Shoppers in Australia have voiced their strong disapproval after retail giant Woolworths introduced a controversial new security feature at one of its stores in Melbourne.
Controversial Security Measure Sparks Outrage
The supermarket has installed a row of rotating, baton-style arms at the entrance of the store. Customers must push through these arms to enter, a design specifically intended to prevent people from leaving through the entrance, thereby reducing opportunities for theft. Once a shopper passes through, the arms lock behind them, directing all traffic to exit via the self-checkout area.
The reaction from many customers has been swift and critical. One shopper remarked that while the word 'welcome' might be displayed, the architecture suggests the complete opposite. Another expressed frustration, stating it felt as though the supermarket did not trust its own customers. A third comment pointed to broader economic issues, suggesting that if shoplifting is so severe that such measures are needed, perhaps the root cause of people being unable to afford food should be examined.
Accessibility and Safety Concerns Raised
Dozens of Australian shoppers highlighted that the new barriers present significant problems for various groups. Concerns were raised for customers with disabilities, those using mobility aids like wheelchairs or crutches, parents with prams, and individuals with sensory sensitivities. One angry commenter bluntly stated the setup essentially tells those in wheelchairs to "f*** off," while another worried about the potential dangers in an emergency, asking, "Heaven forbid a fire."
This move by Woolworths follows a similar initiative by rival supermarket Coles, which also faced significant public backlash for installing automatic exit barriers designed to curb shoplifting. Coles's system uses AI to monitor scans at self-checkouts and can trap customers in the area if it suspects an item hasn't been scanned. One individual with PTSD described being locked in the busy, confined space as a "triggering experience" that made them feel falsely accused.
A Divided Response from the Public
Despite the wave of criticism, some shoppers have come to the defence of the supermarkets' actions. They argue that such anti-theft measures are an unfortunate but necessary part of modern retail operations. One supporter stated plainly that thieves are to blame for the situation, not Woolworths. Another suggested that without theft, the retail environment—including product prices—would be very different for everyone.
The debate highlights the difficult balance supermarkets are trying to strike between loss prevention and providing a positive, accessible customer experience. As shoplifting pressures mount, the industry's solutions continue to draw intense public scrutiny and polarise opinion.
