NCJ Number
86637
Journal
New Jersey Bell Journal Volume: 5 Issue: 2 Dated: (Summer 1982) Pages: 18-27
Date Published
1982
Length
10 pages
Annotation
This article discusses the sparsensess of data on employee theft, the reluctance of employers to deal with it, possible causes of employee theft, and strategies for dealing with it.
Abstract
Since official crime statistics include employee theft under the general category of theft, there is no way of knowing the extent of reported employee theft. Further, many employers prefer not to admit or address the problem, because it may damage the company's image, stir up trouble with employee unions, and suggest their own incompetence as managers. The effects of widespread employee theft are such as to warrant action, however. While the individual items stolen by employees from employers may be relatively cheap, their accumulated value can be significant, and the cost to the employer is inevitably passed on to the consumer and the taxpayer. Also, the acceptance and even the fostering of employee theft conditions employees to view it as normal rather than deviant, so that consciences become dulled and it becomes increasingly easier to rationalize ever more serious thefts. Reasons for employee theft include viewing it as one of the fringe benefits of the job, feeling that a product belongs to the employee because he/she has helped to create it, a sense of alienation from the work performed and the employer, and retaliation for perceived wrongs suffered at the hands of the employer. Excessively stringent security measures may be counterproductive and expensive, but employers should create a working environment and personnel practices that will prevent workers from becoming demoralized and alienated or counter the withdrawal of legitimacy from the employer, his property, and the job. Further, steps should be taken to ensure that employees are not unduly tempted to steal because security is lax or nonexistent and the opportunity for theft is compelling.