Anyone else think Superdrug are having a laugh at our expense?

jenniewb

DCFC79 wrote: »

!!!!!!, frugalstephen started a thread to moan about having to pay for a plastic carrier bag, you dont have to use if you would get charged for it, just carry the things home, whats the proiblem, its easy to do or use a bag brought from home, its common place for shops to charge for bags, aldi and lidl do it an superdrug now,

!!!!!! yourself! have you even read any of the above thread?:rolleyes:

We have so far concluded that shops charge too much and make money from charging- even if it goes to charity, charges are far and above the cost.

One person has mentioned the difficulty in carrying bags if things are impulse buys- eg books, when shops encourage you to buy stupid amounts of things/bulk buying in order to save money, and if this is on impulse, how on Earth do you carry back 5,10 or etc of something if you have no bag? if they encourage impulse buying,-when you were not intending to buy anything, its right they should supply a bag to help you carry stuff in!

I suggested that if the problem was environmental rather then profit based, shops themselves should clean up their act and stop using the volume of plastic and etc to package things just to get it into the shops, and then look at repackaging what they sell to make it easier to carry home.

There are more concerns, no one in fact requested you were forced to read the thread, so maybe cut the bad language (re: !!!!!!) and if you do have a point to make about the threads length, you could try reading it first.

Fragments_Of_Sanity

God this takes me back to a bad place! I got so bored of people getting uppity/rude about carrier bag charges that I actually dreaded the point in a transaction where someone might need one. It would make me laugh when people would completely overreact, be rude and aggressive and then attempt to justify their behaviour by saying "it's the principle"!!!

Whatever you think of the policy and its merits, I think it's utterly ridiculous and moronic to direct your annoyance at the cashier, who has no control over it as a policy. Making plans to annoy or hassle shop assistants is just asinine, twisted behaviour, you're making them suffer because of something that's not their fault or decision. They'll have probably dealt with a series of people being stroppy about it, and it can become really depressing to have to take.

Personally, I think the policy is a good thing, because it's really made me think about usage, and I'll often stop a cashier now from bagging something if I have other bags with me, or could carry the item, regardless of whether I would have to pay for the bag. It's all very well saying one bag won't make a difference, but it will if enough people start making those changes. Using paper bags is only environmentally friendly to an extent, they still have to be made (recycled paper obv less damaging than from new) wheras using bags which already exist isn't expending any waste/energy.

jenniewb

Fragments_Of_Sanity wrote: »

God this takes me back to a bad place! I got so bored of people getting uppity/rude about carrier bag charges that I actually dreaded the point in a transaction where someone might need one. It would make me laugh when people would completely overreact, be rude and aggressive and then attempt to justify their behaviour by saying "it's the principle"!!!

Whatever you think of the policy and its merits, I think it's utterly ridiculous and moronic to direct your annoyance at the cashier, who has no control over it as a policy. Making plans to annoy or hassle shop assistants is just asinine, twisted behaviour, you're making them suffer because of something that's not theif fault or decision. They'll have probably dealt with a series of people being stroppy about it, and it can become really depressing to have to take.

Personally, I think the policy is a good thing, because it's really made me think about usage, and I'll often stop a cashier now from bagging something if I have other bags with me, or could carry the item, regardless or not I would have to pay for the bag. It's all very well saying one bag won't make a difference, but it will if enough people start making those changes. Using paper bags is only environmentally friendly to an extent, they still have to be made (recycled paper obv less damaging than from new) wheras using bags which already exist isn't expending any waste/energy.

I agree with you- its not the cashiers fault (having been one myself, and being concerned about the environmental cost of carrier bags, I am experienced in the carrier bag issue!) but the buck does not stop with the customer: the cost to the environment by the manufacturer and shop itself is actually quite high, and the sheer volume that I have seen that just simply gets discarded or lays unused or is not needed is scarily high. Shops and manufacturers need to reduce what they use too if they expect shoppers to do the same.

DCFC79

jenniewb wrote: »

!!!!!! yourself! have you even read any of the above thread?:rolleyes:

We have so far concluded that shops charge too much and make money from charging- even if it goes to charity, charges are far and above the cost.

One person has mentioned the difficulty in carrying bags if things are impulse buys- eg books, when shops encourage you to buy stupid amounts of things/bulk buying in order to save money, and if this is on impulse, how on Earth do you carry back 5,10 or etc of something if you have no bag? if they encourage impulse buying,-when you were not intending to buy anything, its right they should supply a bag to help you carry stuff in!

I suggested that if the problem was environmental rather then profit based, shops themselves should clean up their act and stop using the volume of plastic and etc to package things just to get it into the shops, and then look at repackaging what they sell to make it easier to carry home.

There are more concerns, no one in fact requested you were forced to read the thread, so maybe cut the bad language (re: !!!!!!) and if you do have a point to make about the threads length, you could try reading it first.

looks like i upset someone, the carrier bag charge will be more common place, i dont see a problem with it, yes i understand that if you dont have a bag and you have bulk items but dont want to buy a bag then you decide if you can carry it or dont bother, i do it some times, i dont have a bag on me so i dont buy things, i didnt moan about the length all at

scrummy-mummy

I get annoyed that stores still assume you want a plastic bag, i am a mum with a buggy who always has fabric bags in my basket, the amount of times i have to hand them back and explain myself is ridiculous. Perhaps if more stores simply asked people if they wanted bags, we would all use less??

jenniewb

DCFC79 wrote: »

looks like i upset someone, the carrier bag charge will be more common place, i dont see a problem with it, yes i understand that if you dont have a bag and you have bulk items but dont want to buy a bag then you decide if you can carry it or dont bother, i do it some times, i dont have a bag on me so i dont buy things, i didnt moan about the length all at

The thing I was upset about was your moaning about the thread- you seemed not to have even read the thread- it was not the bag issue! I was annoyed as no one forced you to read the thread, nor comment on the fact that we were discussing something. The bag issue was secondary to that.

Seriously, was there any real need for you to come and swear and make assumptions on it?

FatAndy

roro<3 wrote: »

I work in Superdrug and I have to say that I hate having to charge people for bags. It's such a hassle, I feel like it's harder to give good cutomer service.
The number of customers that act like it's my personal fault that we are charging for carrier bags, and so many people are outright petty rude. It's amazing the difference in reactions; some people say "a penny/3p? that's nothing!", some people do begrudge paying for a bag, which I can understand, and they acknowledge that it's not my fault, but others look at me in outrage as if I'm robbing them, and whisper how ridiculous it is under their breath. Some of my co-workers have been sworn at.
May I also state at this time that the money for the bags goes to Teenage Cancer Trust.

Can we therefore assume that the bags the Superdrug provide will be changed to reflect this? As someone said earlier the carrier bags provided by high street retailers are almost always festooned with advertising and logos so customers end up acting as unpaid advertising hoardings if they accept one. I think most customers would strongly object to having to pay for the priviledge of becoming a walking advert.

On the otherhand if Superdrug could produce carrier bags promoting the Teenage Cancer Trust, and with no mention of Superdrug whatsoever, then I suspect that their customers might actually believe that charging for bags isn't a money generating scam and might be happier to pay a couple of extra pence. It's no wonder some Superdrug a bit of grief if they've been told the money from sales of bags goes but their customers clearly haven't.

Likewise I'd be more impressed with Marks and Spencer if they gave out bags without any M&S logos and replaced them with a message saying 'PLEASE REUSE YOUR BAGS'. Prehaps then I might actually start to believe their intentions are genuine.

biscit

DCFC79 wrote: »

looks like i upset someone, the carrier bag charge will be more common place, i dont see a problem with it, yes i understand that if you dont have a bag and you have bulk items but dont want to buy a bag then you decide if you can carry it or dont bother, i do it some times, i dont have a bag on me so i dont buy things, i didnt moan about the length all at

When we go into town, not just to the supermarket, we put one or two bags for life in our pockets. My wife has a nylon one that packs up into a tiny cover that stays in her handbag.

This isn't an unreasonably hard or fussy thing to do. It's sensible and responsible. And I do like it that behaving responsibly puts me at an advatange.

True it isn't practical to avoid the charge when you're talking about something like a coat that is too large for a bag for life, but it's not exactly a terrible situation to be charged in those circumstances.

biscit

lynzpower wrote: »

but it obviouslty is helping the environment. I never buy plastic bags unless I y absolutely have to- why, because i carry around some bags for life/jute bags and always have one.

It helps the environment a small amount. But using your own bags requires only a tiny amount of thought and effort.

We have got too used to our comforts and a world where nothing takes any effort that the thought that goes in to putting a bag in your pocket when you get out of the car and go round town is seen as an unreasonably high amount of fuss and effort.

Fire_Fox

Exactly. You are not paying for the privilege of advertising the company, you are donating to charity for the privilege of (a) helping to pollute the environment and (b) being too lazy to carry a bag at all times.

People shouldn't assume that Superdrug or TK Maxx are wasting enormous amounts of packing materials in stocking up their stores. Asda and M&S have committed to zero waste going to landfill within the next few years! Asda Bootle is the flagship store of this concept.