they might well replace their Russell Hobbs kettle with a Dualit Architect, given the chance to do so at a bargain price.

It's true that they might also buy for resale, but that isn't of any materiality to my point, which is that skimming off the best stuff, whatever you do with it afterwards, makes the charity shop less attractive - for customers, it's like being last to the buffet at a wedding and finding only a few curling cheese sandwiches and crisp crumbs left.

I wonder if people underestimate the amount donated to shops. The one I worked in looked like a very sweet high street charity shop. You’d never know that out the back, crammed in amongst the commercial area behind shops was a triple garage just full of bags for rag (emptied monthly but always over flowing) and a shipping container stuffed with items for the shop and to go to other shops. Like, so full that sometimes we would have to bring items in to the shop overnight so we could lock the container properly overnight.

I wonder if people underestimate the amount donated to shops. The one I worked in looked like a very sweet high street charity shop.

Totally. Those of us who volunteer are well aware that if we are taking all the "good stuff" then we would be staggering home under the weight of several of those blue Ikea bags each shift.

There is a wider conversation about the quality of donations and it is true that this is on the slide, especially in clothing. Vinted is so easy Ebay has cancelled its fees for selling. So if you are short of cash or just want to make some money back, it's very easy to sell your unwanted clothes. But a lot of people just can't be bothered with selling, don't want the hassle. We still get good quality clothing but the percentage of clothing which is only fit for rags has increased definitely. Quality of other categories such as books, bric a brac, toys/games has not changed.

For all those who raise concerns about volunteers buying so much of the good stuff so that there's not as much out on the shelves for other customers, I'd like to ask this:

Do you ever consider that at least SOME of the time, the items that the volunteers buy are things that a lot of other people would not be interested in and might not sell otherwise? In which case the shop is gaining a sale that otherwise would not have happened.

I can pretty safeky say that I'm sure that's been the case with some of my own purchases. I've bought books on very niche fields that th vast majority of our other customers would have no interest in having.

If that's the case, then you'd be safe giving it a week on the shelves before buying it.

Patriciathestripper1 , might be a Harry potter first edition with the mistake in the shopping list in it Worth thousands.

Sure, but we're not obliged to do that, so I don't. If I've decided to buy something, I buy it straight away.

I think the best option would be for volunteers to have a set number of times they can have their first pick. Or to be able to buy what they want with their 50 discounts after the item was on a shop floor on display for a week and no one bought it.

Indeed. Why the need to purchase so urgently?

Going round in circles, but as I said, it's your choice - up to you if you want to make your shop less attractive and risk it closing in the long term,

up to you if you want to make your shop less attractive and risk it closing in the long term,

And also going round in circles with this idea thar volunteers are staggering home under the weight of ALL the good stuff, leaving just the tat.

Funny that figures from the charity retail association show that sales are increasing year on year - how is that happening when there is nothing left worth buying?

I don't thibk that buying niche books on occultism is going to make the shop less attractive overall. The majority of our customers are not witches or occultists.

So is she also to tell the next customer who wants to buy a nice thing, that they shouldn't buy it because it makes the shop look less nice?

This thread is nuts.

And other sources say that profits are falling:

https://www.civilsociety.co.uk/news/charity-shops-see-drop-in-profits-as-retail-costs-continue-to-increase.html

You can't base your judgement on bald sales figures during a period of rampant inflation.

‘Best’ stuff??? Have you seen what people donate to charity shops? Unless you’re in West London or similar it’s not actually worth very much…

No, because the customer has found a bargain - the attractive item has served its purpose - that customer will be back because that's the shop where she found the Harry Potter with the misprint or whatever.

I'm not necessarily going to base my view on my own practice alone, but certainly my way of doing things will inform and influence my perspective.

You discuss staff who smuggle items away for themselves and who perhaps do not pay for them. While I'm sure that that does unfortunately happen sometimes, the subject of this thread is specifically about charity shop staff who officially and properly buy items, where it is rung through the till the same way as all other customer purchases are done.

Of course people are going to object to staff actually stealing the stock, but that's not what this thread is about. So thievery is not really relevant to this discussion.

Again, missing the point of donating - if you are taking it to a charity shop and not a women’s refuge (for example) your goods aren’t going to “anyone who needs it.”

They are going to be stock on a shop floor, sold to anyone with money. And most probably not to someone who “needs” it, but to someone who likes a bargain hunt.

Customers in charity shops aren’t necessarily skint, they are just people who like charity shops. My mate could buy and sell me without a blink and she loves charity shopping. My mum was a bargain fiend.

So, no need to buy it before it goes on the shelves if no one else is going to want it.

Round and round we go!

I’ve done various voluntary work over the last 40 years, and one thing I’ve always avoided is charity shop work. I couldn’t do it; all the lifting and lugging, the sorting through dumped toot (including stuff that’s been left on the doorstep in all weathers), being on my feet for hour upon hour, it would all be too much for me. I take my hat off to people working in voluntarily in charity shops, and certainly don’t begrudge them making fair purchases.

I’m going to hazard a guess that most of the people up in arms, or shaking their heads in disapproval would no more work in a charity shop than sprout wings and fly. And they don’t have to, of course.

Also find it interesting that some are recounting one negative experience in a charity shop and happily boycotting all charity shops because they must all be the same. I don’t understand it. Obviously there will be workers in any field who are on the take/chancers/CFs. But you don’t write off a whole sector - one that aims to do good - because of one bad incident.

I don’t think there’s a perfect system, but so long as the charity and the buyer are happy with the sale, that seems fair enough to me.