Worth posting: a word from an (Anonymous) LCB clerk

This comment and my response from the post just below was worth posting here on its own to get more attention. I've edited my response a little just to polish it. This...is directed at the PLCB employees. It's about how to keep your jobs, and take pride in them.

Anonymous said...
Another word to my fellow LCB employees:
You cannot, and should not, expect anyone to choose sides on the privatization debate based on our losing our jobs. On the positive side, the thing we CAN do is educate ourselves about the products we sell. Product knowledge is a skill that will serve both to break the stereotype of the potable-ignorant LCB clerk AND also to give us a strong leg-up if we end up having to apply for jobs in the private sector.


My response...
Bullseye. The service at the State Stores isn't being talked about in the high-level debate in Harrisburg, for the human and political reason that no legislator wants to be quoted criticizing people's performance, but it is definitely discussed among the people who actually have to use the system.

I've said all along that the service I've received at the register has almost always been satisfactory, and often quite friendly. But the service out on the floor is distinctly sub-par, with a very few notable exceptions. I've been given to understand that there's no real program in place to increase product knowledge, and it shows.

Your union reps may tell you what a horrible work environment Total Wine is, but fail to point out that while their employees complain about their treatment by management, they almost never fail to admit that the training they receive in wine and spirits is exemplary...and they often use it to go elsewhere.

If you get motivated about what you're selling, and get excited about helping the people who need help...that's the very best thing you can do to stop privatization. Much better than the chanting and shouting that the UFCW encourages, much better than the flimsy "control" statistics, much better than allying yourself with anti-alcohol groups (because that just emphasizes the innate and bizarre dichotomy of the whole control/sell dual nature of the agency).

If you want a "modernization" program that could actually save your jobs, look to Sweden's Systembolaget, their state monopoly wine and spirits retailer. I've heard nothing but praise for it from producers (I was on a press trip with the Swedish brand manager for Pernod Ricard, and she never stopped praising it) and from consumers; a fraternity brother of mine now lives in Stockholm -- he's very picky about wine -- and he raves about the service and selection at Systembolaget...and as a former Pennsylvanian pities me for the State Stores.

Real modernization would include linking product knowledge and sales performance to advancement, would include a wine specialist and a spirits specialist at each premium store. It would give the local store managers much more training, and much more control over what's sold at their stores. It would take the control of shelf facings away from the people in Harrisburg and give it to you, the people who are actually selling, and seeing what your customers buy, and what they're not finding.

I don't think that's likely to happen, but if it did? It would go a long way to shutting me up on this issue. It would also help if some of your co-workers would stop trying to tell me that private stores in other states aren't as good as the State Stores, because I go there, and that's simply not true. Doesn't help your case. Instead, do what you can to make your service, your store better. Just do what you can, where you are.

I don't go to New Jersey for the prices. I go for the selection, somewhat, especially on spirits, because the State Store is, for whatever reason, scared of whisky. But the main reason I avoid the State Stores is the service. I get much better, much more helpful service at the private stores in New Jersey, New York, Maryland, and Delaware. Fact.

And let me add: I've already talked about how to change the State Stores and save them here. Add this stuff, and you've got a good formula for it. But...I still don't think it's going to happen. Because no one in the upper bureaucracy of the PLCB cares -- because their jobs aren't directly at risk -- and Wendell W. Young IV doesn't care, because up until now, shouting and chanting and yellow shirts and campaign donations have been all he's needed to just keep things the way they are. You're being encouraged to keep the status quo, but the status quo is what 60% of Pennsylvanians don't want (and remember: a large chunk of the 40% or so that says they're in favor of keeping the State Stores don't drink, and would really rather just have Prohibition). You can do better. You can do better on your own. Think about it.

Just Imagine...

If you had a clean slate, could lay things down the way you think would be best for selling alcohol beverages in Pennsylvania...how would you do it? I heard that question asked recently at a small discussion of the prospects of PLCB privatization, and it gave me pause.

Some things were easy. Would I keep the state-owned stores? Certainly not. Would I ever have the State as the sole wholesaler, with a committee in Harrisburg deciding what would and wouldn't be sold in the state? Don't be ridiculous. Would I keep the police-enforced monopoly, making it illegal for Pennsylvanians to buy a bottle of wine across the river in New Jersey? Not on your life. Would any of us keep the nonsensical case law, or its equally ridiculous corollary, the two sixpack limit at bars? Hell no, done away with, along with "registration"!

But... Would I want anyone who wanted to be able to sell beer, wine, or spirits, by the bottle or by the drink, with no limit other than a small fee and maybe a criminal background check? Should municipalities (of whatever size) be able to control that through zoning? What about BYOB and corkage fees? Would I impose excise taxes? Wholesaler franchise laws, brewery/winery self-distribution, hell, the whole idea of the state-imposed three-tier system: keep it, modify it, or toss it out the window? Honestly, there are things that cause me some head-scratching. I like the idea of no license limitations and a small fee: I've already said that I think licensing limitations lead directly to nuisance bars. But if a majority of people in a town really want to put a limit on the number of licensed bars/restaurants/booze stores, shouldn't they be allowed to? It's their town! Truly, the Devil is in the details.

However...hard as it was for me to answer the question, the pro-PLCB side found it even harder. There are just too many contradictions in the current system to put it forward as the ideal situation with a straight face. Government control of retail? If it's good, why not government control of beer sales? Why not government control of by-the-drink sales? And believe me, no one wants the government controlling that. Can you imagine PLCB clerks as bartenders? The mind boggles. They certainly couldn't call it "the hospitality industry" anymore...

If you grant control, and manage to come up with a cogent argument for it, how on earth do you then task the very same agency with regulation, taxation, and regulation of booze sales with an eye towards -- literally -- controlling how much people drink? Does anyone really think an agency that's supposed to be keeping us from drinking too much, that was created "for the protection of the public welfare, health, peace and morals of the people of the Commonwealth and to prohibit forever the open saloon," (as the Almighty Liquor Code puts it), is the agency that should also be advertising the idea of buying mom a bottle of vodka for Mother's Day?

I've said I wouldn't want to debate President For Life Wendell W. Young IV about privatization --  the man is just too glib a liar -- but it would almost be worth it to sandbag him with that question: if you could wipe away the Pennsylvania Liquor Code and build a new way of doing alcohol beverage retail from zero...would you create the PLCB and the State Store System, the beer distributors and tavern licensing, and the case law? Love to see a pro-PLCB answer to that one that wouldn't have the audience laughing their asses off.