With the argument stating that it is important for stores to have a good "image" hiring good looking people will attract more costumers. I have to say that I disagree with this argument. In my opinion I do not think it matters to the costumer if the person helping them out is good looking or not. As long as there is great costumers services for all people of all kinds then who your cashier should not matter. I can understand where stores are coming, hiring people who look as though they would belong in magazine, does make a the store look more put together. However that is not what matters. For example, if a store has average looking employers with great costumer service and nice clothes at an affordable price compared to a store selling similar clothing terrible costumer service and clothes that are to pricey, the store that is affordable with great customer service will end up getting work customers on the fact that they covered what is truly important when you walk into a store.
Another problem is the fact that the store is actually hurting there changes of making any money. Once customers find out hte truth about the stores discrimination problem, the store will end up losing money due to the fact that no one will want to shop at a store that will only hire what they consider to be "beautiful" people. Besides who decides what a beautiful person is. If they decide to hire people who look as though they belong with the people in the magazine, is that beauty? Each store represents a different look for example are you considered beautiful at Victoria Secret with curves or are you considered beautiful walking into Abercombie& Fitch as bone skinny? If so or if not with everything being such the opposite of one other does beauty even really exist? With this being said it is wrong for a store to discriminate on their customer or their employers.
No comments:
Post a Comment