A Road Town man cashed out 16 items at a grocery store’s express line on Friday, infuriating other shoppers and igniting a territory-wide debate about the definition of “10 items or less.”
The shopper, who asked to remain anonymous to protect his safety, defended his actions.
“Some people claimed I had 16 items, but what they need to understand is that those items included two pineapples, four identical boxes of Cheerios, and three very small candy bars,” he said. “It was only logical to count each of these ‘item groups’ as a single item.”
But the impatient shoppers behind him begged to differ.
“It was 16 items, period,” said a woman who numbered each item that he placed on the counter. “I saw it with my own eyes, and you can’t do that!”
The woman tried to protest, she said, but the store clerk just shook her head, sighed and rang up the items.
The incident has sparked controversy across the territory. Some residents say the 10-item limit is violated too often, while others maintain that it is a general guideline that should not be taken literally.
Defining an ‘item’
The accused shopper insists that he never exceeded his limit by any definition.
He counted his two pineapples as one, he explained, following a similar practice that holds for smaller fruits.
“A bag of 20 apples would only count as one item, wouldn’t it?” he explained. “So why should we discriminate against pineapples?”
In fact, he maintained, all fruits of the same species should count as one item, no matter how many are purchased.
Though he conceded that the matter of the Cheerios wasn’t so “clear-cut,” he pointed out that the store clerk only had to scan one of the boxes and then enter the number “4” on the computer to indicate the quantity he purchased.
“This means it’s really fast for her to put it through,” he said. “So in essence, the Cheerios were only one item as well.”
As for the candy bars — a Twix, a Snicker’s and a Milky Way — “they were really, really small,” he explained, adding, “How can you take a one-ounce item and count it the same as, say, a gallon of milk? It doesn’t make sense.”
Cash payment
Instead of attempting to police others’ items, he argued, express-line shoppers should cultivate an atmosphere of “honesty and mutual respect.”
Moreover, he added, the express-line criteria should be based on other factors besides item numbers.
“The guy in front of me last week only had five things, but because he requested a price check he took three times as long as I did,” he said. “It was ridiculous.”
Furthermore, he added, he often checks out through the regular line with fewer than 10 items when he’s not in a hurry.
“So I believe that I’ve built up a little express-line karma,” he explained. “When I really need it, I should be able to take advantage without being vilified.”
Supermarket response
Contacted for comment, a supermarket representative said the store had put the clerk on paid leave and launched a full-scale investigation.
“We’re reviewing the matter,” a store statement said. “If we find the shopper is at fault, we may require him to return to the store and cash out through the regular line.”
For his part, the shopper has retained a lawyer and said he intends to clear his name.
“Precedent all over the world has shown that most people believe that ‘10 items or less’ actually means as many as 20 separate items,” the attorney said. “Not that we concede that my client had more than 10 items: He didn’t. But if he had, most people in this global economic marketplace would not have batted an eye.”
Police said the matter had not been reported to them, but they planned to scour relevant legislation for any laws that might have been violated.
If there are no such laws on the books now, that might change soon: Legislators are expected to debate the issue in the next session of the House of Assembly.
Meanwhile, the supermarket has promised to clarify its 10-items-or-less policy as soon as possible to prevent further confusion. Until then, the express line has been temporarily closed.
Disclaimer: Dateline: Paradise is a column and occasionally contains satirical “news” articles that are entirely fictional.
{fcomment}