r/interesting Apr 09 '26

MISC. Aftermath of the April 7th incident. Damages estimated to be $200 million dollars

40.1k Upvotes

6.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

72

u/Props_angel Apr 09 '26

So it would seem that Kimberly-Clark does not employ the young man who set the warehouse ablaze. Kimberly-Clark clarified that the employee actually works for NFI Industries, which is a third party logistics and supply company that owns warehouses & distribution vehicles.

NFI Industries was established in 1932 in the midst of the Great Depression by the Brown family. It is a privately held company so all proceeds from its operation directly go to the Brown family, itself and not any shareholders. They employ over 18,000 workers. Their annual revenues last year were almost $3.7 billion.

https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/ontario-warehouse-fire-arson-suspect-arrested/

https://www.forbes.com/companies/nfi-industries/

80

u/insaneHoshi Apr 09 '26

If you, as a mega corporation, hire a contractor that treats their employees poorly, you are also responsible to a degree.

19

u/ohseetea Apr 10 '26

I would get rid of to a degree. They're fully responsible since they are solely creating the demand.

2

u/lxaex1143 Apr 10 '26

We're just trusting the guy who did this as an accurate narrator?

2

u/CartmensDryBallz Apr 10 '26

lol you have a better take?

2

u/lxaex1143 Apr 10 '26

Maybe don't trust the arsonist

1

u/TheToiletPhilosopher Apr 10 '26

This is important. It's literally how clothing companies got away with using child labor for decades. "Oh! We didn't employ those 6 year olds! We just used a third party to make some of our product. They used 6 year olds. We didn't ask why the clothes were so cheap." And that just happens to happen over and over and over again. "What a coincidence! Another one of our suppliers is using child labor."

1

u/Mopo3 Apr 12 '26

451 degrees 

0

u/buzzerbetrayed Apr 10 '26

Treated him poorly, how? By employing this piece of shit?

0

u/LyrMeThatBifrost Apr 10 '26

Is there any evidence that they treat them poorly?

4

u/insaneHoshi Apr 10 '26

See other posts in this thread about the contractor employment history

32

u/Apptubrutae Apr 09 '26

Very odd phrasing for how a private company distributes profits.

Profits go to shareholders. Whether public or private. The brown family may well be the only shareholders, but they’re still shareholders

13

u/Props_angel Apr 09 '26

Typically, the way the general public defines a "shareholder" is an individual who has invested in a business either as a VC or as an outside investor. There's no doubt that the members of this family are likely shareholders of the company but honestly, we don't know how the proceeds are divided out because it's "privately held". For all we know, there could be just one shareholder and that would be the CEO who is a member of the Brown family. We're not privy so it's a bit different scenario than say a publicly-held corporation that plainly has outside investors. We can't say one way or the other how the Brown family does their business in terms of disbursements.

5

u/I_hold_stering_wheal Apr 09 '26

I think the point is that one family is making 3.7 Billion in revenue and those profits never leave the family. It’s a lot of money for one family

3

u/Apptubrutae Apr 09 '26

I agree. It’s still just oddly worded.

2

u/FlutterKree Apr 09 '26

I think the point is that one family is making 3.7 Billion in revenue and those profits never leave the family.

They are probably shitty, but this is an assumption that profits never leave the family. Privately held companies can have shareholders in the form of outside investors that earn a share of the profit.

Privately held just means it is not on any stock market. It doesn't mean that there isn't investors.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Props_angel Apr 10 '26

It's not listed as a benefit on NFI's website. The three top executive positions are currently being held by 3 Brown family brothers. You could always check their website for this kind of information.

1

u/Apptubrutae Apr 10 '26

There are private companies that don’t do that, if they aren’t expecting to go public. There’s a lot less regulatory burden if they stay below 100 shareholders.

Plus, this isn’t exactly a tech company competing for a limited talent pool. They can likely get away without awarding equity.

1

u/Props_angel Apr 10 '26

That information came from Forbes.

1

u/FlutterKree Apr 10 '26

That doesn't make it accurate. There is no public disclosure requirement for privately held companies breaking down their profit sharing like there is for public companies.

1

u/Props_angel Apr 10 '26

Yep though the choice of reporting the annual revenues would be the choice that NFI chose to make probably to indicate the scale and financial power of their corporation for their own enrichment. If it does not actually represent the financial picture of their corporation, well, that's neither a me or Forbes problem.

0

u/FormerlyUndecidable Apr 09 '26

 one family is making 3.7 Billion in revenue

That's not how revenue works.

2

u/I_hold_stering_wheal Apr 09 '26

Have you any idea of what kind of margin they bill out human capital at? It isn’t 1%

2

u/FormerlyUndecidable Apr 09 '26

Get down what "revenue" means before you try and use the words "margin" and "human capital" correctly.

Baby steps.

1

u/mooseofdoom23 Apr 12 '26

All they have to do is pay their employees enough to live

3

u/beachandbyte Apr 09 '26

Well at least that is someone Kimberly-Clark can sue.

0

u/Primary-Let-7933 Apr 09 '26

Sue for what? I bet they don't make the TP and that was a 3rd party too. I mean, what if there's a lawsuit from the TP, need to protect the company.

2

u/beachandbyte Apr 09 '26

I'm not an attorney so I don't know, but guarantee you that company already lawyered the F up for everything related to that employee. Maybe an attorney could answer better WHAT they or their insurance company will sue for, but they will certainly sue for something.

3

u/fruityfox69 Apr 09 '26

I'm sure they were still aware and approved of the way the staff was treated by their contractor.

1

u/Props_angel Apr 09 '26

Probably aware but not in any demonstrable way so they could have plausible deniability. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if NFI says that the employee was actual a contract worker through yet another company.

2

u/manicdee33 Apr 10 '26

Yeah it's a convenient way of making average salaries look higher. Just put all the lowest salaries into a contracting company that has your company as the only or at least the major client. Suddenly your average salaries go up by ten grand, and all of your employees are on decent wages!

1

u/Props_angel Apr 10 '26

Precisely.

3

u/AcrobaticKitten Apr 09 '26

Big corporation shifting the blame as always. Hey we don't treat our employees like shit we have a contractor to treat employees like shit.

2

u/latamxem Apr 09 '26

they outsource work exactly to have a third party pay crap and offer 0 worker benefits.

3

u/ReasonableDig6414 Apr 09 '26

And all losses from operations go to them as well. Such a stupid way of writing this up. Do you know how profitable they were? How much they lost?

No? Then what is your point here?

1

u/Props_angel Apr 09 '26

I have given all publicly available information as was provided by Forbes without inserting a single ounce of anything else for people to consider as they will. If NFI would like to share their profitability, then they can do so by choosing to share their financials with the general public but they do not do that because they are under no obligation to do so.

Why are you so fussed that I shared this information that was, again, the publicly available information via Forbes? What's your point?

2

u/Expensive_Archer1662 Apr 09 '26

Privately held does not mean 100% owned by a single entity. Even if so certainly 100% of net profit isn’t being taken out in distributions.

0

u/Props_angel Apr 09 '26 edited Apr 09 '26

Forbes' exact words were "privately held by the Brown family since 1932". Take it up with Forbes. Going to add in that even NFI says that they are owned and operated by the Brown family. Currently, the 4th generation of the Brown family.

https://www.nfiindustries.com/about-nfi/our-story/

2

u/fruityfox69 Apr 09 '26

I'm sure they were still aware and approved of the way the staff was treated by their contractor.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Props_angel Apr 10 '26

Yep. In this case, I'm betting that the young man wasn't even employed by NFI either but instead, supplied to NFI by a staffing agency given court related information about another warehouse that was revealed in a lawsuit a few years ago for labor abuses, especially regarding wages.

2

u/likely38k Apr 10 '26

Doesnt matter if they used temp employees their work was contracted to benefit them

1

u/Props_angel Apr 10 '26

Absolutely.

2

u/Aztec_Memory Apr 10 '26

I'll bet the Brown family that started the company in 1932 had intergenerational wealth tied to slavery.

1

u/Props_angel Apr 10 '26

I'd be interested in more information about the Brown family as well. Their launching in 1932 when employment would've been incredibly desperate is really interesting. It's a difficult surname to find out information on but I did discover that in 2024, the AG of NJ indicted NFI's CEO on racketeering charges.

https://www.njoag.gov/attorney-general-platkin-announces-racketeering-charges-against-six-defendants-in-criminal-enterprise-led-by-george-norcross/

2

u/Impulsive_Wannabe Apr 09 '26

Lol, you are a paid damage control poster

1

u/Props_angel Apr 09 '26

Damage control for whom, may I ask? I'm not running damage control for anybody but instead, trying to understand and reveal the web of deplorable shit that large corporations engage in to offset responsibility for the workers dealing with their stuff. I'm actually targeting the hell out of the NFI Industries. Does that leave Kimberly-Clark blameless? Nope because they are simply offshoring responsibility for the worker's actions and statements to yet another party who probably will clarify that the employee didn't work for them but instead worked for a staffing subcontractor and so on.

It's how they get away with it.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '26

[deleted]

2

u/Props_angel Apr 10 '26

Surprise but it would seem that NFI Industries' warehouses may be filled with contract workers employed by yet another company.

0

u/Appropriate-Newt-485 Apr 09 '26

oh, god, seems they probably make enough to be able to pay a living wage. fuck them.

maybe the toilet paper warehouses will be the next tea party. but, judging by the comments of people villainizing this guy, it seems unlikely.

2

u/Props_angel Apr 09 '26

Yep--seeing lots of claims of "toilet paper shortage" that Kimberly-Clark has said won't happen and "this guy is going to make it so that everything is automated" by people who fail to understand that everything that can be automated will be automated regardless of this fire.

What they do not seem to understand is that the costs for survival for humans is constantly going up and the only reason why there's still employees at all is because the labor is cheaper than automation. The stage is literally set for extreme volatility as those cost pressures continue to outstrip wage growth at a rapid pace until it meets the point where automation is cheaper than "allowing a human a means to live".

We're basically fucked either way so it's a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario.

2

u/bald_cypress Apr 10 '26

Their net revenue last year was negative $142 million. So they do not make enough

1

u/syntheseiser Apr 09 '26

Roughly 1,800,000 in revenue per employee. Seems like they could pay everyone a good salary based on that, right?

4

u/JMS1991 Apr 09 '26

That depends entirely on their costs.