Re: Glossier’s Plan of Action
Outta the Gloss has taken time to reflect on Glossier’s response to our demands. We acknowledge their ownership of years of harm and racial violence committed and encouraged within their retail locations. This apology and response to our demands is a drop in the bucket with respect to the work that must be done, and we have yet to receive true recognition for our labor. The acknowledged demands were rendered vague and the rest were omitted. Glossier’s action plan lacks both a set timeline and concrete details. Moving forward, the changes Glossier commits to must center the editors who are demanding these changes.
In our demands, we state Glossier must commit to hosting an open, company-wide Zoom call. Glossier’s proposed individual Zoom calls reflect a culture of intimidation that we have already outlined as endemic to Glossier. After all, employees at the lowest-paid position of any company would be intimidated by the prospect of calls with an undetermined number of corporate employees who have yet to be named. What’s more, individual Zoom calls with Emily Weiss have already taken place and our dissatisfaction with the outcome ultimately helped us decide to publish our letter. A company-wide Zoom call allows for full responsibility from Glossier to its former employees. We as a collective have developed a structure for this Zoom call so everyone’s voices can be heard.
We would also like to call attention to our demand for a retail-specific on-site HR leader. This point was not fleshed out in their response, but Glossier must commit to implementing an HR Liaison job tier staffed by former retail employees. The people in these positions would be responsible for:
- overhauling the performance review system
- helping create and edit the code of conduct
- partnering with the on-site HR employee who will be assigned to the store to hold them responsible for taking appropriate action
- helping create new anti-racist inclusion training
We don’t want to solely provide feedback on these operations, we must be involved in creating them. We insist that a dedicated on-site HR leader and liaison should exist at every store, including pop-ups, not just “stores that exceed 100 staff members” as Glossier stipulated. That benchmark is misleading given that even Flagship, Glossier’s largest retail location, never met this qualification without the inclusion of seasonal employees. Belaboring the point, it is unlikely that two pop-up locations could effectively share an HR team given the physical distance between locations (for example, London and Seattle). What Glossier’s response makes clear is that it’s imperative that Glossier immediately open these positions before stores reopen, post them on the internal job board, and ensure that recently laid off editors retain access to this resource.
In response to our demand for retail to be involved with hiring new management, Glossier has promised to “commit to finding meaningful ways to incorporate retail feedback”. Their language is ambiguous, and all retail staff has been laid off. We demand that Glossier include a group of former editors in hiring management moving forward, again, before retail locations reopen.
Former retail employees must have oversight on the formulation of Glossier’s Code of Conduct. They must develop training and protocol that will be honored and upheld by Glossier managers, security, and staff. As we are the people most familiar with the retail space, it is important that we are involved in the entire process of creating this Code.
Glossier’s response says that they will “review [their] current compensation system to make sure it is fair and equitable.” We have reviewed it and can assert it is not. According to performance evaluations, editors of color and white editors who received similar written feedback ultimately received different raises. Glossier needs to overhaul this performance evaluation system to ensure that editors who receive the same feedback receive the same raise.
Outta the Gloss is embracing Glossier’s plan with some reservations. Since Glossier published their response, we’ve obtained emails from former editors proving that the company is operating in bad faith via their “PeopleOps” team in trying to negotiate safe, practical ways of collecting personal belongings left at the stores before closures. Some have received condescending responses to their feedback and others have been flat-out ignored. It emphasized how important retail employees’ input is in navigating all that pertains to Glossier’s retail experience. The labor that we have already poured into this, largely uncompensated, is similar to that of a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Manager. Glossier already expressed an interest in “editors and management working together to establish tangible metrics for performance evaluation.” The work we are doing for Glossier is invaluable and due to retail closures, the company is in the perfect position to implement all of our demands. We believe we can work together successfully and await direct communication from Glossier. We can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.