He’s not a good store manager, but he is a good xx

[vvv]

Yesterday I saw a news story about a cellphone shop owner in Harbin who used a child with autism to persuade the other party with drinks from the shop. Netizens praised him for it. When I first saw that news, I did think of him as the owner—someone who would likely exploit the shop clerks—but even then I had this “three-dimensional-person” kind of thought, and I didn’t really think it through. Today at work, a customer asked for a glass of water for the child. Then the store manager brought her a glass of water, sealed it, and put in a straw. At the time, I felt the manager’s attitude was pretty good. But then, turning around, I remembered he still relies on us to distribute the remaining value, and that what he was doing was also a way of winning people over. So I snapped out of it.

I thought about the phone shop owner from yesterday’s news too. He might treat customers with a “nice” attitude, but toward the shop clerks he has a totally different face—because the relationship is different. One is the object he serves, the other is the object he commands. It shows that only through class analysis can you avoid being misled. The report on that phone shop owner in China’s media feels like it’s also trying to promote class harmony, to mislead the public.

In The Condition of the Working Class in England, Engels pointed out:
1You see! The British bourgeois charity is for their own interests; they won’t just hand out favors for nothing. They treat their “charity” as a transaction. They do business with the poor and tell them: “I’ve spent so much money on charitable causes, so I’ve bought myself the right to not be bothered by you anymore. And you have to stay in your own dark little doghouse—don’t use your poor-looking misery to poke at my sensitive nerves! You may continue to be pessimistic and disappointed, but do it in a way that nobody can notice. That is the condition I propose—that is what I get in exchange for the 20 pounds I donate to the hospital!”

And in the news story, the shop clerks gave the other party free drinks four times. Behind that was:
1The shop owner’s first video was meant to remind others to be careful of this “uninvited guest.” But after netizens warned that it might be an autistic person, the shop owner and the clerks showed tolerance and kindness—the core reason the follow-up videos could continue to be watched and discussed.

The phone shop owner only chose to keep giving out drinks after weighing the gains and losses. Sure enough, that also made his cellphone shop popular for a while—but the price may well be that the clerks’ workload increases for no reason.

哈尔滨手机店店员用饮料引导自闭症青年开口沟通引发全网关注

[eee1]

When I used to work at a coffee shop, customers would come in, and that manager would tell me to get a cup ready at the tea-and-water station—pour a glass of water, put in a slice of lemon, set the cup on a tray, and then use one hand to carry the tray over for the customer to drink from. And there were even specific instructions about placing the glass on the customer’s table: I had to hold the bottom of the glass with one hand, not grab it by the rim. In short, it was all this showy “we’re really taking care of the customer” kind of thing. But I just don’t get it—why not simply set the water pitcher on the table so the person drinking can pour it themselves? That would be quicker and more convenient. So what kind of creature thinks it’s a good thing to have someone else serve them water?

[热肉羹同志]

I went to a “super expensive Western restaurant” recently—more like, for instance, they said you can’t put a spoon of cream mushroom soup into the soup. I had no appetite. The waiters had to repeat everything from “Sorry to bother you” to calling out the dishes, to “Mind the steam—please take your time,” as if it were mandatory. They had to carry the tray with one hand like those foreign butlers (even if there were five or six glasses). And when serving each dish, they had to figure out which direction to face toward the diner, and all that. If you did anything wrong, that store manager would yell at you.

But whenever that manager ran into those “expensive-guest” customers, they’d put on a completely different look—showing total deference and fawning respect.

[红术]

People who manage to get into management are basically never able to avoid being the kind of person who’s good at disguising themselves—good at playing politics, handling favors and connections, and running a front-of-house/back-of-house double act. What they do is all about protecting their economic position and keeping the shop running—“the customer is God.” In front of a camera and customers, they’ll definitely put on a servant-like, public-minded persona. But in front of employees? That persona is never something you’d be able to capture on video.

[狐呼语]

To the point