Brode Street
Lifton, N.Y.

Date of Account:   March 04, 2008

Account

This is the introduction to an important, though belated account, concerning an event that occurred at Christmas, 2006.

Right around Christmas day, my mother purchased a real Christmas tree from this local garden center. She brought the tree home and upon my examination I read a product tag attached to it, apparently placed there by its grower. The tag got me wondering whether the tree had any chemicals applied to it, whether pesticides, herbicides, or anything else.

I hit the 'Net to see if Plach's had a website, thinking I would email my question. Luckily they did, and I composed and sent my mail containing my query.

However, Plach's did not respond. Their non-responsiveness surprised me, as I indicated in my email that I had become somewhat reluctant to set the tree up until I was apprised that it was free of chemicals. Perhaps their non-responsiveness was due to a heavy business load given the fact of the holiday. However, they didn't respond afterward, either. Then, in a further attempt to give them the benefit of the doubt, one might speculate that since Christmas day had passed, they assumed that the answer to the query was no longer relevant. However--I'm not willing to go that far in forgiving these people. They received a health-related query from a customer; they should have answered it. If they genuinely could not respond right at Christmas, they should have done so afterward.

Analysis

This account illustrates a ubiquitous pattern under capitalism: companies are all-too-willing to put on a smiling face to make the sale, but once the sale is made they really don't want to be bothered with, well, anything. Caveat emptor.

What of the possible loss of business and revenue that would presumably occur when customers are ignored? Unless many customers voice the same concern; unless a given company or industry finds many customers submitting a given query, they will absorb the loss of business of a single customer, rather than extend themselves in a way they find inconvenient, vexing, or revealing of a flaw or defect in product or service that could impede sales or damage their reputation. This pattern seems especially true in regard to small businesses, given that the ego and emotion of owners, rather than strict business policy, seems to play such a large role in the way these entities operate, at least relative to larger or more strict corporate structures.

Even in regard to small business, however, what of the common business notion that a single dissatisfied customer always broadcasts their disgruntlement to other people, resulting in small, potentially significant clusters of alienated customers?

Capitalism is heralded as a system where all actors are rational, and generally do what is in their best interest. But that is simply not true. The system of capitalism is irrational on many fronts for the simple reason that it involves human beings, and human beings are often irrational, especially in a society predicated on an overarching economic system that does not require complete rationality of all its citizens. If it did, training in personal skills such as critical thinking would be far more greatly encouraged and available. Thus, if businesses were completely rational they would not seek to alienate even a single customer. That is, if business were completely moral rational. In fact, if a business ignores a query from a customer because it calculates that answering such a query could damage product sales or company reputation, that company actually is exercising rationality--economic rationality.

Of course, this gets to the heart of the matter, doesn't it? Project For a Cooperative Society argues that the precedence of economics over morality is a principal cause for the many problems in this world.

Having said all this, it's concomitantly true that companies will often respond to queries or problems that are easily solved. But any that are difficult or controversial to solve, or by their nature, are anathema to companies and are routinely ignored. That is likely what occurred here. What of the disrespect shown a customer whose inquiry is ignored? What of the concern and anxiety on the part of that customer when their concern goes unaddressed? And what of the genuine possibility of damage to life or limb that motivates some inquiries in the first place, as mine,here?

In sum, the answer from the corporate ruling class in regard to all these questions is the same response it gives us so much of the time, no matter what our question or area of concern:

"Tough luck."