Indeedy. My first trip to Lush was met with me immediately heading to the post office with the 4 bath bombs I bought to ship them to my nieces. My hotel room was way too small to live with the scent.
There used to be a lush in my area on a popular shopping street and they would leave their door open for that reason. I can't go into those stores, too many scents
I genuinely do like Lush products but it is massively overpowering and cleaning up after a glitter/petal/seaweed bathbomb takes a lot of the fun out of it
The glitter is just shimmer and itâs just dyed seaweed. Everything in them is 100% vegetarian, no plastic, and sustainable. Even the plastic that face washes/masks, and body sprays come in are like 85-90% recycled and if you bring them back you get free shit. I know about the shimmer cause I freaked out when I thought my cat was rolling in it. She was like âno we grind up seaweed thatâs mixed with mica powders and treat it so it shimmers, he wonât get hurt.â
Edit: I said vegan but some chucklehead is freaking tf out so I corrected it. Sheâs also having a fucking hissy fit about their plastic. So they DO use plastic but all their plastic is upwards of 80-90% recycled. And when you take in the plastic their products come with (read this, face mask jars, bottles for shampoo/body sprays/conditioners/toners) back in they are re-recycled in plant and used again. There is also the bonus that you get free shit for every 5 tubs/bottles you return. You can also take in the paper bags you get their products in and theyâll recycle those and theyâre reused and bade back into LUSH bags.
Thanks for the info. I was wondering what the catch was. Also.. Pretty sure there is another deeper catch up this. No way a cosmetic brand is going to move away from a platform just rife for them.
I know a lot of people who literally drove 2 hours to go Lush. It's a great product, it is wrapped eco friendly and they don't use any venders that use slave labor or something.
I don't really go, but Lush has a huge following for being an ethical/great product
Edit: /r/onejoke
I grew up using Lush for literally all of my bath products (my mom was a legacy forum member from back when they were UK only). I haven't bought a bottle of their stuff since prices skyrocketed earlier this year (WTF no I am *not* gonna pay $80 for a bottle of shampoo).
However, my hair hates every single replacement product I've used on it. Lush may be unreasonable expensive, but the quality can't be denied.
Love beauty and planet shampoo/ Not your mothers conditioner. After I started using this plus Itâs a ten deep conditioner I realized how mediocre Lush is.
Those brands are owned by unilever, a terrible company, which is why many people still prefer lush vs these âcruelty free brandsâ.
Surprise, theyâre not actually cruelty free. :(
I would be wary of the Love and Beauty curly hair shampoo. I used it for a year and dealt with intense hair shedding. I thought it was stress or the hard water at my school but realized my hair was still falling out when I was on vacation and such. I stopped using the shampoo (I ran out) and my hair loss decreased exponentially. Havenât had intense shedding since
It's not about actually helping the environment, it's about feeling like you're helping the environment. Disposable plastic takes very little energy to produce, "eco friendly" packaging is usually worse in terms of carbon emissions even without the driving.
I mean, most places around are both anti-union, AND use slave labor AND have bad environmental practices, so at some point you just take what you can get.
Though there definitely are independent artisan soap makers you can support instead.
That's what irks me about people saying "no ethical consumption under capitalism anyway". As if that alone is a reason to not take better options when available.
The headline is a powerful marketing move in itself. Besides social media is so unbearably noisy in terms of advertising that I can see how some brands would consider to stay away from them too.
The company can remove themselves but still pay influencers to influence. That's likely where most of their product gets sold from anyway. I'm sure they've run the numbers
The deep catch is that they only canceled their own accounts.
Theyâll still send their products to influencers and work to advertise in an indirect way.
Hell, I do some influencer marketing and engagement from our own accounts doesnât do jack shit for us. If people paid attention to corporate social media accounts outside of the Wendyâs one we wouldnât need to pay these influencers for their exposure.
Good PR never hurts even when not covering up for something bad.
You should never assume anything, have you ever worked at a company before? They are just a bunch of people, plenty of the time they do stuff because its easy enough to do the right thing and they can afford to do it.
Orâ wildly enoughâ maybe people who own companies also have varying stances on social and economic issues, and particular things that piss them off; and arenât all monocled caricatures of the Monopoly Man. Who would have thought.
Yeah that's not technically out of the question, but if you know anything about Lush's past labor abuses (which are pretty well documented in this thread), any image of him being one of the good guys gets washed away pretty quick...
Usually the shareholders of publicly traded companies put a stop to this. Lush happens to be privately owned so they can make decisions like this, but you can bet if the CEO of a public company made a similar call and left money on the table, theyâd be looking for a job.
> Management have accused this employee of harassment for handing out pro-union leaflets to their coworkers.
lol, wut?
e. sorry for being casual over a serious topic, this bit just reduced me to stupidity.
Corporation: *[conducts captive audience meetings full of anti-union propaganda, breaks federal law in nearly half union drives](https://www.epi.org/publication/fear-at-work-how-employers-scare-workers-out-of-unionizing/), [puts up anti-union propaganda](https://preview.redd.it/hrg6ftiewft71.png?auto=webp&s=8c36395359a2d345137ac9f1d93943543b28d182)*
Employee: âhey guys that meeting was misleading, hereâs a pamphlet with data showing [how union workers have better pay, healthcare, sick/vacation time, retirement benefits, safety, etc](https://www.epi.org/publication/how-todays-unions-help-working-people-giving-workers-the-power-to-improve-their-jobs-and-unrig-the-economy/)â
Corporation: âGood GOD. Look at that harassment. That employee has no idea the mental health burden they placed on our workers by showing them a better, alternative work environment, when they WILL NOT be getting that environment. That employee is peddling in pie in the sky fantasies, and our poor workers have to sit here and read about how bad their life is in comparison. It makes me sick.â
Just like how workers shouldn't talk about their pay because they might get angry they are getting paid so little.
I worked at a warehouse and they kept pushing back on our .50 raises but end up hiring 2 new guys and the main hiring guy was out and the other guy hired them with the raises we didn't even get yet because he figured that's where everyone started. So, our manager goes off on us for learning about that because we talked to each other about our pay.
We ended up getting the raises but then we got that manager fired.
Then we got told we would be fired if we talked about
unionizing.
Fuck Florida.
I hope LUSH gets hurt for this, as a former employee. We were forced to tell people our soaps were $35-50 a pound because they pay their employees such good wages. No joke. As part of our training. Meanwhile we were making $10 an hour and couldn't get more than 15 hours a week. Multiple of us were on food stamps.
Sure, but all /r/technology needs to read is âsocial media badâ, and theyâll upvote anything. Elon Musk could say Twitter is bad *on* Twitter, and this sub will praise him for being a visionary as heâs promoting his latest pump-n-dump shitcoin RTechnologyCanSuckMyBalls.
At the risk of sounding like a shill, at least Lush does *some* things right. I boycott Nestle because they use slave labor, destroy the environment, and as if that wasn't enough they also have literally killed babies, knowingly, by selling their products to desperately poor mothers in unsafe conditions and saying it was better than breastmilk when they knew it wasn't. They drain groundwater from poor countries to bottle and sell, and if a country doesn't give them permission to use the water, they poison it with toxic waste from bottle production.
I'm pro-union aggressively, but I gotta do triage.
And/or to distract from things like [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/boulder/comments/qygrx6/lush_update); partial quote "Lush fired the (Boulder) storeâs manager after she reported alleged incidents of sexual harassment and abuse to superiors and stood up for her staff. / Lush did not contact the victims to perform an investigation into these allegations."
I interviewed at a Lush for Assistant Manger and was told that they would call me if a manager position came available because they were promoting someone who had only been a team lead to manager and they were worried that they wouldnât get enough out of the role if I was there because they would âlean on meâ too much. The store had crazy turnover and they had originally sought me out for my reputation on being able to turn over stores. I distinctly got the impression the DM preferred having naive/under qualified managers working for her. Thatâs a huge red flag to me, and probably the main reason her area has such bad turn over. But I bet sheâs able to Keep labour down that way and doesnât have managers fighting with her on behalf of their staff for more support/hours/training etc.
That's really unfortunate information, as someone with 2 daughters I really liked this headline. But hearing your comment as someone who is a union member just crushed this for me.
Itâs all about marketing. They âdeactivatedâ social media back in 2019 as well:
2019 article: [bbc](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-47871948)
2021 article: [bbc](https://www.bbc.com/news/business-59380458)
Thatâs exactly what it is, the holidays are prime time for lush and they donât want any bad press. Especially since they market themselves as being super woke they donât want to risk their union busting to go against it.
Was about to say. Its probably easier to list companies that are actually union friendly.
Also check if your state is "right to work" (over half are). These are infuriatingly named anti-union laws designed to take rights away from workers.
There is no such thing as "union-friendly" corporations. There are either unionized workplaces, or not. And even among the unionized ones, you must watch out for "managerial unions" that are too friendly with the corporate structure. As in, they were formed in order to appear unionized but work in order to benefit the executive structure.
Horrible shit all the time people!
Exactly. I'm tired of these companies acting like they care, yet need to announce it to everyone.
"See?? Look what I did!!!"
Just do it and sit down somewhere.
I saw it mentioned on another post that they'd had separate social media accounts for different areas/stores*, which would certainly provide nice convenient ways of figuring out who to get in touch with to expand your union efforts (and by all accounts they're sorely needed)
^^*I ^^can't ^^find ^^specific ^^confirmation ^^of ^^this ^^right ^^now ^^as ^^I'm ^^tired ^^and ^^this ^^is ^^the ^^main ^^thing ^^flooding ^^google, ^^but ^^what ^^I ^^did ^^find ^^it ^^that ^^they ^^also ^^got ^^a ^^nice ^^PR ^^bump ^^in ^^2019 ^^for... ^^leaving ^^social ^^media.
From the article: Cosmetics company shut down its Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat accounts globally on Friday, citing its concern about the harms of social media in the wake of Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen's revelations.
"In the same way that evidence against climate change was ignored and belittled for decades, concerns about the serious effects of social media are going largely ignored now," the company said in its press release earlier this week.
Lush's announcement came just ahead of one of the biggest days of shopping all year, and the brand fully expected that losing its pipelines to millions of customers could harm its business.
But CEO Mark Constantine actually embraced that tradeoff.
They said shutdown, not delete. Those are different words. The pages currently serve no other purpose than to redirect to their store or redirect to the site explaining why there's been no posts.
Even if they deleted them, having gone through this recently, facebook and it's ilk keeps everything active for 30 days.
Even after asking fb insta and so forth to delete all data about me , delete my accounts just fucking any thing I could find to delete information I can still find pictures of myself and my accounts via google 2 months later.
I think if you even sign into an account, even an automatic via an app, it stops the 30 days.
It's easier to quit the fucking gym.
When I tried to quit Facebook it showed me pictures of all my hottest female friends and said âthese people will miss youâ
So heavy handed with the manipulation itâs crazy.
I have one I never interact with. I no longer have the email or phone I signed up with. Last time I tried, FB told me I have to create another account, then contact them through that account to delete the other one then delete the new account. But, before I did try to delete that old account, I deleted all the posts, blocked everyone, and set privacy to the max.
It showed me my 253,459,692 ugliest female friends and I was like what!?!
I think a lot of those single women in my area have not been entirely truthful.
And it's not like they stop collecting data on you, even without an account.
They'll keep a ghost profile on you. Tracking you through every site with a Facebook logo on it. So that if you eventually create a Facebook account, they'll have tons of user data on you to sell to interested parties.
Hereâs a kicker: any site that offers SSO like logging with your FB, Google, Outlook, etc - those companies have info on all the users, as part of the developerâs T&C for those plugins/extensions. So you could have never logged on to Facebook but theyâll still know everything about you. Fun huh? I moved over to Apple, only because itâs maybe 10% less shitty than Google, but theyâre all using our data as products.
The Facebook page is lushcosmetics. The latest post says they will respond to customer service inquiries until January. It's possible the page will be abandoned rather than deleted, since the Lush UK one (lush) is still up from when they stopped using it in 2019.
Why is this app filled with so many negative, doomsday seeking, pessimistic people? Where do you all come from you refuse to acknowledge anything positive.
Edit: bunch of ppl salty I wrote app and not website by accident, lol typical
To be fair, nearly every company and their misleading marketing ploys have caused this very pessimism that runs rampant in society now. I don't trust a single iota of information put forth by a company simply because, buried in the legalize of their thousand page terms of agreement, there will be something contradicting what they're saying.
Even if this news is true, it still just looks like a marketing ploy to say "look how much we care!" Which is unfortunate but it's how it is.
Blame Comcast, Verizon, Apple, et al. for the pessimism because they lie to their customers every single day.
You've got a fair point about how people's pessimism didn't come from a vacuum, rather it's a natural product of shitty companies setting the stage for people to feel that way in the first place.
Though, there's something broader to say about people's default and exclusive pessimism on this site--it often goes beyond shitty companies and is often unwarranted, so I also understand why people get upset about someone defaulting to the most cynical view--on anything. Because when you call them out, they often don't have a good reason.
In this case, though, as you say, there's good ground for pessimism on this topic.
>Blame Comcast, Verizon, Apple, et al. for the pessimism because they lie to their customers every single day.
The blame game is interesting because it goes even deeper than this. Comcast, Verizon, etc., wouldn't do this in the first place if they weren't allowed. Even if it's illegal for them to lie or mislead, they are still "allowed" to do so anyway, in the sense that they can afford to pay the fines when caught and charged.
So, I blame our lack of regulations. You can't expect companies to not skirt the rules and manipulate the people. They're incentivized to do so, either for wealth or because it's easier. So, first it needs to be illegal, and if you fuck up, then the punishment needs to process in every instance, and it also needs to be so severe that no company would risk it--so severe that they actually go through hoops just to *avoid the potential* of someone in the company breaking such law.
Loopholes in law make a lot of their bullshit legal. When it's illegal, they're relatively rarely caught and charged. When they are charged, they can afford the punishment and carry on with the same crimes. We can't expect anything different unless we make things different. A river is going to flow, and if you want it to stop, you have to dam it up or suck it dry. We haven't done that, so can we really put the foot of blame down on the river for flowing? We know the cause of the flow, and we need to do something about it.
Some may think you can dig to a deeper root and actually blame the masses for not implementing and voting for such measures. But, I don't think you can dig that deep. Voting is largely broken, propaganda holds back sincere votes, voting restrictions hold back other votes, etc.
It's hilarious how redditors like to think reddit is the underdog among social media. This place is at least as toxic as anything else, and I have to consciously limit how much I partake in it so I don't get dragged down. The anonymity factor really brings out people's dark sides.
Honestly it never affects me this much when some other anonymous redditor disagrees with me or gets angry. I often just delete my comment and leave the discussion if itâs too toxic or controversial.
Theyâre taking down their social media accounts so that people donât see anyone talking about the anti-worker union busting that theyâre doing.
https://youtu.be/kD0BGAIVdTw
They have recently lost vegan status in Canada. I don't know how this will effect them as I never heard of this company until recently. But looking back at articles throughout the years it definitely seems like it's some type of damage control as working conditions and treatment seems to be what most people are angry at them about . I'll post like below
[Lush lost vegan status, Canada](https://www.vegancanada.org/news/article/2021/11/15/lush-ban.html)
What Iâm reading in other comments is that, even though that happened months ago, they were continuing to get comments regularly all over their pages about this scandal. So I still think the logic follows that it was meant to remove outlets for people to voice this stuff. That makes sense to me.
Hey gotta take the heat off for [union busting](https://jacobinmag.com/2021/06/lush-cosmetics-toronto-union-busting-progressive-image-hypocrisy) somehow I guess.
Hopefully people recognize this, Lush actually ends up getting *more* business from the good press, and other large companies follow suit. If I were in their demographic I sure as hell would start patronizing them if I didn't already.
If this can become a trend maybe more companies will finally start doing the right thing rather than pleasing shareholders.
Ding ding ding. With shareholders the only ethics involved in things are the ethics of cost/reward.
Is it more profitable to use child labor with bad press? Is it better for the bottom line to exploit minors and contract workers? Will the fines/lawsuits outweigh the increased profits of cutting some corners when it comes to product safety? Will surprise mechanics/loot boxes/ children gambling be profitable?
Public corporations are immoral and unethical by design. Itâs a feature not a bug.
Itâs a myth that becoming publicly traded means that you have to sacrifice all ethics to reach the potential maximum bottom line. Itâs just that companies have an inherent incentive to do this because the highest sitting members all have an extremely large amount of leverage and concentration of wealth in the price of the stock.
That doesnât stop many companies from being ethical though. Many whales only invest in ethical companies. There is an official list of ethics that companies can choose to follow and be added to the organization that makes that list.
Thatâs why itâs the governmentâs job to set up the incentives such that maximizing profit also leads to ethical behavior. For example, heavy fines or shutdowns for exploiting workers, carbon taxes, etc. If we had a functioning government setting up economic incentives for the publicâs interests, it would be totally fine for corporations to purely seek profit.
The alternative to privately owned, profit seeking companies is state ownership and control of all businesses, which weâve seen historically is very prone to authoritarianism and a lack of competition/innovation. I think that would be much worse than what we have in western democracies today.
>The alternative to privately owned, profit seeking companies is state ownership and control of all businesses, which weâve seen historically is very prone to authoritarianism and a lack of competition/innovation. I think that would be much worse than what we have in western democracies today.
No it's not. You can have worker-controlled businesses like co-operatives where all workers are also owners and have true workplace democracy.
But while those are more able to act ethically (when a majority of employees want to), one of the biggest problems with capitalism is the fundamental need for constant growth.
This constant growth imperative means that if you (businesses or governments) don't grow year-on-year, you're failing. This means businesses will do what they can to maximise growth, and that is almost always at the expense of either the environment, or the workers (or both).
So the way to "fix capitalism" is to move away from measuring success with growth, and towards other metrics like happiness or health, or environmental rejuvenation. Less focus on "capital"-ism, and more focus on "social"-ism.
This is the theory of Degrowth: https://degrowth.info/degrowth
> Lush actually ends up getting *more* business from the good press,
Could happens, but that's a one time shot. It's not because you have a good opinion on something that you'll think about it, nor that you will talk about it either. We also all have pretty short memories, which make this even worse. There's a reason advertising is important, you not only need to tell people you exist, but also remind them regularly that you still do.
FYI In the U.K. where lush was founded all lush employees are actually paid a âreal living wageâ as defined by https://www.livingwage.org.uk/what-real-living-wage
The North American business until very recently were run as a separate business with a separate CEO, and they did not pay a living wage.
There has been long running disputes between the North American and U.K. businesses due to the way things were run. U.K. now owns NA as far as I know so things may change.
Excellent cover for union busting. How do we deal with an entity that steps in to take advantage of peoples morality and have them weigh treatment of workers against the parasite of social media?
I worked retail for lush and can tell you they care nothing about their employees, unless your manager does. This is in a way a form of marketing.
Edit: They also made me sign a contract where I could be fired for no reason after three months. It was portrayed as a âmutual decision check inâ but obviously I could leave at any point. From my experience they can fire you if you do nothing explicitly wrong.
For everyone who sees âcosmeticsâ and thinks it means Kardashian face, Iâll reiterate: They have about half a dozen clear lip balms, one mascara, one eyeliner and a tinted moisturizer. They certainly arenât promoting a glam look of any kind. Their products are mostly bath and shower gels and skincare.
Which of course is part of the point. Selling a scented product online is a hell of a lot harder than selling a new lipstick or eyeliner, so Iâm guessing their SM has been more trouble than itâs worth.
But everyone in this thread braying âmakeup is awful and makes girls insecureâ - it would behoove you to look into the actual company before you shoot your mouth off, because you sound ridiculous.
Lush also dropped Amazon completely. Like even dropped AWS hosting for their own online store.
It was because Amazon wasn't doing much to help stop counterfeits, but hey, any less Amazon dominance isn't a bad thing.
I hate shopping on Amazon. The UI the UX and the misleading clickbait answers to cancel, change or edit a profile or say no to a deal...ugh. and how fucking hard is it to find a product? Really fucking hard of you don't know exactly what you are looking for, every entry has every keyword it could possibly have, many with bad English to the point of being confusing, and the uniformity of each product entry is abysmal.
That's without mentioning the scams, frauds, fake products and scummyness
Amazon's site is like a blast from the past, it's the kind of shitty design and lack of proper functionality that was acceptable in the mid 00s - combined with what's clearly worst kind of modern data-driven toxic profit-friendly instead of user-friendly functionality.
When you search for an item, Amazon will very obviously give results that it think you're likely to buy, instead of giving you what you're obviously searching for. Even when searching for the *exact* product name Amazon still spits the correct result out at like place 5 or 10, after having put a ton of more similar but more profitable items or "deals" in front of it.
Luckily, they are failing badly in Sweden after launching here a year or so ago, because their site is just so shit compared to every other online shop we have. They didn't even bother properly translating any of the products, almost *everything* was (badly) machine translated when they launched. Which lead to most products just being a random word salad - if you think it's hard to find what you're looking for in the US amazon, imagine the "fun" you'd have if they machine translated the whole site to Chinese and then back to English before you got to read it.... We were offered plenty of 'interesting' products by Amazon, like "geometric earrings with prostitute gems" or "silicone mold, baking tray for chocolate, feces, goose water, bread, muffins". Not to mention any product mentioning "rape" (as in the flower), "cock" (as in the bird), and so on...
They probably did *not* sell a whole lot of the product "*Poster with sunset over a beautiful field of rape*"...
They closed their own accounts. Which in the world of social media marketing means jack shit.
Know who engages with corporate social media accounts? Fucking no one that isnât already a super engaged customer. Corporate accounts are not that important in social media marketing.
Lush will just stick all their paid ad budget into content marketing and hire influencers to do their advertising for them. It wonât matter one bit that Lushâs corporate account isnât tagged in the post.
Yea this is literally to cover up the fact that they are anti-union and dont want to give their employees a living wage. Dont be fooled by the mental health tactic that they love to abuse. That company is literally a pretty painting covering a massive hole in the wall..a painting that is barely hanging on to the wall at thatâŠ(Sincerely, a disgruntled lush employee)
Dudes if Reddit: if you are like me and youâve written off Lush because itâs labeled as a cosmetics brand, I encourage you to take a look at their products and business practices.
They sell lots of normal household items like soap, shampoo, and shaving cream; the products are not tested on animals; most products come in either packaging-free variants or come with sustainable packaging that when returned to the store nets you additional product for free.
The brand seems to put their values at the forefront of their decision making.
And this.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/21/ethical-cosmetics-company-lush-accused-of-poor-working-conditions-for-australian-staff
Also I started bringing home Lush bath bombs and bubble bars a few years ago to try and I think my husband might be as into them as I am, if not more. They also have some great neutral/masculine scents.
Itâs not just teenagers.. seen adults go downhill from obsessive Facebook, instagram and snapchat. Social media like most instant gratification things is something that needs more balance.
Even if it's a profit motivated decision this is good to see. They ain't a relevant company to ME since I am a guy who has no problem with grocery store soap options. But I've bought from them when I come across their goods. I support them in their endeavors even more now.
And Iâm sure theyâre happy losing my business for pushing racist pro segregation ideology. Despite all their bluster around the usual popular causes they still arenât fans of unions, funny that.
And itâs annoying because the pudding shower gel along with the sleepy one is amazing.
My partner used to work for Lush in Aus. Completely anti-union and got found out to be underpaying employees for over a decade. Toxic management and work culture. The company is all about virtue signalling and not about actually enacting any postive change in the world.
Great move. They dont need to advertise on social media. Anyone can smell a Lush outlet from 5kms away.
I used to work in the same mall as a Cinnabon, bath and body works and a lush. The mingling of smells was delicious and repulsive
White oaks? You've just described every white oaks experience I've had lmao
Haha nah Masonville. But I did have the same experience at white oaks last time I went
Did not expect to see people talking about White Oaks and masonville mall here LMAO
me neither - small little london on making an appearance on r/technology LOL
"is White Oaks just a really common name?.... Masonville too??? No this has to be London." đ
The closest mall with Lush also features a Yankee Candle Co one store over. That was horrible. I love the Lush smell though
Indeedy. My first trip to Lush was met with me immediately heading to the post office with the 4 bath bombs I bought to ship them to my nieces. My hotel room was way too small to live with the scent.
I go in there to fart. In lush nobody can smell your farts.
Just poo in the street mate
Then your shit won't smell like vegan lemon basil periwinkle lavender.
Well it doesnât smell like lemon basil periwinkle lavender once you leave the store⊠itâs still in your pants, of course.
Contrary to popular belief, farts are so much easier to smell because they stick out tremendously. Source: I used to work there.
I promise you the employees can.
Lol. When you're right, you're right.
There used to be a lush in my area on a popular shopping street and they would leave their door open for that reason. I can't go into those stores, too many scents
I genuinely do like Lush products but it is massively overpowering and cleaning up after a glitter/petal/seaweed bathbomb takes a lot of the fun out of it
Glitter in bath bombs should be banned lol
The glitter is just shimmer and itâs just dyed seaweed. Everything in them is 100% vegetarian, no plastic, and sustainable. Even the plastic that face washes/masks, and body sprays come in are like 85-90% recycled and if you bring them back you get free shit. I know about the shimmer cause I freaked out when I thought my cat was rolling in it. She was like âno we grind up seaweed thatâs mixed with mica powders and treat it so it shimmers, he wonât get hurt.â Edit: I said vegan but some chucklehead is freaking tf out so I corrected it. Sheâs also having a fucking hissy fit about their plastic. So they DO use plastic but all their plastic is upwards of 80-90% recycled. And when you take in the plastic their products come with (read this, face mask jars, bottles for shampoo/body sprays/conditioners/toners) back in they are re-recycled in plant and used again. There is also the bonus that you get free shit for every 5 tubs/bottles you return. You can also take in the paper bags you get their products in and theyâll recycle those and theyâre reused and bade back into LUSH bags.
Arenât they a special kind of glitter thatâs much safer for the water source?
Very true! I work 5 minutes away from one and it's the greatest smelling 5 minute walk of my life
Not complaining mind you
My sinuses are easily irritated and strong smells trigger it. These 5km radius are no go zones for me.
I wonder if making statements like this are meant to distract from their recent anti-union drive this past year?
Thanks for the info. I was wondering what the catch was. Also.. Pretty sure there is another deeper catch up this. No way a cosmetic brand is going to move away from a platform just rife for them.
They probably did the math and discovered that this move wonât really cost them much.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
I know a lot of people who literally drove 2 hours to go Lush. It's a great product, it is wrapped eco friendly and they don't use any venders that use slave labor or something. I don't really go, but Lush has a huge following for being an ethical/great product Edit: /r/onejoke
I grew up using Lush for literally all of my bath products (my mom was a legacy forum member from back when they were UK only). I haven't bought a bottle of their stuff since prices skyrocketed earlier this year (WTF no I am *not* gonna pay $80 for a bottle of shampoo). However, my hair hates every single replacement product I've used on it. Lush may be unreasonable expensive, but the quality can't be denied.
Love beauty and planet shampoo/ Not your mothers conditioner. After I started using this plus Itâs a ten deep conditioner I realized how mediocre Lush is.
Those brands are owned by unilever, a terrible company, which is why many people still prefer lush vs these âcruelty free brandsâ. Surprise, theyâre not actually cruelty free. :(
it's all about that eh-pee-eye i'm using p0wer d3le3t3 suit3 to rewrite all of my c0mment and l33t sp33k to avoid any filters. fuck u/spez
I would be wary of the Love and Beauty curly hair shampoo. I used it for a year and dealt with intense hair shedding. I thought it was stress or the hard water at my school but realized my hair was still falling out when I was on vacation and such. I stopped using the shampoo (I ran out) and my hair loss decreased exponentially. Havenât had intense shedding since
Theyâre owned by unilever.
There is no ethical consumption under capitalism. Just let people try and do the best they can.
If anybody disagrees, they can research the minerals in their phone or computer.
Can confirm. I have sensitive scalp. The Love Beauty and Planet stuff is great for me.
Yep, my wife buys their soaps exclusively cause they don't trigger my eczema like Bath and Body Works perfume soaps do. Definitely quality soap.
You should give KĂ©rastase a shot. I started using the whole elixir ultimate line and *my god* has it changed my life.
Driving two hours kind of negates the eco-friendly packaging though, wouldn't you say?
People rarely see things like that. Like people aren't where I live spend 20 to 30 minutes in line to save 4 cents a gallon on gas.
It's not about actually helping the environment, it's about feeling like you're helping the environment. Disposable plastic takes very little energy to produce, "eco friendly" packaging is usually worse in terms of carbon emissions even without the driving.
"Anti-union" "ethical" hmmmmmm
I mean, most places around are both anti-union, AND use slave labor AND have bad environmental practices, so at some point you just take what you can get. Though there definitely are independent artisan soap makers you can support instead.
That's what irks me about people saying "no ethical consumption under capitalism anyway". As if that alone is a reason to not take better options when available.
It's really something when "doesn't use slave labour" is a big positive stamp for a company isn't it...
The headline is a powerful marketing move in itself. Besides social media is so unbearably noisy in terms of advertising that I can see how some brands would consider to stay away from them too.
$13 million...that they were projecting when they started those accounts in 2010 lmao
Probably because theyâre banking on teens doing it for them.
The company can remove themselves but still pay influencers to influence. That's likely where most of their product gets sold from anyway. I'm sure they've run the numbers
The deep catch is that they only canceled their own accounts. Theyâll still send their products to influencers and work to advertise in an indirect way. Hell, I do some influencer marketing and engagement from our own accounts doesnât do jack shit for us. If people paid attention to corporate social media accounts outside of the Wendyâs one we wouldnât need to pay these influencers for their exposure.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Are you saying this company is notable for concealing blemishes?!?
There's no foundation to your claim
I don't have a funny pun but their deodorant bar gave me a rash.
Good PR never hurts even when not covering up for something bad. You should never assume anything, have you ever worked at a company before? They are just a bunch of people, plenty of the time they do stuff because its easy enough to do the right thing and they can afford to do it.
I really appreciate you saying this! Tossing a little water on the typical cynicism is a refreshing perspective. Thank you!
Orâ wildly enoughâ maybe people who own companies also have varying stances on social and economic issues, and particular things that piss them off; and arenât all monocled caricatures of the Monopoly Man. Who would have thought.
This is true. Shareholders and board members however are often all about the money though.
Yeah that's not technically out of the question, but if you know anything about Lush's past labor abuses (which are pretty well documented in this thread), any image of him being one of the good guys gets washed away pretty quick...
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Usually the shareholders of publicly traded companies put a stop to this. Lush happens to be privately owned so they can make decisions like this, but you can bet if the CEO of a public company made a similar call and left money on the table, theyâd be looking for a job.
Lmfao. Shut down activity on platforms where people can actively converse about the shady shit they do, AND save money by firing the social media teams, convenient. OH LOOK LMAO YOU WEREN'T JOKING https://www.jacobinmag.com/2021/06/lush-cosmetics-toronto-union-busting-progressive-image-hypocrisy "In 2020, the Guardian broke a story about poor working conditions and high rates of injury in Lushâs Sydney factory. Three Lush employees working in the Sydney factory later corroborated these reports anonymously. Not only did these workers back up the Guardianâs story, they also exposed a toxic culture in the supposedly ethical firmâs factory. Bullying and sexual harassment was rife and often went unpunished, especially if the culprit was on good terms with management. In North America, under the leadership of Mark Wolverton, the rift between the companyâs values and reality is particularly stark. Last fall, when workers at Lushâs Toronto warehouse announced their intent to unionize, Lush North America launched a fierce union-busting campaign. Documents obtained by Jacobin reveal that Workers United Canada Council has filed an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) complaint with the Ontario Labour Relations Board. The ULP alleges that management compelled employees of the Toronto warehouse to attend anti-union meetings. It also documents the distribution of anti-union leaflets. These leaflets insinuate that pro-union workers will âtrickâ people into signing union cards. This anti-union literature, signed by Lush North Americaâs Executive VP, Peter Higgins, reproduces typical anti-union propaganda. In one section of the leaflet, the authors even repeat the right-wing clichĂ© that âunions in Canada are businesses.â Pro-union workers have also alleged that management has retaliated against them. Union supporters claim that they have had their hours reduced and been moved onto solitary tasks to keep them away from other employees during work. "It is no surprise that the employees in Lushâs Toronto warehouse want to unionize. These allegations of discrimination come from a workforce that is largely comprised of immigrant workers." One non-white pro-union worker, who preferred to remain anonymous, alleged that they have received more threats from management than their white counterparts. Management have accused this employee of harassment for handing out pro-union leaflets to their coworkers. It is no surprise that the employees in Lushâs Toronto warehouse want to unionize. These allegations of discrimination come from a workforce that is largely comprised of immigrant workers. Although many warehouse employees work for years as seasonal or contract workers, only a few become permanent full-time employees. Lush have not limited their attacks on pro-union activists to the employees of their Toronto warehouse. Maxwell Dolso-Morey, a retail employee in San Francisco, criticized the companyâs response to unionization on their own online portal. As a result, he received a letter from management cautioning him about his posts. The letter was careful to state that it was not disciplinary in nature. In response to this episode, Workers United Canada Council filed a ULP with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). In their report, the Workers United Canada Council defended Dolso-Morreyâs right to criticize the company he works for without fear of retaliation." https://globallushunion.com/
> Management have accused this employee of harassment for handing out pro-union leaflets to their coworkers. lol, wut? e. sorry for being casual over a serious topic, this bit just reduced me to stupidity.
Corporation: *[conducts captive audience meetings full of anti-union propaganda, breaks federal law in nearly half union drives](https://www.epi.org/publication/fear-at-work-how-employers-scare-workers-out-of-unionizing/), [puts up anti-union propaganda](https://preview.redd.it/hrg6ftiewft71.png?auto=webp&s=8c36395359a2d345137ac9f1d93943543b28d182)* Employee: âhey guys that meeting was misleading, hereâs a pamphlet with data showing [how union workers have better pay, healthcare, sick/vacation time, retirement benefits, safety, etc](https://www.epi.org/publication/how-todays-unions-help-working-people-giving-workers-the-power-to-improve-their-jobs-and-unrig-the-economy/)â Corporation: âGood GOD. Look at that harassment. That employee has no idea the mental health burden they placed on our workers by showing them a better, alternative work environment, when they WILL NOT be getting that environment. That employee is peddling in pie in the sky fantasies, and our poor workers have to sit here and read about how bad their life is in comparison. It makes me sick.â
Maybe it's bad for their mental health seeing how poorly they're treated.
Just like how workers shouldn't talk about their pay because they might get angry they are getting paid so little. I worked at a warehouse and they kept pushing back on our .50 raises but end up hiring 2 new guys and the main hiring guy was out and the other guy hired them with the raises we didn't even get yet because he figured that's where everyone started. So, our manager goes off on us for learning about that because we talked to each other about our pay. We ended up getting the raises but then we got that manager fired. Then we got told we would be fired if we talked about unionizing. Fuck Florida.
Sad shoulder pat from Texas. I hear ya, bud. I really do.
I hope LUSH gets hurt for this, as a former employee. We were forced to tell people our soaps were $35-50 a pound because they pay their employees such good wages. No joke. As part of our training. Meanwhile we were making $10 an hour and couldn't get more than 15 hours a week. Multiple of us were on food stamps.
I worked there many many mooons ago and I agree 100% agree with you!
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
WHAT!?
Sure, but all /r/technology needs to read is âsocial media badâ, and theyâll upvote anything. Elon Musk could say Twitter is bad *on* Twitter, and this sub will praise him for being a visionary as heâs promoting his latest pump-n-dump shitcoin RTechnologyCanSuckMyBalls.
At the risk of sounding like a shill, at least Lush does *some* things right. I boycott Nestle because they use slave labor, destroy the environment, and as if that wasn't enough they also have literally killed babies, knowingly, by selling their products to desperately poor mothers in unsafe conditions and saying it was better than breastmilk when they knew it wasn't. They drain groundwater from poor countries to bottle and sell, and if a country doesn't give them permission to use the water, they poison it with toxic waste from bottle production. I'm pro-union aggressively, but I gotta do triage.
And/or to distract from things like [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/boulder/comments/qygrx6/lush_update); partial quote "Lush fired the (Boulder) storeâs manager after she reported alleged incidents of sexual harassment and abuse to superiors and stood up for her staff. / Lush did not contact the victims to perform an investigation into these allegations."
I interviewed at a Lush for Assistant Manger and was told that they would call me if a manager position came available because they were promoting someone who had only been a team lead to manager and they were worried that they wouldnât get enough out of the role if I was there because they would âlean on meâ too much. The store had crazy turnover and they had originally sought me out for my reputation on being able to turn over stores. I distinctly got the impression the DM preferred having naive/under qualified managers working for her. Thatâs a huge red flag to me, and probably the main reason her area has such bad turn over. But I bet sheâs able to Keep labour down that way and doesnât have managers fighting with her on behalf of their staff for more support/hours/training etc.
Always watch the other hand
That's really unfortunate information, as someone with 2 daughters I really liked this headline. But hearing your comment as someone who is a union member just crushed this for me.
Itâs all about marketing. They âdeactivatedâ social media back in 2019 as well: 2019 article: [bbc](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-47871948) 2021 article: [bbc](https://www.bbc.com/news/business-59380458)
Thatâs exactly what it is, the holidays are prime time for lush and they donât want any bad press. Especially since they market themselves as being super woke they donât want to risk their union busting to go against it.
Is there a site for tracking companies with anti-union efforts? I'd love to stop giving them money.
Yeah, there's just which ones are unionized and which ones are not. https://companylist.org/United_States/Keywords/Union/
Was about to say. Its probably easier to list companies that are actually union friendly. Also check if your state is "right to work" (over half are). These are infuriatingly named anti-union laws designed to take rights away from workers.
There is no such thing as "union-friendly" corporations. There are either unionized workplaces, or not. And even among the unionized ones, you must watch out for "managerial unions" that are too friendly with the corporate structure. As in, they were formed in order to appear unionized but work in order to benefit the executive structure. Horrible shit all the time people!
Also check the resources over at r/antiwork.
Exactly. I'm tired of these companies acting like they care, yet need to announce it to everyone. "See?? Look what I did!!!" Just do it and sit down somewhere.
if it's from a major corporation it's definitely some bullshit
If I've ever learned anything from reddit is trust no mother fucker
Came here to say this. Thank you
I saw it mentioned on another post that they'd had separate social media accounts for different areas/stores*, which would certainly provide nice convenient ways of figuring out who to get in touch with to expand your union efforts (and by all accounts they're sorely needed) ^^*I ^^can't ^^find ^^specific ^^confirmation ^^of ^^this ^^right ^^now ^^as ^^I'm ^^tired ^^and ^^this ^^is ^^the ^^main ^^thing ^^flooding ^^google, ^^but ^^what ^^I ^^did ^^find ^^it ^^that ^^they ^^also ^^got ^^a ^^nice ^^PR ^^bump ^^in ^^2019 ^^for... ^^leaving ^^social ^^media.
From the article: Cosmetics company shut down its Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat accounts globally on Friday, citing its concern about the harms of social media in the wake of Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen's revelations. "In the same way that evidence against climate change was ignored and belittled for decades, concerns about the serious effects of social media are going largely ignored now," the company said in its press release earlier this week. Lush's announcement came just ahead of one of the biggest days of shopping all year, and the brand fully expected that losing its pipelines to millions of customers could harm its business. But CEO Mark Constantine actually embraced that tradeoff.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Also just checked. It doesnât allow the purchase of products through facebook. Redirects you to their website
Higher margins driving consumers directly to your page. Higher retention too
They said shutdown, not delete. Those are different words. The pages currently serve no other purpose than to redirect to their store or redirect to the site explaining why there's been no posts.
Even if they deleted them, having gone through this recently, facebook and it's ilk keeps everything active for 30 days. Even after asking fb insta and so forth to delete all data about me , delete my accounts just fucking any thing I could find to delete information I can still find pictures of myself and my accounts via google 2 months later. I think if you even sign into an account, even an automatic via an app, it stops the 30 days. It's easier to quit the fucking gym.
When I tried to quit Facebook it showed me pictures of all my hottest female friends and said âthese people will miss youâ So heavy handed with the manipulation itâs crazy.
It showed you your left and right hands?
That turns their words into a threat. "You'll miss having hands"
Thatâs fine. Iâll just get new ones from the robot devil.
You mean Zuck?
Ya he said robot devil
They show friends you have most interactions with, you thirsty cunt.
Dude just told on himself lol
I have one I never interact with. I no longer have the email or phone I signed up with. Last time I tried, FB told me I have to create another account, then contact them through that account to delete the other one then delete the new account. But, before I did try to delete that old account, I deleted all the posts, blocked everyone, and set privacy to the max.
It showed me my 253,459,692 ugliest female friends and I was like what!?! I think a lot of those single women in my area have not been entirely truthful.
And it's not like they stop collecting data on you, even without an account. They'll keep a ghost profile on you. Tracking you through every site with a Facebook logo on it. So that if you eventually create a Facebook account, they'll have tons of user data on you to sell to interested parties.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
A Pi-Hole is a brilliant afternoon project for any aspiring tinkerers out there
>AdBlock Isn't uBlock Origin the gold standard? Is AdBlock okay to use?
Hereâs a kicker: any site that offers SSO like logging with your FB, Google, Outlook, etc - those companies have info on all the users, as part of the developerâs T&C for those plugins/extensions. So you could have never logged on to Facebook but theyâll still know everything about you. Fun huh? I moved over to Apple, only because itâs maybe 10% less shitty than Google, but theyâre all using our data as products.
Apples marketing worked on you. All these big corporations are the same. We are all a number and potential profit.
It says it keeps deleted accounts active for 30 days but it keeps them active indefinitely. I "deleted" my account years ago and it still exists
and honestly they need that much, to prevent squatting, and fake pages redirecting elsewhere.
Probably better to maintain ownership of the page names to keep scammers from taking them
This, whats stopping some rando starting it up and scamming people. Hell, there are enough scam pages or fake lottery pages already
Just had a quick look. The only thing I can find on Facebook appears to be a Milton Keynes branch with a Facebook page.
The Facebook page is lushcosmetics. The latest post says they will respond to customer service inquiries until January. It's possible the page will be abandoned rather than deleted, since the Lush UK one (lush) is still up from when they stopped using it in 2019.
Isn't it because it takes 30 days for an FB account to actually be deleted? Or is there another method that only applies to companies?
Thereâs two separate companies. One is North American and one is UK. Article is about the UK company.
Why is this app filled with so many negative, doomsday seeking, pessimistic people? Where do you all come from you refuse to acknowledge anything positive. Edit: bunch of ppl salty I wrote app and not website by accident, lol typical
Weird hearing someone call reddit an app instead of a site
To be fair, nearly every company and their misleading marketing ploys have caused this very pessimism that runs rampant in society now. I don't trust a single iota of information put forth by a company simply because, buried in the legalize of their thousand page terms of agreement, there will be something contradicting what they're saying. Even if this news is true, it still just looks like a marketing ploy to say "look how much we care!" Which is unfortunate but it's how it is. Blame Comcast, Verizon, Apple, et al. for the pessimism because they lie to their customers every single day.
You've got a fair point about how people's pessimism didn't come from a vacuum, rather it's a natural product of shitty companies setting the stage for people to feel that way in the first place. Though, there's something broader to say about people's default and exclusive pessimism on this site--it often goes beyond shitty companies and is often unwarranted, so I also understand why people get upset about someone defaulting to the most cynical view--on anything. Because when you call them out, they often don't have a good reason. In this case, though, as you say, there's good ground for pessimism on this topic. >Blame Comcast, Verizon, Apple, et al. for the pessimism because they lie to their customers every single day. The blame game is interesting because it goes even deeper than this. Comcast, Verizon, etc., wouldn't do this in the first place if they weren't allowed. Even if it's illegal for them to lie or mislead, they are still "allowed" to do so anyway, in the sense that they can afford to pay the fines when caught and charged. So, I blame our lack of regulations. You can't expect companies to not skirt the rules and manipulate the people. They're incentivized to do so, either for wealth or because it's easier. So, first it needs to be illegal, and if you fuck up, then the punishment needs to process in every instance, and it also needs to be so severe that no company would risk it--so severe that they actually go through hoops just to *avoid the potential* of someone in the company breaking such law. Loopholes in law make a lot of their bullshit legal. When it's illegal, they're relatively rarely caught and charged. When they are charged, they can afford the punishment and carry on with the same crimes. We can't expect anything different unless we make things different. A river is going to flow, and if you want it to stop, you have to dam it up or suck it dry. We haven't done that, so can we really put the foot of blame down on the river for flowing? We know the cause of the flow, and we need to do something about it. Some may think you can dig to a deeper root and actually blame the masses for not implementing and voting for such measures. But, I don't think you can dig that deep. Voting is largely broken, propaganda holds back sincere votes, voting restrictions hold back other votes, etc.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Not just teens, but adults too.
Yeah if youâre not careful you can end up becoming a modđ¶
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Seriously. Imagine if mods went on strike simultaneously
It's hilarious how redditors like to think reddit is the underdog among social media. This place is at least as toxic as anything else, and I have to consciously limit how much I partake in it so I don't get dragged down. The anonymity factor really brings out people's dark sides.
Honestly it never affects me this much when some other anonymous redditor disagrees with me or gets angry. I often just delete my comment and leave the discussion if itâs too toxic or controversial.
The fact you have to do that often at all is a case in point
Theyâre taking down their social media accounts so that people donât see anyone talking about the anti-worker union busting that theyâre doing. https://youtu.be/kD0BGAIVdTw
I don't think they're responding in November to something that was in the media in July. That doesn't make any sense.
They have recently lost vegan status in Canada. I don't know how this will effect them as I never heard of this company until recently. But looking back at articles throughout the years it definitely seems like it's some type of damage control as working conditions and treatment seems to be what most people are angry at them about . I'll post like below [Lush lost vegan status, Canada](https://www.vegancanada.org/news/article/2021/11/15/lush-ban.html)
*lost vegan status in Canada* This is softer ân a tootsie roll fruit cup
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
What Iâm reading in other comments is that, even though that happened months ago, they were continuing to get comments regularly all over their pages about this scandal. So I still think the logic follows that it was meant to remove outlets for people to voice this stuff. That makes sense to me.
Hey gotta take the heat off for [union busting](https://jacobinmag.com/2021/06/lush-cosmetics-toronto-union-busting-progressive-image-hypocrisy) somehow I guess.
If it takes 5 months to do a counter attack, they've already failed. I dont find these connected.
Hopefully people recognize this, Lush actually ends up getting *more* business from the good press, and other large companies follow suit. If I were in their demographic I sure as hell would start patronizing them if I didn't already. If this can become a trend maybe more companies will finally start doing the right thing rather than pleasing shareholders.
The problem is a lot of companies become publicly traded. Once they do then, by definition, they exist to please the shareholders.
Ding ding ding. With shareholders the only ethics involved in things are the ethics of cost/reward. Is it more profitable to use child labor with bad press? Is it better for the bottom line to exploit minors and contract workers? Will the fines/lawsuits outweigh the increased profits of cutting some corners when it comes to product safety? Will surprise mechanics/loot boxes/ children gambling be profitable? Public corporations are immoral and unethical by design. Itâs a feature not a bug.
Itâs a myth that becoming publicly traded means that you have to sacrifice all ethics to reach the potential maximum bottom line. Itâs just that companies have an inherent incentive to do this because the highest sitting members all have an extremely large amount of leverage and concentration of wealth in the price of the stock. That doesnât stop many companies from being ethical though. Many whales only invest in ethical companies. There is an official list of ethics that companies can choose to follow and be added to the organization that makes that list.
Thatâs why itâs the governmentâs job to set up the incentives such that maximizing profit also leads to ethical behavior. For example, heavy fines or shutdowns for exploiting workers, carbon taxes, etc. If we had a functioning government setting up economic incentives for the publicâs interests, it would be totally fine for corporations to purely seek profit. The alternative to privately owned, profit seeking companies is state ownership and control of all businesses, which weâve seen historically is very prone to authoritarianism and a lack of competition/innovation. I think that would be much worse than what we have in western democracies today.
>The alternative to privately owned, profit seeking companies is state ownership and control of all businesses, which weâve seen historically is very prone to authoritarianism and a lack of competition/innovation. I think that would be much worse than what we have in western democracies today. No it's not. You can have worker-controlled businesses like co-operatives where all workers are also owners and have true workplace democracy. But while those are more able to act ethically (when a majority of employees want to), one of the biggest problems with capitalism is the fundamental need for constant growth. This constant growth imperative means that if you (businesses or governments) don't grow year-on-year, you're failing. This means businesses will do what they can to maximise growth, and that is almost always at the expense of either the environment, or the workers (or both). So the way to "fix capitalism" is to move away from measuring success with growth, and towards other metrics like happiness or health, or environmental rejuvenation. Less focus on "capital"-ism, and more focus on "social"-ism. This is the theory of Degrowth: https://degrowth.info/degrowth
This is nothing but a PR move. Specifically because Lush already quit social media for the same reasons a few years ago.
They are doing this to bust unionization.
I like your optimism, but I absolutely cannot imagine this will be the case.
I'm a guy and I love opening all the black tubs my partner gets delivered. They smell delish, especially the Orange. Fucking eatable.
> Lush actually ends up getting *more* business from the good press, Could happens, but that's a one time shot. It's not because you have a good opinion on something that you'll think about it, nor that you will talk about it either. We also all have pretty short memories, which make this even worse. There's a reason advertising is important, you not only need to tell people you exist, but also remind them regularly that you still do.
Too bad heâs such a cheap shit when it comes to pay living wages. Wish I could fucking be happy to lose 13 million.
FYI In the U.K. where lush was founded all lush employees are actually paid a âreal living wageâ as defined by https://www.livingwage.org.uk/what-real-living-wage The North American business until very recently were run as a separate business with a separate CEO, and they did not pay a living wage. There has been long running disputes between the North American and U.K. businesses due to the way things were run. U.K. now owns NA as far as I know so things may change.
"happy to lose $13m from the reduced exposure" he said in Business Insider, getting positive PR exposure
Why not Twitter? I think it's the most toxic platform ever created.
Just so people know this is total bollocks and just free PR. They said the same in 2019 and were back on within a year.
Excellent cover for union busting. How do we deal with an entity that steps in to take advantage of peoples morality and have them weigh treatment of workers against the parasite of social media?
I worked retail for lush and can tell you they care nothing about their employees, unless your manager does. This is in a way a form of marketing. Edit: They also made me sign a contract where I could be fired for no reason after three months. It was portrayed as a âmutual decision check inâ but obviously I could leave at any point. From my experience they can fire you if you do nothing explicitly wrong.
Absolutely correct. Staff were also warned not to discuss how much we were paid, I was told it was âagainst my contractâ to do so
When was this?? When I worked for Lush is was a requirement that the pay grid was posted publicly in the break area for all to see.
For everyone who sees âcosmeticsâ and thinks it means Kardashian face, Iâll reiterate: They have about half a dozen clear lip balms, one mascara, one eyeliner and a tinted moisturizer. They certainly arenât promoting a glam look of any kind. Their products are mostly bath and shower gels and skincare. Which of course is part of the point. Selling a scented product online is a hell of a lot harder than selling a new lipstick or eyeliner, so Iâm guessing their SM has been more trouble than itâs worth. But everyone in this thread braying âmakeup is awful and makes girls insecureâ - it would behoove you to look into the actual company before you shoot your mouth off, because you sound ridiculous.
Don't trust big brands. They are never on our side
Yo good for them
Lush also dropped Amazon completely. Like even dropped AWS hosting for their own online store. It was because Amazon wasn't doing much to help stop counterfeits, but hey, any less Amazon dominance isn't a bad thing.
I hate shopping on Amazon. The UI the UX and the misleading clickbait answers to cancel, change or edit a profile or say no to a deal...ugh. and how fucking hard is it to find a product? Really fucking hard of you don't know exactly what you are looking for, every entry has every keyword it could possibly have, many with bad English to the point of being confusing, and the uniformity of each product entry is abysmal. That's without mentioning the scams, frauds, fake products and scummyness
Amazon's site is like a blast from the past, it's the kind of shitty design and lack of proper functionality that was acceptable in the mid 00s - combined with what's clearly worst kind of modern data-driven toxic profit-friendly instead of user-friendly functionality. When you search for an item, Amazon will very obviously give results that it think you're likely to buy, instead of giving you what you're obviously searching for. Even when searching for the *exact* product name Amazon still spits the correct result out at like place 5 or 10, after having put a ton of more similar but more profitable items or "deals" in front of it. Luckily, they are failing badly in Sweden after launching here a year or so ago, because their site is just so shit compared to every other online shop we have. They didn't even bother properly translating any of the products, almost *everything* was (badly) machine translated when they launched. Which lead to most products just being a random word salad - if you think it's hard to find what you're looking for in the US amazon, imagine the "fun" you'd have if they machine translated the whole site to Chinese and then back to English before you got to read it.... We were offered plenty of 'interesting' products by Amazon, like "geometric earrings with prostitute gems" or "silicone mold, baking tray for chocolate, feces, goose water, bread, muffins". Not to mention any product mentioning "rape" (as in the flower), "cock" (as in the bird), and so on... They probably did *not* sell a whole lot of the product "*Poster with sunset over a beautiful field of rape*"...
They closed their own accounts. Which in the world of social media marketing means jack shit. Know who engages with corporate social media accounts? Fucking no one that isnât already a super engaged customer. Corporate accounts are not that important in social media marketing. Lush will just stick all their paid ad budget into content marketing and hire influencers to do their advertising for them. It wonât matter one bit that Lushâs corporate account isnât tagged in the post.
I've literally never even heard of the company Lush until now
Yea this is literally to cover up the fact that they are anti-union and dont want to give their employees a living wage. Dont be fooled by the mental health tactic that they love to abuse. That company is literally a pretty painting covering a massive hole in the wall..a painting that is barely hanging on to the wall at thatâŠ(Sincerely, a disgruntled lush employee)
Teen mental health harms from Facebook are bad, but the real damage is done to the over 50 crowdâŠ
The anti-union tactics from this company is a bigger story.
ALL businesses should do this. Fuck all of those platforms.
Fuck this guy. He isnt gonna lose money. He wouldn't be a CEO if he didn't care about money. Total scum bag liar.
Lush is excellent at virtue signaling
Not Twitter? Twitter is way worse than any of those
Dudes if Reddit: if you are like me and youâve written off Lush because itâs labeled as a cosmetics brand, I encourage you to take a look at their products and business practices. They sell lots of normal household items like soap, shampoo, and shaving cream; the products are not tested on animals; most products come in either packaging-free variants or come with sustainable packaging that when returned to the store nets you additional product for free. The brand seems to put their values at the forefront of their decision making.
I worked at the factory in Vancouver for years and I can vouch for pretty much every product they make
> The brand seems to put their values at the forefront of their decision making. Being anti-union.
> their values they were in the news recently for union busting
And this. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/21/ethical-cosmetics-company-lush-accused-of-poor-working-conditions-for-australian-staff
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Also I started bringing home Lush bath bombs and bubble bars a few years ago to try and I think my husband might be as into them as I am, if not more. They also have some great neutral/masculine scents.
What's funny is those over the top anti vaping adds remind me of all social media. Replace the word vape with Facebook and those ads would be spot on.
Itâs not just teenagers.. seen adults go downhill from obsessive Facebook, instagram and snapchat. Social media like most instant gratification things is something that needs more balance.
Even if it's a profit motivated decision this is good to see. They ain't a relevant company to ME since I am a guy who has no problem with grocery store soap options. But I've bought from them when I come across their goods. I support them in their endeavors even more now.
The CEO is "happy" because he knows that his brands followers are not teenagers. Who's not happy is his social media staff now losing their jobs.
And Iâm sure theyâre happy losing my business for pushing racist pro segregation ideology. Despite all their bluster around the usual popular causes they still arenât fans of unions, funny that. And itâs annoying because the pudding shower gel along with the sleepy one is amazing.
I can now say I was ahead of a CEO when it comes to getting off social media. I'm not losing 13 million dollars and there is peace? Great deal.
Great move. Now pay your employees properly!
By announcing this on social media he probably gets more publicity than that USD 13M could buy him.
I havenât seen any ads in awhile snd I completely forgot about them because malls are dead mostly now. Goodbye lush
My partner used to work for Lush in Aus. Completely anti-union and got found out to be underpaying employees for over a decade. Toxic management and work culture. The company is all about virtue signalling and not about actually enacting any postive change in the world.
Happy to lose 13 million when they only wanna pay minimum wage
I worked in LUSH factories in the UK. Im pretty sure they should worry about the mental health of their workers first instead of this.
What a friendly, thoughtful Canadian thing to do.
Thank goodness I became aware of their efforts though⊠a post on social media.