As one online food writer noted, it’s been a bad month for Loblaw’s. Now even more controversy as more than one shopper reports severely underweight packages of Loblaw’s No Name brand foods. Is it a scam, or just a production line issue?
Jake MacLellan shows us the underweight bag of Loblaw’s house brand No Name frozen
veg the chain served him last week, in this composite still photo. His facial
expressions clearly convey his feelings: “We’re being screwed!”
Cheat me once, shame on you. Cheat me three times, shame on me – and there has to be something really bad going on here. Maybe…
At least that’s what angry Loblaw’s shoppers are saying, after not one, not two, but three of them posted online rants this past week about severely underweight No Name products they bought recently at the embattled supermarket chain.
A compelling tale
Leading a new attack by ticked-off Loblaw’s customers, Vancouver shopper Jacob MacLellan has posted a troubling video on TikTok this past week showing a package of frozen veggies he bought that was labelled as 700 g, but weighed in, on his own kitchen scale, at just 435 g. Is he pulling a scam of his own? No chance. Just look at the bag, sitting on the scale. It’s no more than 1/3 full.
After MacLellan weighs the package on screen to prove his claim, he goes straight to camera and leans in tight: “You’re being screwed!”
Cheat me twice…
This is just the latest episode in an ongoing series of such complaints from Loblaw’s shoppers about underweight packaging. Last September, another TikTokker posted a video of a half-filled No Name Potato Chips bag. “Shopping at the cheapest store, buying the cheapest brand so I can keep living indoors … And you’re stealing half my damn chips,” ranted user @joceforce. Loblaw’s agreed, the package was ‘not up to it’s standards’.
Just this past February, yet another shopper complained that their 400 g box of pancake mix weighed only 205 g. Is there a pattern emerging, here?
A call to arms
MacLellan posted a follow-up video designed to rouse the masses in revolt. “We can’t afford food and they aren’t even giving us what they say they’re giving us,” he says. “Loblaw’s isn’t the only problem and we all know this. Are you interested in a national protest against [all] Canadian grocers? If I have to be the one to start all this, so be it.”
Loblaw’s is currently the target of a month-long boycott protest called by the 84,000-strong Reddit group r/loblawsisoutofcontrol. It’s been demanding an overall reduction in the chain’s retail prices of at last 15 percent, among other pricing moves. The group also wanted Loblaw’s to sign the new Grocer’s Code of Conduct. In the midst of the boycott, and calls from another online group to ‘Steal from Loblaws’, the chain finally signed the agreement. Alas, observers say the long-awaited Code is essentially gutless. And may serve more to shield the grocers from scrutiny than protect consumers.
Is Loblaw’s really cheating?
I suspect… Not. I’ve worked in retail, and I’ve had some long, serious talks with the manager of my local Loblaw’s in the past. We’ve chewed over the downsizing issue. And talked ‘margin for error’ in the manufacturing processes employed for creating mass-market foods and beverages.
Given what I’ve learned over the years about the food industry, I have to say I can’t confirm that the three isolated short-weighting incidents the online rabble rousers are trumpeting come anywhere close to constituting a ‘cheat’.
My take
More than likely, the under-filled packages were from the end of their filling runs, and got into the packing stream as the product flow from their batch ran out. But before the filling machines were halted.
I can also see an opportunity for human error, by an employee who said, “One more box and we can fill that last shipping carton!” You can’t ship a part-carton. And nobody wants an incomplete one sitting around, waiting for the next production run to top it off.
I’m all for lower food prices, and properly-filled food packages. But I think the current tense climate in the supermarket sphere is causing a lot of every-day events to be blown up out of all proportion by angry, hungry shoppers.
~ Maggie J.
You have a whole category on your blog filled with many posts over the last decade about how grocery chains are screwing people over regarding product weight. Suddenly, you’ve changed your tone in this article. Either this is a paid blog post to suit someone elses narrative, or the blog has changed authorship recently. How can we take anything you write seriously from now on?
I think your observations probably echo the thoughts of many other readers. First, this forum is in no way ‘paid for’ by any outside entity. Nor does it owe allegiance to any outside industry or political entity. Second, I want to assert that responsible journalists always try to give all sides of a story a fair hearing. As such, I’ve covered the Loblaw’s – vs – Redditors’ saga from both sides. But I’ve also aired ‘third party’ comments about food supply chain issues. And, as in this post, I’ve offered alternate explanations for the problems under discussion. I give credit where credit is due, and point out issues that need attention where I see them. Thanks, Bill, for your comment. Don’t be a stranger!
Yet you still feel the need to not address what he said which is true and double down on your support for Loblaws rathan than the “common sense” you claim on your blog title.
Matt! Thanks for commenting. Are you referring to what commenter Bill said? Or what Jake MacLellan said?