Connect with us

When an Employee’s Social Media Reveal an Enthusiasm for Marijuana, How Should This Retailer React?

mm

Published

on

JANELLE AND TIM O’NEILL LOVED their hometown and took great pride in knowing that O’Neill’s Diamonds was one of few independent jewelers still operating in the area. In his role as marketing manager, the challenge of keeping up with strategies to attract the town’s millennial bridal customers while continuing to appeal to their long-established older customer base fell to Tim. After much conversation with industry colleagues and experts, he and Janelle decided to hire someone to handle the development and growth of O’Neill’s social media presence. Growth in the business had already created the need for additional help on the sales floor, so they chose to look for someone who could handle both jobs.

ABOUT REAL DEAL

Real Deal is a fictional scenario designed to read like real-life business events. The businesses and people mentioned in this story should not be confused with actual jewelry businesses and people.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Kate Peterson is president and CEO of Performance Concepts, a management consultancy for jewelers. Email her at kate@performanceconcepts.net

They were fortunate enough to attract several qualified applicants for the position, including Grace Matthews, the 21 year-old recent college graduate daughter of a family friend. She was articulate, bright and eager to learn, and most importantly, she was totally familiar with building a presence with Instagram, Facebook and Pinterest. Grace’s references checked out and she was brought on board.

Grace started strong. She was pleasant and personable on the sales floor, and she seemed to be learning quickly about the store’s products and services. She was also creative and enthusiastic working with the store’s social media. Her posts were generating interest within the first few weeks.

A Packed Store Like the Day Before Christmas? Wilkerson Makes It Happen
Sponsored Content

A Packed Store Like the Day Before Christmas? Wilkerson Makes It Happen

Oprah-Endorsed Online Jewelry Retailer to Launch IPO in ‘Near Future’ (Video)
Headlines

Oprah-Endorsed Online Jewelry Retailer to Launch IPO in ‘Near Future’ (Video)

Video: Here’s a Great Way to Use Personal Stories in Your Jewelry Marketing
Headlines

Video: Here’s a Great Way to Use Personal Stories in Your Jewelry Marketing

About six weeks into Grace’s employment, Janelle held a store training meeting on the importance of demonstrating O’Neill’s core values — honesty, integrity, responsibility, professionalism and dedication to service — both inside and outside of the store.

Advertisement

She knew they had been fortunate in that they’d never had an issue with an employee creating image problems in town, but she also believed that regular discussion of the topic was part of the reason for that.

The day after the meeting, Linda Weiss, one of the store’s more senior employees, asked to speak to Janelle in private. She said that her son knew Grace casually through friends, and that he’d come to her several weeks ago with concerns about Grace working in the store. He was concerned that her public presence reflected badly on the store, since everyone in town knew she worked there. Linda showed Janelle an Instagram post her son had brought to her attention — Grace’s personal page. From every indication, in her personal social media world, Grace was a stoner, posting regularly about all things marijuana-related, including notes about paraphernalia, varieties, qualities and suggestions for where and how to buy the product. Janelle thanked

Linda for bringing the matter to her attention.

Later that day, Janelle discussed the matter with Tim, and they agreed that neither had noticed any indication that Grace was ever high while at the store. They also looked through her personal pages carefully and were sure that she did not mention being an O’Neill’s employee anywhere. They agreed that despite the fact that times were changing, in their state, marijuana possession and use was still a criminal offense (misdemeanor or felony, depending on quantity), and that they really needed to take some kind of action.

The Big Questions

  • Since Grace’s discussions about marijuana were limited to her personal social media accounts (to which, technically, Janelle and Tim should not have had access), can the O’Neills take action based on the content of those pages?
  • In the bigger picture, does an employer have the right to monitor and/or regulate what an employee posts online if the content has nothing to do with the store and does not violate client or business confidentiality in any way?
  • In a small town where everyone knows everyone else, does the employee have an obligation to restrict public behavior on personal time to conform with the conduct policy of the business?

Expanded Real Deal Responses

Sue F.
New York

From a legal standpoint, this is a tricky situation. State laws vary on employee rights outside of work time, so one answer may not be valid in every state.
Situations like this underscore the need for Employment Practices Liability Insurance (EPLI). A good EPLI insurer provides access to free consultative services with attorneys who can provide practical information about topics such as this. Your insurer also should provide access to a Workplace Risk Solutions Website where you can research your state’s legal requirements, find model workplace policies and forms, tap into a library of workplace-related articles, and access web-based training on topics such as preventing discrimination and harassment, as well as other employment issues.

Deric M.
Oceanside, CA

Janelle and Tim are not in a difficult situation here. What constitutes a PR problem is how it is received and Grace isn’t attaching herself to the store with her pro-marijuana posts. Janelle and Tim never appeared to have even asked themselves if the marijuana consumption is recreational or medicinal — an important distinction — and more information is needed.
Since cannabis appears to be illegal in their state for recreational use, however, Janelle and Tim should have a chat with Grace to tone it down because of how it could become a PR problem. If Grace is otherwise a positive influence on the store’s traffic and bottom line, this is an easy matter to resolve.

Advertisement
Joe K.
Lantzville, BC

First let me say that I am in Canada, and we have just legalized recreational use of marijuana for the entire country. I am also in British Columbia, where it has been said that pot is our largest cash crop. There is a right place and time to use pot and a wrong place and time; the same goes with alcohol consumption. I think monitoring your employee’s recreational behavior and online presence away from the workplace is a breach of her privacy. If she doesn’t come to work high or use pot at work, I don’t think there should be a problem, especially if she’s a competent asset and representative for the business. Having said that, we might be a little more lenient here, and attitudes toward marijuana will be quite different in the US Midwest.

Brenda R.
Honolulu

I would not want to be in that situation. There are risks involved with any kind of drugs, legal or otherwise. Does the company have a formal drug policy? One needs to know the local, state and federal laws and work policy to comply with. Was there a stated probation period to see if the employee “fits” with the requirements of dress, being on time, and client interaction? If there are red flags, the person may have to be let go.
What they do at home is their business and should never impact the requirements and expectations of the job they were hired for. Proceed with caution.

Stuart S.
Egg Harbor City, NJ

The employee needs to be taught how to transition from the fantasy fun land of college to the real world. As long as she is responsible and doing a great job, her personal life is not the store’s concern, but when her actions can potentially alienate any customers, it is. Any controversial posts need to be avoided and eliminated. The posts were obviously on her pages before being hired, so the potential repercussions were never considered. Teaching her about why they are no longer appropriate is more important than just having them eliminated. This is all about grooming her to be a valuable asset to the store, and just as importantly, teaching her to grow as a person!

Gabi M.
Tewksbury, MA

My family and I work in a small town, and I know we all watch what we put on our personal social media accounts (mostly political discussions) because we know that we represent our business 24/7. I think they simply just need to talk to Grace and tell her that her posts aren’t acceptable for someone who works for their business. It should be an easy solution, such as just making her accounts private to the public — and if she has a problem with it, then that’s a whole other underlying problem with having her as an employee.

Marcus M.
Midland, TX

This is a tricky one. Really, an employer should not be able to judge an employee about what they personally post, as long as it doesn’t mention the store, her profession or have violent content. But at the end of the day, she does reflect the store no matter what, and they do live in a small town, so people know where she works. They’ll judge your store as they judge a person’s social media. Maybe have a chat with her and just ask that she consider how her post will look on her career and see if that helps. She’s obviously not very conscious of how her post about pot looks, or maybe she really just doesn’t care, so either way, it’s a bit of a red flag for me. I don’t know … maybe she’s just still young and immature and needs a little guidance, and I think that’s acceptable to give out.

Jane H.
Highland Park, IL

It does reflect upon the credibility and integrity of the business. Unfortunately, it appears that anyone can do anything and it’s their right, blah blah blah. Since Grace was already hired and during the interview there was no discussion of “life outside the store,” it may become a situation they will need to accept until something happens. There are plenty of employers that check out a potential employee’s social media posts (when possible) for any red flags, and in my opinion, this would influence the decision to hire or not. The jewelry business is based on trust and honesty, especially an independent brick and mortar store. One incident would be tough to overcome for the store’s reputation.

Advertisement

Also, unless you know the personality of someone when they’re “high” or not, the only way you might find out is from someone’s observation. If Grace is “selling,” you are giving her a ready-made customer base. Sorry if I sound extreme and tough, but it’s hard work and devotion to stay in the jewelry business. Grace should go.

Jim D.
Kingston, NH

Obviously an employee who engages in criminal activity would quickly become a former employee. While I know there are those who condone drug use, excuse it and work to decriminalize it, it is still illegal. A jeweler’s reputation is a precious thing and needs to be protected. How many repair clients would want to hand over their treasures to a known criminal? If followers of her social media start hanging around, it could lower the tone of the store, possibly bringing in undesirable elements. Worst case would be a front-page newspaper picture of an employee being taken away in handcuffs and your store-front in the background, after she sells some pot to an undercover police officer.

What’s the Brain Squad?

If you’re the owner or top manager of a U.S. jewelry store, you’re invited to join the INSTORE Brain Squad. By taking one five-minute quiz a month, you can get a free t-shirt, be featured prominently in this magazine, and make your voice heard on key issues affecting the jewelry industry. Good deal, right? Sign up here.

Kate Peterson is president and CEO of Performance Concepts, a management consultancy for jewelers. Email her at kate@performanceconcepts.net.

Advertisement

SPONSORED VIDEO

Wilkerson Testimonials

A Packed Store Like the Day Before Christmas? Wilkerson Makes It Happen

Deb Schulman says once she and her husband, Ron, decided to retire, she could feel “the stress start to leave.” The owners of B. Alsohns Jewelers in Palm Desert, California, the Schulmans had heard about Wilkerson over the years and contacted them when the time was right. Wilkerson provided the personalized service, experience and manpower it took to organize their GOB sale. “We are so impressed with the way Wilkerson performed for us,” says Ron Schulman, “I’d send high accolades to anyone who was interested.”

Promoted Headlines

Real Deal

When a Once-Happy Client Sends Back a Damaged Ring and Demands a Refund, What Should the Store Owner Do?

The ring is scuffed and dented after just a year’s worth of wear.

mm

Published

on

JOSH WELLMAN AND Brooke Kerney were best friends back in high school. When they both moved back to their Midwest hometown and reconnected after 12 years of living on opposite sides of the country, their friends and family — most notably Josh’s mother — were convinced that a wedding was inevitable. With that in mind, she gave Josh, her eldest son, her engagement ring — a family heirloom that had been passed down through generations. The ring, a late Victorian design, was a 1.50-ct. old European cut diamond in a platinum filigree setting, with milgrain detailing and several accent sapphires.

ABOUT REAL DEAL

Real Deal is a fictional scenario designed to read like real-life business events. The businesses and people mentioned in this story should not be confused with actual jewelry businesses and people.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Kate Peterson is president and CEO of Performance Concepts, a management consultancy for jewelers. Email her at kate@performanceconcepts.net

Josh finally proposed while on a trip to visit one of Brooke’s friends just after Valentine’s Day. Brooke had been close to Josh’s mom when they were younger and was more than honored to serve as the next generation’s custodian of the heirloom ring. It was just a touch too big, though, so Brooke suggested they take it to a custom jeweler in the city who had done some work for her the year before. The couple made an appointment to see John Anford, owner of Anford and Company Fine Jewelry.

Brooke knew John Anford to be a knowledgeable professional who delivered quality work at a fair price. She was referred to John by a friend when she lost an earring and needed to have a replacement made. The work was done perfectly and well within the time frame expected. Brooke was confident that John would take good care of her new treasure as well.

At the Anford office, John measured Brooke’s finger, then examined the ring carefully. He told the couple that while beautifully made and still wearable, the heirloom was showing the signs of its 100 years of experience. He pointed out areas of weakness and structural issues that he believed made the ring unsuitable for everyday wear, and he recommended that Josh and Brooke consider having the ring restored by a vintage expert. They left the ring for sizing and said they would think about it.

By the time they returned to pick the ring up the next day, Josh and Brooke had come up with another plan. They were both uncomfortable with the idea of restoring or altering the ring in any way and agreed that keeping it in original condition was more important to them than Brooke being able to wear it every day. With that in mind, they asked John to design a companion piece for the ring — a band that would be in keeping with the original ring’s design — in platinum filigree with milgrain trim and sapphire accents. Brooke said that her work as an executive for a technology company didn’t require any activity that would be especially rough on a ring, and she didn’t have any “heavy-duty” hobbies. They worked with John on initial concepts and agreed to stay in touch via email. Brooke made an appointment to come back in three weeks to look at the model and make a final decision.

Brooke and Josh loved the design of her new ring, and over the three-week period, signed off on the CAD rendering as well as various detail decisions and price. When she next visited John’s office and saw the resin model of her ring, she was delighted and confirmed the order. She and Josh returned in mid-April to see the finished product — and after a minor adjustment to a milgrain edge, were happy. Per his policy, John verified that his clients were completely satisfied with the ring, reminding them that they still had the option to cancel before taking delivery if the ring failed to meet their expectations in any way. They agreed that the ring was exactly as they had envisioned, and paid the $3,000 balance by credit card. The ring was shipped to Josh and Brooke’s Midwest home and was received on April 20, 2018.

About a year later, John received an email from Brooke containing pictures of the ring, significantly damaged with bends and dents in the metal and several broken sapphires. In her message, she said,

“Earlier today, I put my ring in an overnight package coming to your office. When I came to you last February, we discussed that my heirloom family ring was not suitable for daily wear, so we agreed to commission a custom ring that could be worn regularly. I approved the design for this ring, but relied on you to ensure proper materials and craftsmanship. You assured me that the problem with the milgrain edge we originally saw was a minor cosmetic issue and not a structural concern. Yet, less than a year later, the structural integrity of the ring has been severely damaged through nothing more than the ordinary use we discussed.

We’ve consulted with two reputable jewelers in our town. They both said that platinum was not the right metal for this ring — that white gold should have been used, given the design. Based on their opinions, and the significant damage that has occurred in just 11 months, I’d like you to honor the cancellation offer you made initially and issue a full refund for the piece so that I can use the money to get a ring I can actually wear every day.”

John noticed that the pictures were taken by one of the jewelers Brooke had consulted. He was tempted to contact the store to find out how they could have suggested that the choice of platinum was the issue here, but instead, chose to review his notes and talk with his craftsman as well as other trusted metals experts. He came away from his research with the thought that while there might have been a sturdier metal choice for the ring design, even 14K white gold would not have held up to the obvious abuse the ring had suffered.

John didn’t think he could afford — financially or philosophically — to send a check for the full $4,750 sale price of the ring, since what he received from Brooke was essentially scrap platinum. On the other hand, as a small custom shop in a highly competitive city, he also couldn’t afford scathing reviews across social media.

The Big Questions

  • Who is responsible for the situation and who should absorb the cost?
  • Should John have known that white gold might have been a better option, despite her heirloom platinum ring having lasted over 100 years? Should the contract craftsman who made the ring have been more proactive in presenting the right design characteristics?
  • What should John do?
John M.
Grand Haven, MI

Ouch. Hard to convince a customer it wasn’t a problem with your year-old band when her similar engagement ring lasted 100 years. And maybe with good reason. Did you make the band solid enough, or was it a flimsy shell because you cheaped out? Was it wide enough to keep its shape for everyday wear? You’re the expert who’s supposed to know platinum keeps its color, is tough, and chemical resistant, but scuffs, mars and bends easily. And hers is likely a hard die-struck piece, whereas your band is a softer casting. If your band was too lightweight, it’s not going to do the job she specifically tasked you with, and you need to take care of it. If the ring was beaten regardless of the metal or who made it, then point out the specific indicators, while also assuring her you want to help her resolve her situation. Your fault, offer to make a new ring in 14K white gold for free. Her fault, offer to make her one at cost.

Richard S.
Seattle, WA

She obviously abused the ring, but it sounds like between the client and jeweler, they did not resolve the original concern about daily wear durability. Regardless of metal choice, it does not sound like a good design choice. The jeweler needs to either recreate it, making the ring a little heavier and using a ruthenium alloy, iridium being much too soft for platinum casting, or make a new design that both parties can be happy with. But to simply give a refund is unreasonable, assuming he has had a conversation about her lifestyle and what could have caused heavy damage.

Jack Van D.
Wellington, FL

Offer to fix the ring the best way he can, at no charge. We’re not responsible for abusive wear to a piece we design and sell. They’re just trying to get something for nothing.

Marcus M.
Midland, TX

These people are trying to take advantage of John, and shame on them. Platinum was a fine choice for a ring like this and should be more than durable enough to handle her said lifestyle. She obviously started working out with it on or it slipped down the disposal and took a spin (I’ve seen both be very destructive). Either way, something has happened and rings like this don’t self-destruct. I would offer to repair or remake it at my cost, but I would NOT give a refund. Stand your ground, John. You can treat her with respect and understanding and still keep your integrity. Letting them walk all over you is not the answer, especially when you and they know that this ring destruction was user error.

Sandi B.
Ocala, FL

Almost the exact thing happened in our store about two years ago. The couple had purchased a platinum radiant three-stone for a right-hand anniversary ring and was quite happy with it. A year later, they wanted to reset her wedding set into platinum with a bigger center diamond. It was made, loved and within one month, they did not like the “scratches” and dents on the bottom of the shank. It was an existing design that was just tweaked, so not completely custom. I talked with the manufacturer extensively about the platinum content, had it refinished, and the couple was still not satisfied.

I refunded the whole set and got a credit from the manufacturer, so it wasn’t a complete loss. Probably a little buyer’s remorse along with the softer metal performance. I would love to say they have purchased other things after that and it was a win-win situation; however, that is not the case. You win some, you lose some. Our reputation is still intact.

Daniel U.
Hamilton, ON

I think that the dealer got “played” by a person who abused her ring and then wanted a free ride to make up for her negligence. If she wanted to wear the ring “hard,” she should have said so at the beginning. My impression is that she got a suitable ring for her lifestyle, which she abused not just once, but several times. I believe that she knew she abused it, that she was morally wrong but that she did not want to accept responsibility for her actions.

The reason I believe these things is we have had clients who misrepresented their lifestyles and tried exactly the same type of scenario: to get a refund after they damaged something they could not afford. It is a measure of the solidarity of our clients that they stood together and denounced that individual as a liar and a fraud.

June M.
Aberdeen, MD

Since the customer indicated before authorizing the band that she did not do any heavy duty work in her employment or have any heavy duty hobbies, she could wear the ring every day. And she had worn it for a year or so. What DID she do that could have possibly caused that ring to end up in such a condition? I also don’t feel the store is responsible for the whole outcome of the finished ring. The craftsman is also responsible. Possibly also the customer.

Instead of a refund, the store could offer to replace the ring in a sturdier ring, possibly a heavier gauge for the filigree and the base plus a thicker band. That way, the cost for the store would be less than a refund.

Saro A.
Chevy Chase, MD

In the custom business, there are always cases when things go wrong either in design/manufacturing or by customer. I think Josh and Brooke should have at least given John a chance to make a new ring instead of asking for a refund. As bad as making a new ring would be for John, he should take the loss and never promise to give a refund on a custom made piece once the customer has seen and approved the wax model.

Ira K.
Tallahassee, FL

I think that John should refuse to accept the package. Make the brute that beat up the ring come to the store to discuss any concessions to be made. And while she’s there, explain the abuse of the jewelry. I would NOT refund under any circumstances.

Continue Reading

Real Deal

A Vendor Raises an Item’s Memo Price After It Is Sold. What Should This Store Owner Do?

The ring was sold for less than the vendor now wants for it.

mm

Published

on

GUILD AND STONE WAS a second-generation, high-end store in the Pacific Northwest. Store owner Dean Callen had used his 28 years as the company’s general manager to expand on the strong reputation his father built with an extensive vendor network and a local client base that included most of the town’s VIPs.

ABOUT REAL DEAL

Real Deal is a fictional scenario designed to read like real-life business events. The businesses and people mentioned in this story should not be confused with actual jewelry businesses and people.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Kate Peterson is president and CEO of Performance Concepts, a management consultancy for jewelers. Email her at kate@performanceconcepts.net

Back in April, Sharon Sanderlund, president of a local construction company and one of Guild And Stone’s best customers, came in to talk with store manager Jennifer Lee about finding a pendant to match the fabulous Art Deco citrine earrings she had just inherited from her aunt. Since there was nothing workable in the store’s estate collection, Dean recommended that Jennifer contact Ed Ansell, one of the store’s regular estate vendors who specialized in vintage colored gemstone pieces. Jennifer spoke with Ed and he agreed to memo several pendants for her to show.

The day the package arrived, while it was sitting on Dean’s desk waiting to be opened, Jennifer received an email from Ed letting her know that in addition to three citrine pendants, he had also included a number of other pieces in the shipment, all from an estate he had recently purchased and all on memo to the store. Since the lot was very well priced, he thought she and Dean might want to keep a few of the pieces for stock.

Advertisement

When Dean opened the package, he was surprised to see that it contained a total of 13 pieces. As he checked them in, he had to agree that the prices were great, but he was further surprised to see that there was one item in the package — a vintage aquamarine and diamond bracelet — that was not listed on the memo. He contacted Ed immediately to report the error. Ed apologized and emailed an updated memo within the hour.

Later that week, Sharon Sanderlund came in to look at the pendants. She chose a beautiful art deco citrine and diamond pendant from the memo and a vintage chain from the store’s collection for a total of $4,550. While she was still in the store, Jennifer remembered the additional items that Ed had sent and brought them out of the safe to show Sharon. Sharon was immediately drawn to a Victorian sapphire and diamond ring — a cushion-shaped sapphire surrounded by 13 Old European Cut diamonds in 18K gold. Jennifer checked the memo and saw that the store’s cost for the ring was $3,500. She checked with Dean, who assigned a retail price of $6,100 to the ring — then promptly sold it to Sharon.

The next day, Dean sent Ed an email reporting the sale of the two items, adding a list of three more pieces from the lot that he wanted to keep for stock and asking for an invoice. Ed called back an hour later to let Dean know that there had been a mistake on the memo. He said that he had mixed up two rings from the estate — that the sapphire in the ring Jennifer had sold was unheated and that the actual cost for the piece was $7,500, not $3,500. He told Dean that the invoice would reflect the $7,500 price. Dean struggled to remain calm and rational while he very clearly explained to Ed that the ring was sold based on the memo price, and that was the price he would pay. The conversation got rather loud as Ed suggested that Dean contact the customer to get the ring back — something Dean flatly refused to do. The call ended with Ed insisting that the ring would be invoiced at the $7,500 price and subtly suggesting the possibility of legal action if Dean chose not to pay.

Advertisement

Dean remembered thinking that like the rest of the lot, the ring was a great value at $3,500 cost, but he did not believe that price to be unreasonably low for an estate item. In an effort to be fair and to preserve a vendor relationship, he called Ed back the following day and offered to split the difference — to pay $5,500 for the ring. In his view, since the ring didn’t need sizing, that would leave him with a small profit once he paid Jennifer’s commission. Unfortunately, Ed refused to move off of his demand that Dean pay the invoiced amount for the ring. Dean hung up when Ed mentioned that as a professional, Dean should have noticed that the price was not right for a ring of that caliber in the first place.

The Big Questions

  • What should Dean do?
  • Is it reasonable to think that Ed might be right — that someone at Guild And Stone should have noticed that the price was too low for the ring?
  • Should Dean contact Mrs. Sanderlund and explain the situation in an attempt to either recover the ring or to re-sell it at a higher price?
Kevin P.
Newark, OH

When you write down a price on paper or write it in an email and send it, that is your responsibility to be correct. Once a vendor or a retailer gives a price, it is a done deal. In 40 years, I have never backtracked on a sale. A few times, I made mistakes in my calculations, once using per carat instead of net price to figure my cost.

In this case, I would call back the vendor and reiterate your offer to pay the $5,500 for the ring, as well as the second item and buy the three additional items. Remind him of the business you have done and may do in the future and ask him if he is willing to forget that. If he does not agree, I would send the amount he is asking for the two items and return the rest, and ask that your account be closed. There are other vendors who will behave in an honest and straightforward way with integrity.

John T.
Atlanta, GA

It was the vendor’s mistake and the vendor’s responsibility to catch and correct it before the sale was completed. The offer to split the difference from the jeweler was more than fair. Pay the memo price, and not a penny more, then find a new estate dealer; this one is crackers.

Oscar V.
Chicago, IL

Pay what is on the memo.

Stuart T.
Bel Air, MD

I always try to be fair with my trade partners, BUT in this case Ed is being unreasonable. Dave made a very fair offer to split the loss, and Ed refused to bend at all. Dave could have kept the Aquamarine and diamond bracelet but he was too honest to do so. Ed doesn’t have a leg to stand on, so let him sue, and loose a customer as well.

Michael J.
Port Charlotte, FL

I know the fine print on most memos says items are not to be sold until invoiced, but this can be argued since virtually no company actually holds to these words, so precedents have been set. The fact that Dean offered to split the cost at all was more than fair to the vendor, and in my opinion, should have been accepted without hesitation, especially if he had any desire to salvage the business relationship. The fact that Ed vehemently declined the offer means it should be rescinded and a check mailed for the price on the memo.

Albert D.
Fords, NJ

This is cut and dry. The store would only be liable for the original invoiced price. The fact that they were willing to give more was a very generous. I think the original vendor should have accepted their offer, considering that they know the ring was sold.

Advertisement
Colleen Z.
Hershey, PA

Ed is absolutely in the wrong here. It’s his duty to correctly identify and price his merchandise — and to eat the loss if he makes a mistake. If he ever wants Dean as a customer again, he needs to honor the original price on his memo. Dean should absolutely not let his client know what’s going on — it’s not at all her responsibility to deal with and it ruins the magic of the purchase. If he ends up having to pay the full cost so she can keep her ring and he can avoid legal action, then so be it. However, he should never work with Ed again. Dean went above and beyond to compromise, and Ed clearly doesn’t value the relationship in the same way. If his customer service is this poor, I wouldn’t trust Ed with other items. Dean should contact his lawyer for advice to handle the situation but above all else — keep Sharon out of it!

Jay S.
San Diego, CA

The retailer tried so hard to be fair. The supplier made the mistake and should live with it. When the supplier was not willing to work with his customer, I would have told him to sue me, and then I would have told him to pound sand!

David B.
Calgary, AB

When is a deal a deal? On both ends. Dean cannot go back to his client and ask for more. It makes him look unprofessional. It may even cost him a client. His offer to eat some cost was very fair. The consignor showed no professionalism. And getting an offer to split the difference was very fair. When I was a traveling salesman, this situation happened to me. I did not go back and ask my retailer for more money. I ate the loss and practiced better accounting. Further, the consignor making threats about court action is ridiculous. I know a fight is expensive, but where do you draw the line? Retailers get kicked in the backside at every turn, and even when it is a clear mistake, why are we expected to make it right? Dean needs to hold his ground.

Stewart P.
Lansing, MI

It is truly unfortunate that we all make mistakes in a variety of different ways. With 45 years in the trade under my belt, I can honestly say that I have paid a small fortune for the errors in judgment that I have made in an attempt to retain or strengthen the integrity of my business. I could have paid much less if I had chosen to place blame on others and refused to accept the responsibility. In the instance described, the error was clearly in the vendor’s corner. The retailer was completely blameless and should not be punished. We cannot function if we cannot rely on quotes and estimates from our vendors as written or stated.

Joe K.
Lantzville, BC

A deal’s a deal. The cost on the original invoice is all that should be paid. Looks like Ed is a little lackadaisical in his invoicing. Suck it up, Ed.

Jim G.
Champaign, IL

The ring as invoiced stands correct. If they had picked up the phone and told the new price before the ring was sold, then the new price would be in order. Too bad for the vendor.

Rex S.
Houston, TX

It is basic contract law. The items were sent out on consignment to be shown to a retail customer and allowed to be sold to retail customers based on the offer price listed on the memo. The retailer sold the item to the retail customer based on the price that the vendor sent to the retailer in good faith. It should also be noted that the vendor had previously told the retailer that this lot was an exceptionally well-priced estate lot; therefore, the retailer was reasonable in not questioning the pricing of the items. The retailer absolutely should not be asked, nor should they contact the retail customer, as that customer bought the item in good faith from the retailer and this has no duty to resend that sales contract. In short, the “memo” is in fact an offer to sell, and the retailer accepted that offer.

Norbert M.
Nairobi, Kenya

Especially in gem and jewelry trade, the customer is always right and therefore should not be bothered. Also, why should the initial seller want to unscrupulously transfer his error to his jewelry broker friend? This is wrong! He should accept the loss as his mistake and use the mishap as a future strength-point! Going to a court of law will only break their wonderful business association. Furthermore, 1) the untold truth is that estate jewelry is often bought at extremely lower price to exploit the owners and to sell off fast to make a quick buck! 2) the money involved is too low to cause the fuss considering the long-term business relationships. In a nutshell, for all the parties, let it be what has already been and move on. Hope I don’t sound too blunt!

Jim S.
Kauai, HI

Dean in good faith sold items based upon a written memo price. That the wholesaler made a mistake is not his fault. His offer of a compromise showed integrity and fairness. Ed’s response showed a lack of both.

Dianne H.
Eldon, MO

They must leave the satisfied customer out of the deal. That part is finished. The customer did nothing wrong. Neither did the jeweler. Carelessness by this supplier shows as the one bracelet was not even on the original invoice. Now the jeweler should prepare to get legal advice and not be bullied by the supplier! $10 payment per month FOREVER!

Marcus M.
Midland, TX

Dean should not pay a dime over $3,500. That is the price listed on his memo sheet, and if Ed tries to take any legal action, then Dean has the proof of the price Ed originally gave him. This is Ed’s mistake and should be his loss, not Dean’s. Also, Ed should probably realize how much money Dean was about to send him and be happy that he could probably recoup his mistake. If I was Dean, I wouldn’t do a bit of business with Ed again. There’s lot of estate dealers out there; go find another one who is more professional. And there is no chance I would call a great customer and ask her for the ring back or to pay more money. You would lose her for good if you did something like that.

Joel M.
New York, NY

Estate jewelry is tricky on value. We receive from our dealers and trust them to value the pieces. Thus, the store owner is not liable and his dealer should have taken the offer to split the profit.

Stuart S.
Egg Harbor City, NJ

This is an estate ring and could have just been an amazing value. Dean was very generous to split the difference. If the ring had not been sold, I’m sure Dean would have either returned the ring or agreed to the price. I feel bad for Ed that he made the mistake, but he has nobody to blame but himself. Ed no longer deserves the benefit of the split. Obviously Ed does not have the same respect for their business relationship as Dean!

Jon P.
St. George, UT

Ed’s mistake. Ed should eat the difference.

Tom C.
San Marcos, CA

You live with your mistakes. An error in pricing is the sender’s fault, not the buyer’s. It may affect any future dealings, but so what? If you can’t trust the sender’s memo pricing, what good is it to solicit goods from them?

Bruce A.
Sherwood Park, AB

Dean is required to pay the $3,500 plus applicable taxes. Anything greater than that requires a visit to his lawyer. When the dust settles, Dean should let Mrs. Sanderlund know the incredible deal she received and offer his services to appraise the item. Mistakes happen to all of us, and Dean’s offer of $5,500 was overly generous. Once rejected, I believe a judge would rule in Dean’s favor.

Valerie S.
Champaign, IL

If I’m not mistaken, this was fictionalized based off of my post on the Jewelers Helping Jewelers Facebook group. Fortunately, the wholesaler honored their memo price and we all moved on.

Ira K.
Tallahassee, FL

Let me see if I understand this correctly … The memo said one price, the vendor changed it (doubled), and then Dean offered to meet Ed halfway. Dean is a mensch; and Ed is a _______! (fill in the blank as you deem appropriate). I would send a check for the memo price — I would not buy the other three pieces that looked good and probably not buy anything else from Ed.

What’s the Brain Squad?

If you’re the owner or top manager of a U.S. jewelry store, you’re invited to join the INSTORE Brain Squad. By taking one five-minute quiz a month, you can get a free t-shirt, be featured prominently in this magazine, and make your voice heard on key issues affecting the jewelry industry. Good deal, right? Sign up here.

Continue Reading

Real Deal

How One Jeweler Raised a Stunning $100,000 for Charity

They did it in just eight months.

mm

Published

on

The Day’s effort to support children through JFC included a social media campaign and digital banners.

EACH YEAR, OUR December Real Deal tells a story that helps bring to mind the amazing privilege afforded us by our industry to make a real difference in our communities, and that reminds us why we do what we do. This year, we are honored to share the story of the Corey family and their amazing Day’s Jewelers team, who chose to celebrate their company’s 100th anniversary by raising $100,000 for Jewelers for Children.

Day’s Jewelers was founded in 1914 by Harry Davidson in the Old Port District of Portland, ME. Over the ensuing 30 years, Day’s became one of the most formidable jewelry chains in the east, as Davidson and his two brothers expanded the business to include 21 stores throughout northern New England. Among the many who built long-term careers starting with the Davidsons was a young man who entered the business as an 11-year-old stock boy. Robert Corey rose through the ranks to become the manager of the Day’s store in Caribou, ME, before he left the company to open his own store — Robert’s Jewelers — in 1955. Robert and his wife Enid raised seven children while building their business, each learning the value of hard work, integrity, quality and extraordinary service, as well as the importance of family and commitment.

In 1988, the original Day’s Jewelers company was offered for sale when the last of the Davidson heirs were ready to retire. The company was bought by Robert and Enid’s sons Jim and Jeff, Jeff’s wife Kathy and a business partner, Mark Ford. Today, Jeff and Kathy Corey are the owners of Day’s Jewelers, operating eight stores in Maine and New Hampshire. Their son Joe, vice-president of store operations, represents the next generation of Corey family leadership.

Advertisement

100 Years in the Making

Late in 2013, Kathy and Jeff Corey reached out to their employees for ideas regarding what the Day’s team could do to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the company’s founding. One of the many proposals was a plan to raise $100,000 — $1,000 for every year in business — for a charity. The Coreys really liked that idea, since philanthropy has always been at the core of Day’s culture.

Kathy and Jeff have never been afraid of challenges, but they both knew that they would need the commitment of every one of their 125 employees to make it happen.

The idea was presented at the monthly management team meeting in January 2014. Store managers, office managers, assistant managers and the Day’s executive team voted unanimously to move forward with the project, and Jewelers For Children was adopted as the charity. The team felt it was important to support JFC because the JFC charities (Make-A-Wish Foundation, St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital, CASA and Elizabeth Glazier Pediatric Aids Foundation) are meaningful to people in all of the communities in which Day’s does business, and a very high percentage of JFC donations go directly to the beneficiaries. In addition, the organization projects the jewelry business as an industry that — like Day’s — genuinely cares and gives back. The Day’s marketing department was charged with developing a strategic plan with specific initiatives, milestones and timelines to help ensure that the $100,000 goal was met prior to December 31, and Leo Gerrior, manager of Day’s South Portland store, was chosen as the spokesperson for the campaign. The plan involved careful orchestration and the engagement of employees, customers, suppliers, and communities at large.

The program was introduced to employees at store meetings in April and supported by a video message, in-store posters, and direct communication from the leadership team. Day’s associates were offered the opportunity to donate directly through a voluntary payroll deduction program. In addition, their other important role in the effort would be to engage friends, family, acquaintances and customers by telling the #ReasonsToGive story and by encouraging everyone who was able to participate.

The #ReasonsToGive campaign officially launched to the public in May 2014, with Day’s reaching out to its customers, vendors and communities to give in some way, no matter how big or small. “Every person has their own individual reason to give; a personal loss, a story that’s touched their lives, or simply knowing that one small act can make a difference,” said Kathy Corey at the time. “Mother’s Day is a perfect time to kick off this campaign where every dollar raised in the $100K Challenge will go to children and their families.”

Advertisement

Outreach to customers and communities involved in-store collateral, including bag stuffers, countertop signs, large posters and an innovative “Buy A Block” program, in which customers were encouraged to buy a paper block on which they would write their name and their personal reason for giving. Blocks were then affixed to a designated wall in each of the Day’s stores. The in-store effort was bolstered by a marketing drive that featured a high-impact press release and a formidable traditional component (primarily newspaper and radio), as well as a wide-ranging digital outreach. A moving #ReasonsToGive video was posted on social networks, featured on the Day’s website (where the campaign was explained in detail and where digital donations were accepted), and shown on in-store loops. Google, Facebook and banner ads were placed, and multiple email blasts were sent to the company’s extensive database. The company invited anyone inspired by the campaign to share their #ReasonsToGive on Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, and Instagram. Progress was reported to store managers and associates regularly and was tracked on large “fundraising meter” boards at the front entrance of each store, as well as on the Day’s website.

Maine governor Paul LePage (left) with Jeff Corey (center) and Charles Stanley of Forevermark.

The campaign culminated in a spectacular Day’s Jewelers For Children 100th Anniversary Gala held on Nov. 17, 2014 at the Westin Harborside in Portland — not far from the location of the original Day’s store. The event featured a cocktail reception, dinner and dancing, as well as live and silent auctions. Day’s suppliers were encouraged to participate both by attending the gala and by making sponsorship donations. Primary sponsors for the event included Forevermark, Seiko, Martin Flyer, Rembrandt Charms, Holden Agency and TD Bank. Maine’s governor and first lady, Paul and Anne LePage, were honored guests. The evening was a stunning success, raising over $50,000 for the campaign.In January 2015, on behalf of the entire Day’s Family — employees, suppliers, customers and communities — Jeff and Kathy Corey presented Jewelers For Children with a check for $102,000. Said JFC executive director David Rocha, “Jeff and Kathy Corey epitomize the term ‘community’; the community of the jewelry industry, the community they live in and do business in, and the community they have created for their employees. When they decided to raise $100,000 for Jewelers for Children to celebrate their 100th anniversary, they showed that they are at the center of those communities, and those communities pulled together to help them reach their goal and exceed it.”

Advertisement

In the five years since the #ReasonsToGive campaign, the Coreys and their Day’s community have continued to actively support Jewelers For Children with in-store fundraising, participation with industry-wide initiatives like “JFC Day,” involvement in “wish enhancements” (including send-off parties and shopping sprees for wishes granted to kids in their store areas), and the contribution of time and talent to the organization’s board of directors. Following Jeff Corey’s six years of service, Hannah Duguie, Day’s marketing director, was recently elected to the board. Hannah’s thoughts perfectly reflect the service-focused philosophy that has made the company a century-old institution, and that will carry it through a brilliant future:

“It is so important for jewelers — for any business — to give back to their community. Jewelers for Children is a great way we can band together and make a huge impact. The way you show up for the world as a business is the way the world shows up for you. I could not be more proud to be a part of the Day’s Jewelers family.”

PHOTO GALLERY (14 IMAGES)

{{gallery_holder}}

Continue Reading

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Subscribe


BULLETINS

INSTORE helps you become a better jeweler
with the biggest daily news headlines and useful tips.
(Mailed 5x per week.)

Latest Comments

Most Popular