uFederal Judge Dismisses Apple Store Employees’ Lawsuit Over Bag Searchesr

4 4 4 9

• Earlier this year, a 2013 lawsuit filed by Apple Store employees went forward, seeking class action status. The workers complained that mandatory searches of their bags before leaving the store premises occurred while they were off the clock, and the searches were “insulting and demeaning.” Over the weekend, the class action was dismissed. The judge’s reasoning: there’s no reason why employees need to bring a bag to work, or their personal Apple devices.

  Yes, modern people do tend to bring their mobile phones everywhere with them, and if those people are Apple Store sales staff, they’re unlikely to not use an iPhone. Employees contacted CEO Tim Cook about the policy to complain, but that apparently didn’t go anywhere.

  This class action included only current and former Apple Store employees in California, but that still meant 12,000 plaintiffs. The judge turned the question of searches around on employees and instead asked why they need to bring a bag to work in the first place, writing:

  Rather than prohibiting employees from bringing bags and personal Apple devices into the store altogether, Apple took a milder approach to theft prevention and offered its employees the option to bring bags and personal Apple devices into a store subject to the condition that such items must be searched when they leave the store.

  The plaintiffs didn’t object to the searches, exactly, but did object to the time to perform them being taken out of their breaks and occurring off the clock, and to the inspections happening on the sales floor in front of customers.

  Apple Class Action Lawsuit Is Dismissed [Reuters]

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

uFCC Declines To Force Internet Companies To Listen When You Ask Them Not To Track Your

4 4 4 9

• 
  
  It’s no secret that the internet, well, follows you around. Browse one product on Monday and you’re seeing ads for it everywhere all week long. Modern browsers have an option that lets users ask businesses nicely not to follow them. One consumer group tried to ask the FCC to make businesses listen but it appears that is not to be.

  Do Not Track settings exist in browsers, but opting in is, well, optional. Some businesses have chosen to participate and respect a user’s flag, but plenty of others don’t. Among them, two of the biggest advertising companies in the world, Google and Facebook.

  In short, the current standard, such as it is, is basically a hot mess. So a group called Consumer Watchdog filed a petition (PDF) asking the FCC to start a process to make a universal rule that would require all of the businesses known as edge providers — the category of services where big web companies like Google and Facebook fall — to honor users’ do not track requests. In their filing, Consumer Watchdog argued that the FCC has authority to make rules regarding privacy under its “ancillary jurisdiction” authority, and tried to bolster that claim with examples of times the FCC has taken action against wireline or wireless providers over privacy breaches.

  The FCC, however, disagrees. The commission dismissed the request (PDF), explaining that basically, the FCC has absolutely no interest whatsoever in dealing with the companies that are on the internet, rather than the companies that provide the internet. In short: regulation of edge providers is not on the FCC’s agenda, end of.

  Net neutrality opponents have long argued that the 2015 Open Internet Rule is tantamount to censorship and “regulation of the internet,” so in theory the FCC’s categorical rejection of a chance to regulate edge providers should be soothing to the saber-rattlers who are concerned about the commission wanting to stifle content.

  Meanwhile, this petition was tantamount to asking some of the biggest businesses in the world to stop making money hand over fist. Had the FCC chosen to pursue a rulemaking procedure, they would almost certainly have faced a significant amount of opposition.

  [via The Washington Post]

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Kate Cox via Consumerist

uUber’s Carpool Service: Helping Strangers Find Love In The Back Of A Carr

4 4 4 9

• 

  Move over online dating sites, there’s a new player looking to make love connections between near strangers, albeit inadvertently. While the Uber app has been hooking up passengers with drivers for a while, the company is now apparently facilitating romance via its carpooling-like UberPool service. 

  The New York Post reports that UberPool, the service that lets travelers share a car other UberX riders traveling in similar directions, is becoming a dating app of sorts for single New Yorkers who aren’t afraid of hopping in a car with strangers.

  Unlike other ride-sharing options – such as the taxi stand at the airport – users of UberPool don’t have to waste time figuring out where potential co-passengers are going or how much they’ll pay. All of those details are sorted out via the Uber app, leaving more time for riders to get to know each other.

  And for one Manhattan lawyer, the service has given his dating life a bump, telling the Post that the service provides a great setting for a spontaneous blind date.

  Back in September, he says he struck up a comfortable conversation with a woman who actually lived close to him. The night ended with a number exchange.

  Another New Yorker says he shared a cab to La Guardia recently with a potential suitor.

  “I’ve found a lot of things in the back of an Uber… but I never thought I’d find love in the back of an Uber,” he says.

  UberPool is NYC’s best new blind date spot [New York Post]

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

uBlue Buffalo Recalls Some Cat Treats Over Presence Of Not-Yummy Propylene Glycolr

4 4 4 9

• You always want to feed your cat something healthy, which is why you pay attention to the labels on the cat food and snacks you buy. But every once in a while some special unintended ingredient makes its way into those packages, which can lead to some very sick kitties.

  The folks at Blue Buffalo have announced a recall of some Blue Kitty Yums Chicken Recipe Cat Treats because they may contain low levels of propylene glycol, a chemical barred from use in cat food.

  Cats who have consumed a lot of propylene glycol may exhibit signs of depression along with loss of coordination, muscle twitching, and excessive urination and thirst.

  The FDA says that if your cat has consumed the recalled product (details below) and has these symptoms, you should contact your veterinarian.

  The recall is the result of a single customer complaint, which led to FDA testing of the Blue Buffalo product and the discovery of some propylene glycol in the affected lot.

  The specific product being recalled comes in a 2-oz., plastic stand-up pouch. Only the packages with the following UPC codes and use-by dates are part of the recall:

  Blue Kitty Yums Tasty Chicken Recipe, UPC: 859610007820 — Best If Used By: April 24, 2016.
  Blue Kitty Yums Tasty Chicken Recipe, UPC: 859610007820 — Best If Used By: July 24, 2016.

  Both the UPC and the date are found on the back of the package.

  If you have any of these recalled treats, you can return them to the place of purchase for a full refund.

  Consumers with questions may contact Blue Buffalo at: 888-667-1508 from 8 AM to 5 PM Eastern Time Monday through Friday or by email at BlueBuffalo5883@stericycle.com for more information.

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Chris Morran via Consumerist

uWalmart Tried, Gave Up On Using Facial Recognition Software To ID Shopliftersr

4 4 4 9

• 
  If you’ve ever known a shoplifter, you’ve probably noticed that he or she has a tendency to hit up the same stores over and over until those victimized retailers either nab the shoplifter or do something to make theft more difficult. It would make seem to make sense then for Walmart to deploy a facial recognition program to identify known or suspected offenders. So why did the company recently give up on this sort of system?

  In a story for Fortune.com, Walmart was the only major national retailer that would confirm the use of face-scanning technology.

  The retailer acknowledged that some sort of automated recognition program — which would alert store personnel to the presence of a potential thief — had been tested at various Walmart stores around the country, but that the company pulled the plug on it earlier in the year.

  A Walmart rep explains that the system simply wasn’t providing the return on investment needed to justify its use.

  “We were looking for a concrete business rationale,” says the rep to Fortune.

  One factor not mentioned in the story is the fact that a large amount of shoplifting and product loss at big box retail stores — not just Walmart — involves employees. Facial recognition software may be pointless when the pilferer is already someone you recognize without expensive technology.

  Back in 2012, a Best Buy employee told us that around 60% of the theft at his store was internal, which is why his location did away with the often-hated process of checking bags and receipts.

  “Why are we slowing down the entering and exit of the building by our paying customers for something that even by our own numbers, they barely contribute to?,” he explained of the thought process behind the change.

  It’s possible that Walmart came to a similar realization when testing the facial recognition software.

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Chris Morran via Consumerist

uStarbucks Expands Tuition Program To Cover Spouses & Kids Of Military Employeesr

4 4 4 9

• 

  Since announcing a tuition reimbursement program for its workers in June 2014 – and an expansion to cover four years of schooling – Starbucks has sent more than 4,000 employees on a path toward an online bachelor’s degree from Arizona State University. Now, the company plans to expand the offering once again: covering the full tuition for a spouse or child of a veteran or active-duty servicemember working for the mega-coffee chain. 

  Starbucks announced the expansion of its College Achievement Plan Monday as part of its initiative to hire more veterans and military spouses.

  The tuition program is a collaboration between Starbucks and ASU in which partners of the coffee chain can get either full tuition reimbursement or partial scholarships to complete one of 49 online bachelor’s degree programs through the University.

  A previous breakdown of the Plan showed that the University will pay about 42% of student’s tuition, while Starbucks will cover the remaining 58%.

  By adding the ability to gift one free tuition to a spouse or a child, the coffee company is attempting to make the tuition program more relevant to veterans, the Washington Post reports.

  Adrienne Gemperle, Starbucks’s senior vice president of global human resources operations, tells the Post that the tuition extension was created after conversations with the company’s Armed Forces Network and military employees found many don’t use the College Achievement Plan because they already have a degree or planned to pay for college through government benefits like the G.I. Bill.

  “There’s a benefit from this as a recruitment tool as well,” she said. “It allows our veterans to look across their family’s goals in the way that’s most meaningful to them.”

  In addition to announcing the expanded tuition support, Starbucks said on Monday that it had hired 5,500 veterans and military spouses. Back in 2013, the company made a commitment to hire 10,000 former or current servicemembers and spouses by 2018.

  The coffee chain also introduced several promotions tied to Veterans Day, including free coffee for veterans on Wednesday, veteran-themed mugs for sale and giftcards in which the company will donate $5 to the USO Transition 360 Alliance with every purchase.

  [via The Washington Post]

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

uUniversity Med School Returns $1M Gift To Coca-Colar

4 4 4 9

• 
  Last year, Coca-Cola donated $1 million to the University of Colorado School of Medicine, with the money intended to fund a pro-soda advocacy group called the Global Energy Balance Network. After being criticized for accepting this money to push Coca-Cola’s business agenda, the university has now decided to return the funds.

  “The University of Colorado School of Medicine has notified the Coca-Cola Co. that the University is returning contributions made by the company to support the establishment and operation of the Global Energy Balance Network,” reads a statement released over the weekend.

  The Global Energy Balance Network’s co-founder and president is a professor at Colorado. The organization emphasized the importance of exercise and healthy eating in the fight against obesity, but what drew so much criticism for GEBN was its attempt to downplay any connection between sugary drinks and obesity.

  The organization’s ethics and motives were questioned because of videos like the one below, featuring the GEBN vice president blaming the media for linking obesity to high-calorie foods, declaring that there “virtually no compelling evidence that that, in fact, is the cause.”

  The Colorado med school is maintaining that the core idea of GEBN is a valid one, but that the money is being returned to Coca-Cola because “the funding source has distracted attention from its worthwhile goal.”

  Coca-Cola tells the NY Times that it will take the returned funds and donate them to the Boys & Girls Clubs of America.

  “While the network continues to support a vigorous scientific discussion of the contributions of dietary and physical activity behaviors to the obesity epidemic, it has become evident that the original vision for G.E.B.N. has not been realized,” reads a statement from the beverage biggie.

  A physician at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which has been very critical of GEBN, supports the school’s decision and hopes others follow suit, but notes that Colorado, “probably returned the money out of embarrassment.”

  The med school is just the latest organization to end a lucrative relationship with the sugary cash source. The American Academy of Pediatrics used $3 million from Coca-Cola to launch healthychildren.org, while the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics received $1.7 million from the company. Both groups have severed financial ties with Coke.

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Chris Morran via Consumerist