"B&H forced Hispanic workers to use separate bathroom: feds"

<p>http://nypost.com/2016/02/25/bh-forced-hispanic-workers-to-use-separate-bathroom-feds/</p>

<p>Shocking news:</p>

<ul>

<li>NY Magazine: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/02/bh-hit-with-discrimination-lawsuit.html</li>

<li>Wall Street Journal (need subscription to read the entire article): http://www.wsj.com/articles/lawsuit-accuses-b-h-of-discrimination-1456450749</li>

<li>NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/27/nyregion/bh-electronics-store-sued-for-discrimination-of-hispanic-workers.html</li>

</ul>

<p>Fundamentalists of any religious tradition may do unpleasant things to outsiders.</p>

<p>Not all is necessarily as presented in the NYT, and not all WSF articles are well researched (note the mispelled "Photo"). Cited claims of job conditions are made by union representatives, not employees themselves, and that the union "election" was by card check, not a secret ballot of all employees as required by law. OSHA is meticulous about rooting out unsafe working conditions. Where is their report, if any, cited? The union would have workers paid according to their seniority, not the value their labor produces.</p>

<p>I'll stick with Edward for now. Innocent until proven guilty and all that. Too much he said, she said, they said, for now. </p>

This isn't a union matter, it's a federal Dept of Labor investigation. That's serious. These workers aren't even unionized

(yet).

 

In light of this I'll be returning a lens that arrived yesterday from B&H and looking for another source, and staying away

from B&H until this is cleared up. Henry, if you're reading, please convey to management that you've got at least one very

unhappy customer.

<p>Regardless of the reliability of newspapers, which can be pretty bad, it's clear that the U.S. Department of Labor has filed a lawsuit about some serious labor practices at B&H. The charges may or many not be accurate, and I hope they're not.</p>

<p>I've always liked B&H, it's been my favorite internet store ever since I saw it recommended on photo.net and tried it out. I agree that the right approach is to wait and see. I will wait on large purchases until I see how the charges are resolved.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Not all is necessarily as presented in the NYT, and not all WSF articles are well researched (note the mispelled "Photo").</p>

</blockquote>

<p><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=419409">Edward Ingold</a>, did you even bother to read the articles? They didn't misspell the word "photo," as both the Wall Street Journal and the New York Magazine are pointing out that B&H's official name is "B&H Foto & Electronics Corporation," which is displayed across the bottom of B&H's web pages.</p>

<p>See this article on Bloomberg about B&H: http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapid=23710763<br /> Our friend Henry Posner is listed there as a key executive.</p>

<p>I have been a B&H customer for over two decades, back to the days I used to live in the New York area when I visited their store monthly. They have served a lot of us very well over the years. While I am aware that there have been a few law suits against B&H on discrimination, this new development is indeed serious. I am sure that all the negative publicity and the threat of losing some $46M of government contracts and perhaps others will get their attention.</p>

<p>I can probably discount some of those New York tabloids, but the New York Times and Wall Street Journal are serious publications on the left and right sides. </p>

<p>It is premature to draw any conclusion, but I would pay attention to any development in this case. Henry Posner has been very helpful to us for years; I am sure that this is a difficult time for him as well. It is appropriate for him not to comment on an on-going investigation and law suit.</p><div></div>

<p>I'm not saying it isn't serious, but it has the earmarks of election year politics. So far we just hear from one side, an attorney representing the union seeking to organize the workers. B&H is being sued by the Dept. of Labor based on these allegations. The sad fact is you can't win against the government, at least without spending far more in legal fees than the cost of settlement. The threat of losing government contracts is very real, because the government can abrogate contracts, with near impunity, on executive order (it would take a 2/3rds majority of Congress to override). All stick and no carrot.</p>

<p> </p>

Edward, have you read the articles? There are two different issues. One is that the workers want to unionize because of

bad working conditions. That's probably going to succeed, and there will be some negotiations and they'll get some

improvements. The worker who was injured on the job, sidelined for a long period, got no help from the company and is

going broke shows why a union is necessary in any workplace like a distribution center that is easily ignored by

customers. The other issue is racial discrimination in the workplace, which of the subject of the Labor Dept. There is

nothing in the articles to indicate that a union is involved in that.

<blockquote>

<p>"it has the earmarks of election year politics."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>These enforcement activities occur all the time. There's no evidence, whatsoever, of any electoral motivations.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The sad fact is you can't win against the government, at least without spending far more in legal fees than the cost of settlement.</p>

<p> </p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is inaccurate. The opposite has occurred often.<br /><br />Let's stop making stuff up.</p>

<p>There does appear to be an unfortunate pattern in how B&H treats its employees. Plenty of other places to buy if this concerns you.</p>

Where there's smoke...

<p><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=937861">John H.</a>, I think a more appropriate title for this thread is about the federal government Labor Department's law suit against B&H concerning discrimination against Hispanic workers. As the New York Times points out, B&H has "a history of labor disputes." But then, B&H is hardly alone. For example, there are plenty of reports about poor factory conditions that manufacture products for various well known US brands.</p>

<p>As I wrote earlier, B&H has served a lot of us exceptionally well for 2, 3 decades. I am sure every company has areas to improve, and hopefully threads such as this one can encourage B&H to do so, especially when it is serious enough for the federal government to file a law suit.</p>

<p>Again, rather than drawing more innuendos and per-mature conclusions, let's keep an eye on how this case evolves. If it reaches a point that you are unsatisfied about B&H, you can certainly take your business elsewhere. There is plenty of competition and alternatives out there, and every business is well aware of it.</p>

<p>"I'll stick with Edward for now. Innocent until proven guilty and all that. Too much he said, she said, they said, for now".</p>

<p>I would agree however there is no smoke without fire.</p>

<p>What's wrong with unions? some folk from their post seems to think they are a visitation of evil on society. The reality is business protects their profits and try to maximize them in every conceivable way. The workers also have a right to maximize their wages in every conceivable way.....slavery has been abolished...</p>

<p>It takes two wings to fly.</p>

 

<p>I thought these guys were sooooo religious ?</p>

<p>I don't know anything about the case, but I do know this:</p>

<p>There is a huge difference between having a separate bathroom for Hispanics and having a separate bathroom for warehouse floor workers who all happen to be Hispanic. One is deliberate discrimination. The other is not. Casual observation doesn't always reveal which is the case. I can't imagine any group of people being so arrogant as to believe they could get away with blatant discrimination. If that proves to be the case, there will likely be enough shame to force B&H out of business.</p>

<p>But let's see how this all unfolds.</p>

<p>I've always backed B and H as being an ethical company to do business with. These charges are very disheartening. I hope they straighten out whatever's going on or they'll wind up destroying their business. </p>

<p>The Department of Labor's Office of Federal Compliance Programs alleges:<br>

"During its compliance review, however, OFCCP found that, from January 2011 to January 2013:</p>

<ul>

<li>B&H’s Brooklyn Navy Yard warehouse exclusively hired Hispanic men into its entry-level laborer job group, contributing to the complete exclusion of female employees at the warehouse and the near exclusion of black and Asian employees at the facility.</li>

<li>B&H promoted and compensated its Hispanic workers at a significantly lower rate than comparable white workers, leading to lower pay, fewer opportunities to advance and a near-total exclusion of Hispanic workers from higher level clerical, managerial and supervisory positions. Hispanic employees were also subjected to racist remarks, degrading comments and harassment at the worksite. </li>

</ul>

<p>"In addition to its findings regarding hiring, compensation and promotion discrimination and harassment, OFCCP found that B&H’s Brooklyn Navy Yard warehouse:</p>

<ul>

<li>Failed to keep and preserve required personnel and employment records.</li>

<li>Relegated Hispanic warehouse workers to separate, unsanitary and often inoperable restrooms.</li>

<li>Failed to provide designated restroom or changing facilities for females.</li>

</ul>

<p>"Filed with the Office of Administrative Law Judges, the complaint asks the court to enjoin B&H permanently from discriminating against female, black and Asian individuals in hiring, and discriminating against Hispanic individuals in promotions and compensation; and to require B&H to ensure and maintain a working environment free of unlawful harassment, intimidation or coercion. OFCCP is also seeking complete relief for the affected class including lost wages, interest, front wages, salary adjustments, promotions and all other lost benefits of employment and a reform of discriminatory policies.<br>

"If B&H fails to provide relief as ordered, OFCCP requests that all its government contracts be canceled and that it be debarred from entering into future federal contracts. Headquartered in Manhattan, B&H has supply contracts with the General Services Administration and the Department of Justice’s Federal Bureau of Investigation valued in excess of $46 million.<br>

"OFCCP filed its complaint after determining that it was unable to secure a voluntary agreement from B&H to take corrective action."<br>

Here's a link to the OFCCP's press release:<br>

http://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/20160225-2<br>

<br />Here's a link to the actual complaint filed with the Court:<br>

http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/ofccp/OFCCP20160384.pdf</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>John H... ...B&H is harly alone. For example, there are plenty of reports about poor factory conditions that manufacture products for various well known US brands... ...rather than drawing more innuendos and per-mature conclusions, let's keep an eye on how this case evolves. If it reaches a point that you are unsatisfied about B&H, you can certainly take your <a id="itxthook2" href="/casual-conversations-forum/00dldu?start=10" rel="nofollow">business </a>elsewhere.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm not sure why all this is directed at me. I didn't make any innuendos or conclusions, mature or otherwise. I didn't even offer any opinions or suggest B&H is alone or not or doing anything. I didn't indicate whether I approved of anything or not. I merely posted an article that may be of interest to many people because of the organization's substantial relationship with the photographic community.</p>

John H., only my first paragraph was directed at you. Unfortunately you omitted it. I think the bigger issue here is that the

Labor Department has filed a law suit against B&H on various discrimination issues, against women, African Americans,

Asians ... and of course Hispanics. It is far broader than making Hispanic workers using a different restroom. Somehow the NY Post selected a catchy subject which leads to the subject for this very thread, but IMO that title is not focusing on the entire case.

 

Nobody is suggesting that John H. is making innuendos. Those come from other follow up posts and I am suggesting that

this discussions should be base on facts from reliable media. We also should give B&H a chance to respond and perhaps take corrective action. It is a company that has served its customers extremely well for a long time. It deserves a second chance and probably a bit more.

<p>This same thread was posted over on Apug and the moderators deleted the thread. Not sure why as it was in a proper forum for industry news. <br /> I have received the best service possible from BHPhoto over the years. However I just cannot see discrimination as something that should be tolerated and it needs to be dealt with wherever it pop's up it's ugly head. Since it's a big deal, lawsuits and such I figure I will move on to another store. I mostly just buy film and chemistry anyway and there are many places that I can purchase a 10 pack of film and some chemistry when I need it..</p>

<p>APUG had 2 episodes of postings of this obvious Liberal Activism today. Obviously the work of the shills and stooges of the Community Agitator-in-Chief with the pen and the phone. But alas, all these precious little darlings will have plenty of employment as masons next year, working from the south side. Also, the SC Lunatic Party primary was today, and both candidates had their stooges working overtime stirring up voters. It's a time-honored pattern of their party since Mayor Daly in 1960 found all those voters in the cemeteries. Just thought I'd answer the question, because you certain won't see any truth the press.</p>

<p>The threads on APUG were not deleted, they were moved to the "Soapbox" section where many of us felt they belonged. Some of the comments were going way beyond the issue at hand and into snide innuendo related more to the current insane political climate.</p>

<p>As a very satisfied customer for ten years or so, I would certainly like to hear more of the B&H side. But even if it's all true as stated, they are far from alone among the paragons of industry and commerce when it comes to worker exploitation.</p>

<p>I do not wish to enter this dispute, but just have to mention that "where there's smoke there's fire" is true only if you redefine fire to mean smoke. </p>