‘Good-looking’ job ad looks bad for Abercrombie & Fitch PR
The latest PR blunder by American clothing giant Abercrombie & Fitch has seen them advertise for new staff at a new store in Scotland by saying it wanted only ‘cool and good-looking’ people to apply.
We blogged about the 'discriminatory approach' of Abercrombie & Fitch last year when they treated a disabled staff member poorly. Now actually, they were found not to have discriminated, but that is what people remember!
Now the latest act of either stupidity or ignorance would have gone largely unnoticed by us had it not been for Google, more specifically Personnel Today picking up on our last criticism of Abercrombie and Fitch and asking us to comment on this debacle.
We often talk about the importance of blogging to raise expert status, and it certainly worked for us in this instance and we were quoted in Personnel Today yesterday (which we tweeted about and certainly leveraged for the credibility it gives Morgan PR – free tip there!).
I spoke about how adherence to the brand values was merrily alienating potential customers and indeed potential staff members. I also explored the potential it was cynical PR to reinforce the brand and grab some headlines, possibly believing that all publicity is good publicity. Honestly though, that would be foolish and could easily backfire.
I also said it was one thing to want to recruit ‘cool and good-looking’ people, but you need not say that publicly and attract bad PR. Indeed I used to know a restaurateur who knew if he was going to employ a new waitress in the time it took her to get from the door to the bar – I doubt he would have fared too well if that had been a publicly stated part of the selection procedure!
Chatting to Berkshire human resources expert Carolyn Wahlen of Gap HR Services, she added their take on the sorry affair: “There are obviously potentially serious discrimination issues here. Abercrombie and Fitch must be aware of that due to the case last year in the UK and a class action in America in 2005 where 10,000 employees and job applicants sued them because they didn’t fit the profile to work on the shop floor. However they have not changed their approach. Why?
“As a business owner I would be much more concerned by the fact that their discrimination strategy is not working! Their sales have been down for the last 2 years.
“So the fact that they employ “beautiful people” shows that they are actually not recruiting the best staff for the job. The cool and good-looking staff are not dealing with customers, they are not increasing sales, they are not thinking of new ideas how to increase revenue, or improve the business. They are standing around, looking in mirrors at themselves and not helping the less good-looking customers who have the money to spend. Result – the customers go elsewhere.
“The point of having employees is usually to find the best person for the job, who will help meet business criteria. Usually the criteria is increase sales, not just “look pretty”.
“Whoever does their target strategy probably needs to wake up and look up the meaning of an aspirational brand – it doesn’t mean that you only sell to those who fit your criteria and intimidate the others away!”
Whatever your view on this episode there are several points I would take away. Even the appearance of discriminatory behaviour is going to damage a brand. Also, if you display your expertise in a blog, you give other publications the opportunity to call on you and improve your PR