Trashy Post?

I always laugh at the Seinfeld discussion when Elaine asks, "When do you consider sex to have taken place?" Jerry responds, "I think when the nipple makes its appearance."

Similar political, moral, and ethical questions come up all the time: When is a baby a life? When do we pull the plug on the terminally ill? Or even something as foolish as when does a piece of bread become toast?

In reponse to some of the comments on my blog and on tartcider regarding Guy Masse's firing from Zellers for taking candy, I pose the question: when is garbage garbage?

It's a sticky point in the candy debate, and alevo makes a good point when he/she says that the candy was not in the dumpster, but was instead in the store en route to the garbage. Does this make the candy more garbage or less garbage?

I would consider a lot of things in my house garbage. Let's have a look around. My desk has a wide assortment of objects that might be considered garbage:

-- One tissue box three quarters full
-- One spool of 50 blank cds half full
-- One cellular phone
-- One half of a "Barrel of Monkeys" pen (the other half and monkeys are in my backpack)
-- 5 sheets of paper on which are written the values of Texas Hold'Em Hole Cards
-- One small spoon.
-- One cheque made out to me for $100US (how about that!)
-- One water spray bottle to discourage my cat from meowing at the door
-- One registration receipt for online ABQ course
-- Nine miscellaneous music, data, and software CDs
-- Computer, speakers, monitor, keyboard and mouse
-- One crumpled piece of paper

I can live without most of what is on my desk, but I wouldn't consider any of it garbage. Someone who looks at the quality and design of all those objects might deem all of them garbage. I doubt though in reality that anyone would throw out anything from my list, but lets say that someone came in and took the crumpled piece of paper. I wouldn't be upset. They would argue that it was garbage and that I just hadn't placed in in the wastepaper basket. It was en route to the garbage. I might have agreed.

Now let's consider a little more. The piece of paper that was taken was not refuse, but was instead a winning lottery ticket. I would have been downright furious had someone come in and taken it. I would have been digging through dumpsters along with the person who took the paper.

If the lottery ticket had not been a winner but instead a loser, would my reaction be different? Of course. I wouldn't have cared that the ticket was gone; it was en route to the garbage.

If that person, instead of taking the crumpled piece of paper, had instead taken the pen, would I have been angry? Sure, because my other half a barrel of monkeys pen and monkeys (currently residing in my backpack) are now useless. Would I be digging through dumpster for it? No.

I suppose that this is my point about the black and white of policy manuals. Suppose Mr. Masse had taken a 34" Panasonic widescreen LCD flat-screen TV that was returned as defective because its base was slightly warped. Had he taken that out of the store because it was "garbage" there would be no issue here. Had he taken that same TV been returned because the movers dropped it down a staircase smashing it bits the case would be very different.

I think that the most important thing about this story is that we have to remember that the poor guy took expired chocolate! The policy manual might have said that he "breached the trust of his supervisors" but come on now! I still maintain that Mr. Masse's firing was overly harsh.

If I'm walking down the street and a police officer sees me jaywalk and also sees a man robbing a bank, what would we assume is the greater crime? No one would point their finger at me and say I should have received a fine and the robber be set free! Even though I did break the law by jaywalking, my crime is not ticketworthy when placed beside the bank robber. Both are crimes and both are unlawful, but any reasonable human being would say that I should have walked free while the bank robber should be arrested. I think that when it comes to taking expired-en-route-to-the-grabage-candy we should also believe that Mr. Masse should not have been fired.

I digress a little from my garbage diatribe.

I suppose the simplest way to define garbage is to say that everything in my wastepaper baskets beside my desk and bed, and in my bathroom is garbage. The black garbage bag in my kitchen contains garbage. The metal garbage can outside my apartment door also contains garbage.

So does an object become garbage the moment it crosses the threshold of a refuse container? I suppose the simplest answer is yes, but how many of us have thrown out something important? In a moment of distraction, or stupidity tossed out the remote control in your right hand instead of the empty styrofoam cup in your left hand? How many have had a pet knock a wedding ring or stick of lip balm into the garbage can? Does that object automatically become garbage the moment it crosses the threshold of the refuse container? Certainly not.

My sister and her husband just bought a new TV for their bedroom. Their old TV is better than any television I have ever owned, and you better believe that if it is placed anywhere near a garbage can I'm going to take it. They might consider it garbage since they don't have any further use for it, but going into their house and taking it would be considered theft, even though it may be "en route" to the curb.

I'm not sure if I've come any closer to an answer here, but I found this comment on Chris's blog to be very interesting:

I work in a warehouse. Busy place, lots of stuff gets thrown out. Decisions about what to throw out are too numerous to be supervised. Instead, everyone knows you don't take stuff out of the garbage. Its an odd sight. It draws attention. its a security choke point. The guy knew better, or, shoulda.

My question is why? Why can't someone take garbage out out the dumpster? Perhaps it's a problem of our society that we believe we need new things. Perhaps, we could save the planet if we simply reused. Perhaps our disposable society will be our downfall. Perhaps this penchant for not using garbage has saved thousands of lives that might have been lost through disease.

There are many objects in my house that have been salvaged from the curb. I took the best stove/oven I've ever owned from the street. My three bookshelves, coffee table, end tables, dresser, and television stand have all, at some point, been considered garbage. Some might consider them to still be garbage, but I'll be damned if I had to go out and buy all that furniture. All of that cost me a grand total of $0.00, but to replace it would cost a few hundred.

I understand the idea that employees can go out of their way to rip off the company. Another comment (Paul Denton) on Chris's blog suggests that "It becomes all too easy for the individual to "accidentally" tear packages or leave perishables unrefrigerated just long enough to be convenient." I agree in some ways, but disagree with his idea of "the easiest solution [being] a blanket policy against employee scrounging".

A blanket policy is an effort to make all cases exactly the same without heart, care, or compassion. Perhaps that's what is needed in our society of 128-bit encryption, IDs, PINs, and Adscams, but it saddens me that that's what we've become. We need to be viewed for our individual strengths and our individual needs. To assume that all cases are the same is to fall into the trap of prejudice.

I doubt that Mr. Masse wasn't trying to rip off the company. I really don't believe that his actions justified his firing. I suppose that in order to maintain true to the mandate of the mundane within this blog I should simply posit that arguing the moment an object becomes garbage is definitely a waste of time.