Exposed security tag injured my baby

Heyman_2

Flyboy152 wrote: »

The best bet is to contact trading standards. They are the department who would have jurisdiction over incidents like these.

Thanks for the advice Flyboy and it is nice to hear from someone who shares my POV.

I was thinking about contacting TS. I'm really not bothered about the vouchers. It's more the thought of that pin fully impaling my little baby that continues to bother me, like if we picked baby up with both hands round baby's waist or put baby down and it went into baby's back.

It didn't happen and I am thankful. But this "sorry about that, we'll take our chances on it happening again, maybe more serious next time" response I'm getting isn't sitting well with me. That's why I'm a bit loathe to accept vouchers and move on.

aliasojo

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Well, I think that any retailer who markets their products for use by children, have a far greater degree of responsibility, don't you think so as well? We might as well say that the onus is on the parents' to check that the eyes of teddy bears are firmly secured, or that their child's nightlight isn't going to burst into flames. However, there are safer ways to ensure that stock isn't stolen.

The point is that the tag itself wasn't the problem. It was the shop employee who was the problem.

How do you ensure an infallible human resource?

Flyboy152

Techhead wrote: »

Its best to get the child to try them on, then wash them before wearing.

Clothes are often treated with anti-fungal and anti-bacterial treatments after manufacture and it's best to wash these off as young children can have sensitive skin. You also don't know what has happened to the clothes on the shop floor.

If the clothes are natural fibres then there is the likelihood of some dye transfer if the clothes aren't washed.

Personally, we laundered all our baby clothes before he wore them.

But trying them on is wearing them.

Heyman_2

aliasojo wrote: »

The point is that the tag itself wasn't the problem. It was the shop employee who was the problem.

How do you ensure an infallible human resource?

The tag itself not being the problem is your presupposition - there wouldn't be the need for an infallible human resource if they deployed safer tags in the first place.

Flyboy152

aliasojo wrote: »

The point is that the tag itself wasn't the problem. It was the shop employee who was the problem.

How do you ensure an infallible human resource?

You reduce the risk of the affects of this infallibility by using safer equipment. This is the reason for guards on saws in workshops.

aliasojo

Heyman wrote: »

The tag itself not being the problem is your presupposition - there wouldn't be the need for an infallible human resource if they deployed safer tags in the first place.

I do see your point. (And Flyboy's btw. )

I just feel this is not a clear cut issue and responsibility for the incident isn't able to be laid solely on the tag itself.

There are other types of security tags available I believe, but these are much more costly to use which in turn pushes up the price of the item. I can see why they are not used for lower end price product and tend to be used more for designer tag items.

When it comes down to it, we can all sit and discuss this until we're blue in the face but I doubt a general agreement will be reached simply because of our differing viewpoints.

I suppose you really just have to make a decision as to what to do, on your own gut feelings.

Heyman_2

aliasojo wrote: »

When it comes down to it, we can all sit and discuss this until we're blue in the face but I doubt a general agreement will be reached simply because of our differing viewpoints.

You are right, but I wasn't looking for consensus - more for differing opinions to give me a bit of food for thought, or perhaps to make me feel better about it/change my mind.

I liked the surety of your earlier post. In an ideal world they would look at and change the way they protect their products, but I tend to agree with you that it's probably unrealistic for me to expect this to happen off the back of this one incident. I guess that's how campaigns get started up though, eh?

aliasojo wrote: »

I suppose you really just have to make a decision as to what to do, on your own gut feelings.

Yeah. Think I know what I'm going to do.

catfish50

OP -- have you seen this site?

[Baby Products Association -- edited to remove link in case dodgy]

It's a trade organization. Maybe if you email them about the issue, they might be interested in taking it up. Don't get me wrong, since it's a trade body they can be expected to look after the interests of their members, but after all it's not in anyone's interests for babies to be at risk of injury.

Just a thought.

Flyboy152

aliasojo wrote: »

I do see your point. (And Flyboy's btw. )

I just feel this is not a clear cut issue and responsibility for the incident isn't able to be laid solely on the tag itself.

The tag can't be responsible, seeing as it is an inanimate object. The responsibility lies with the retailer. The assistant, who did not check the tag had been removed, represents the retailer and ultimately it is their responsibility.

There are other types of security tags available I believe, but these are much more costly to use which in turn pushes up the price of the item. I can see why they are not used for lower end price product and tend to be used more for designer tag items.

When it comes down to it, we can all sit and discuss this until we're blue in the face but I doubt a general agreement will be reached simply because of our differing viewpoints.

I suppose you really just have to make a decision as to what to do, on your own gut feelings.

But the retailer makes the decision that they put them and others at risk, if child is injured because of their penny pinching. Many injuries and deaths have been caused by the miserly ways of employers, I don't see retailers being any less responsible. Cost is no excuse to absolve ones responsibility to safety.

aliasojo

Heyman wrote: »

I guess that's how campaigns get started up though, eh?

Actually, that's very true. And it tends to be Mums who start them, we're a tenacious bunch if nothing else.

Maybe you could take the pin into the store and jab the employee with it just to illustrate your issue?

I'm a sensible down to earth sort most of the time but I might be tempted to 'illustrate' things if my kids got hurt.