Forgiving companies who stop supporting abortion?

[fnr]

Oy! For all the prior years we have been there, Land’s End has been the company that sells the uniforms for my daughter’s Catholic school.

Earlier in 2016, Land’s End published a catalog that had interviews with famous people from throughout the world. One of them was Gloria Steinem, who’s a pro-abortion feminist. In response, many Catholics and other Christians were angry and sent a lot of comments to Land’s End, saying that they don’t want to be seen supporting a company that holds up abortion advocates as worthy of respect in such a public way. My bishop wrote an order requiring that all schools in his diocese not use Land’s End for uniforms in future years.

In response, Land’s End published an apology and said that it would try to support its customers better in the future. It deleted the Steinem interview in the catalog version of its website. There was no change from the bishop, and now my daughter’s school has a new uniform company that’s expensive and supplies clothes that are equal or lower in quality than what Land’s End offered.

The bishop’s decision to keep the policy in place now really seems wrong to me. If Land’s End hadn’t apologized and changed the version of its catalog that was still available, I could understand the policy staying in place. However, the company apologized, promised to change, and edited its web site. To me, our diocese now sends the wrong signal, because now Land’s End gets the message that Catholics don’t accept apologies. This seems wrong to me, as we are to forgive as we are forgiven, especially when the problematic behavior has stopped.

Could I please ask your thoughts on this issue? Should the bishop reverse the policy and allow Catholic schools in the diocese to go back to Land’s End for uniforms? How else do we signal to companies that they will get our support if they change their ways more in accord with the way the Catholics would like?

 

[Theo520]

I think the Lands End response was a politically savvy PR move. Your vendor selection team can find other affordable suppliers besides Lands End, if they try.

 

[fnr]

I think the Lands End response was a politically savvy PR move. Your vendor selection team can find other affordable suppliers besides Lands End, if they try.

The search process the “team” ended up using was pretty shaky. First they announced two vendors under consideration, then finalized a third with no prior public mention.

Land’s End shipped their own “label,” and offered a lot more variety (e.g. different cuts of materials for boys vs. girls’ polo shirts, which makes a difference when girls wear jumpers over their shirts). Land’s End provided free shipping over a certain amount spent, and offered periodic discounts of 30-40% throughout the year. I can’t read the corporation’s “mind,” but I can say that it did seem to be responsive to the concerns that it received over Steinem appearing in its catalog.

The new supplier is pretty awful. More expensive. It’s a retailer, not a manufacturer, so there’s no customization. Boys and girls get the same cuts of material for polos. Poor customer service. Much more polyester.

One parent at my school went to the vendor’s local store (~30 minutes drive from the school), asking for a particular skirt for her daughter. The store was out of stock, so they told the mother that she would either need to come back to the store when new stock came in, or pay $12.99 in shipping costs to get it sent home – that has not been my experience with other retailers, who offer free shipping if the stores don’t have stock.

All around, I’m dissatisfied with the process of dumping Land’s End and getting this new uniform vendor. It sends a message that Catholics don’t forgive, tells parents that the diocese and school are willing to tolerate higher cost, lower quality uniforms, and did so in a process that was totally opaque. I see absolutely no evidence that this change has helped to turn the world to Christ.

 

[Theo520]

The new vendor is probably politically connected since they aren’t a reasonable choice for cost, selection or service.

 

[Rau]

Share your thoughts with the Bishop.

One can pay too much attention to the political or social stances taken by businesses. Look at the number of businesses around the world that have publicly endorsed SSM. Should they all be now persona non grata? There is little to be gained by objecting or boycotting when even their stockholders don’t rise up and object to such wasteful and unexpected (by stockholders) use of company funds.

 

[CatholicRaven]

I would write to the Bishop, respectfully, and outline the reasons you believe a return to Land’s End would be beneficial (including showing forgiveness). I would not use emotional, pushy, or critical statements about his decision either way. I would also include mention of the problems with the current company–objectively, simply stating things like the poor customer service, lower quality, and higher prices.

I would also say to encourage others who agree with you to contact him about this, as well.