3 Blog Sites FYI:

Keep in mind that this is a secondary Target Sucks blog site, and is NOT kept up to date. The main blog site is found at:
http://www.targetfiling.blogspot.com/

A seperate blog for the 42 page ‘Target AP Directives’
http://targetapdirectives2006.blogspot.com/

See the Target Corp v. John Doe case summary at:
http://www.citmedialaw.org/threats/target-corp-v-doe

==============================



Going too Far?

Witness: Target Worker Wrestled, Choked Female Customer

By Chris Morran The Consumerist, on September 15, 2010 1:15 PM

Yesterday, Cherie was shopping at a Target in Cincinnati when she claims she witnessed a Target loss prevention associate "brutally detain, wrestle, strike and choke a shopper for more than three minutes."

Here is the direct link to a long story which was posted on the Consummerist site (http://consumerist.com/2010/09/witness-target-worker-wrestled-choked-female-customer.html) and just shows yet again how Tarbutt AP thugs treat customers. Why they continue to get away with it is unknown. They are in violation of so many sections of their own AP Directives that you must assume that Tarbutt has them only for 'show' and not to be enforced.


You can see them on this blog or seperately at:
1) Target Corrective Action Guidelines 2) AP Directives 2006 http://targetccguidelines.blogspot.com/


Other Target sites you might want to look at:
http://www.targetfiling.blogspot.com/
http://www.citmedialaw.org/threats/target-corp-v-doe

========================================


From: http://www.targetfiling.blogspot.com/

I bring to your attention the interesting case of:

Marjorie Ann Diaz v. Target Corporation

CV 10-1103 AG (MLGx), now before UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA and a case that is going to proceed as a class action against Target.

This case was removed from Orange County Superior Court to U.S. District Court 7/21/10. The original complaint runs 64 pages with 64 additional pages of attachments. The PACER Docket report itself runs for 9 pages. Clearly this is going to be a long case with serious implications for Target nationwide.

Target of course whines about being sued and puts forth many objections and asks for the matter to be tossed out, but as the Honorable ANDREW J. GUILFORD says: “Defendant Target Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as to all claims”.

Plaintiff Diaz filed a class action complaint on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated. Ms Diaz was an hourly non-exempt employee of Target in Irvine, California, from approximately October 2000 until May 2009, and alleges the following:

(1) failure to provide meal periods under California Labor Code § 226.7;
(2) failure to provide rest periods,
(3) failure to timely pay wages due at termination,
(4) failure to comply with itemized wage statement provisions,
(5) failure to pay overtime compensation,
(6) failure to reimburse expenses,
(7) penalties pursuant to the California Private Attorney General Act,
(8) violations of the Unfair Competition Law under California Business & Professions Code,
(9) violations of the Unfair Practices Act under California Business & Professions Code

Despite all the bitching and moaning the Judge said in part: “At this stage, Plaintiff has alleged sufficient facts to move forward as a class action.”

So all you cart pushers out there can rest easy, Tarbutt has its tit in a nice California ringer and I will keep you up to date on how things develop.

You can find out additional info on this case by looking at the 2/24/10 post further down on this blog, click on the direct link: http://targetfiling.blogspot.com/2009/12/calif-target-suit-needs-more-plaintiffs.html
and you can see the full 10 pages of the above reference Order Denying Motion To Dismiss at:
http://diaz-target.blogspot.com/

The entire 44 page Directives is found at the end of this blog. The main site is at: www.targetfiling.blogspot.com, take a look there for the main blog site.

(NOTE: This is a secondary blog site, you will find the main site at: www.targetfiling.blogspot.com here is a sample of what is there.)

Background: This is the 4th year this site has been up and running. The site exists to showcase the Target AP Directives and they are here in full later in the blog.

The original source of these 'Directives' is Mr. Scott Hundt, a former asset protection specialist at a Target store in Wisconsin. He kept a copy of the Directives when he was 'terminated' in June 2006 and subsequently posted them on the internet and forwarded me a copy in July 2006 and I also posted them on my blog.

Shortly after this, it came to the attention of Tarbutt, that their AP Directives were online and they leaned on Hundt who caved in immediately and removed them from the site he had posted them on. My blog has kept them posted since I first received them.

I also placed information of the availability of the Directives on various 'message boards', sometimes with the below summary.

Tarbutt sent threatening letters and emails to these sites demanding the information be deleted. I found that the sites universally caved in to the demands and removed the information and in most cases both deleted my screen name and banned me from their sites. I had at one time a blog titled: TargetSucks and that blog host was also contacted and deleted the blog. see letter at:
http://www.retail-worker.com/documents/20060727.target_cease_and_desist.pdf

This blog site was the subject of 23 months of litigation wherein Tarbutt whinned about it and insisted damages be paid and the information removed, but on July 16, 2008 the case was tossed out by Judge Cooper in Atlanta Federal Court. So for the moment anyway, the 1st Ammendment remains in effect.

I estimate that the total cost to Tarbutt was 250k and to me it was $0. Although I don't like Tarbutt, I would really suggest that they find better legal representation than Faegre & Benson (http://www.faegre.com/) for their outsourced legal work, they really did a crappy job.

Just FYI here is a brief glimpse of what is contained in those 39 or so pages, which you will find in full, later in this blog:

From: Target AP Directives

C. Five Steps for Apprehension


Certified AP team members must observe all five steps prior to making a shoplifter apprehension.

NOTE: If local law enforcement takes independent action and makes an apprehension before all five steps are met, the details must be documented in the CIRS report.

1. Initiation of Observation - The subject must enter the store/area without possession of Target merchandise.

2. Selection - The subject must be observed selecting Target merchandise from the display location.

3. Concealment - The subject must be observed concealing the merchandise, or the AP team member must have NO reasonable doubt based on observations that the merchandise has been concealed by the subject.

NOTE: If the merchandise is not actually concealed, it must be exposed as the subject exits or attempts to exit the store.

4. Maintain Observation - The AP team member must maintain sufficient surveillance of the subject in order to know the location of the merchandise and ensure the subject does not discard the merchandise.

NOTE: A Productive Merchandise Recovery (PMR) shall be attempted if surveillance is broken for any reason, or the AP team member can not maintain sufficient surveillance. (See PMR Directive)

5. Failure to Pay for Merchandise/Exiting the Store -AP team member(s) must observe the subject attempt to exit the store without paying for the merchandise.


NOTE: Some jurisdictions allow variances from the exiting requirement to allow apprehensions of concealed merchandise before an individual reaches the building’s exit. In these cases, the requirements must be documented and approved by the Director or Vice President of Assets Protection using the “Variance from Exiting Form” (found on the AP Zone).

----------------------------------------------

D. Restroom / Fitting Room


Apprehensions AP team members are not allowed to conduct surveillance or make apprehensions in restroom and/or fitting rooms.

1. AP team members are not allowed to follow subject’s into a restroom or fitting room to conduct surveillance.

2. AP team members shall not ask another team member to enter a fitting room or restroom to conduct surveillance.

-------------------------------------------------

B. Searches of Private Residence or Motor Vehicles

1. AP team members will NOT participate in a search of a private residence or motor vehicle.

--------------------------------------------------

1. Fleeing Shoplifter

a. If a shoplifter attempts to flee after being confronted, do not give chase in any manner (running, driving, etc.).

b. Store based AP team members shall not use any vehicle to follow or pursue a subject for any reason.

c. AP team members shall not encourage, condone, suggest or ask another Target team member or anyone else to chase a fleeing shoplifter.

2. AP shall refer for prosecution all individuals apprehended for retail theft when the value of the merchandise is $20.00 or greater and the case meets local prosecution requirements.


NOTE: If a case meets/exceeds the $20.00 referral guideline, but is NOT referred, the reason for non-referral must be included in the CIRS narrative. (Example: Local jurisdiction limits require merchandise in excess of $75.00 in order for prosecution.)


3. A team member witness, of the same gender of the suspected shoplifter , must be present in the room at all times during the detention.

--------------------------------------------

A. Photographing Shoplifters

1. Adult shoplifters - AP shall photograph all adult shoplifters unless prohibited by local statutes or ordinances.

2. Team Member Shoplifters - AP will not photograph any team member apprehended for shoplifting during working or non-working hours.


3. Juvenile Shoplifters - AP will not photograph any juveniles apprehended for shoplifting, unless required by local statutes or ordinances.
===================================

There is a 'message board' available for Target. Post your comments, opinions or problems at:

http://pub44.bravenet.com/forum/static/show.php?usernum=3751272404&frmid=387&msgid=0

========================================

This is a secondary blog:

It was set up in case the original blog had to be shut down. The main blog is available at:

www.targetfiling.blogspot.com

===============================

Assets Protection Mission Statement:
To enhance profitability, the guest experience, and our reputation by minimizing loss and business disruptions and providing secure environments.

-------Store Positions-------

o Target Protection Specialist (TPS, Sr.)-
The TPS position is all about presence. The Law Enforcement-style uniform and Batman belt serve to deter potential shoplifters as well provide peace-of-mind to guests. The Sr. TPS position has the added ability to make apprehensions.

o Assets Protection Specialist (APS, Sr.)-
The APS position is all about External Apprehensions. They wear plain clothes, and are usually exempt from the duties that other AP Team Members may have. The Sr. APS position has the added ability to perform Internal Interviews.

o Assets Protection Team Leader (APTL, APL)-
The APTL is the hourly equivalent of the ETL-AP. APTLs cannot perform Internal Interviews, so the Investigation Center monitors APTL/APL stores closely. A new position, the APL, is exactly the same as the APTL position in all facets, however, they do not have any allotted TPS hours.

o Executive Team Leader – Assets Protection (ETL-AP)-
At one time, the ETL-AP position was the backbone of AP. They could wear plain clothes, and their sole job was to catch Internals and Externals. However, non-HRSP ETL-APs now have to work LOD shifts, during which time they become store-side, and cannot make any AP-related impacts.

o Assets Protection Business Partner (APBP)-
Formerly the District Assets Protection Team Leader (DAPTL). In February 2009, STLs became the immediate supervisors to Assets Protection. The APBP role was modified to reflect that change.

o Group Assets Protection Team Leader (GAPTL)

-------HQ-------

o Regional Director of Assets Protection

o Vice President of Assets Protection - Brad Brekke

-------Investigation Center (IC) Positions-------

o Investigation Specialist (IS)-
The IS position is similar in many respects to the store-side Sr. APS position. An IS wears plain clothes, and is deployed to stores based on current theft trends in the market. The apprehensions an IS makes should restricted to high-dollar cases, and they also have the ability to perform Internal Interviews. They are not necessarily based out of the IC.

o Investigation Tech (IT)-
Based out of the IC, the Techs are responsible for camera work, investigating losses, communicating market trends (Daily Intelligence Briefings), performing Booster Interviews, and other tasks.

o Investigations Center Operations Leader (ICOL)

o Investigator-
The Investigator position is the direct supervisor to the IS. Investigators deploy the IS to necessary locations, as well as partnering with the FBI and other Law Enforcement Agencies to perform stings on suspected Fencing Locations. They also become involved if an ETL is suspected of Internal theft.

o Investigations Team Leader (ITL)

o Investigations Group Assets Protection Team Leader (I-GAPTL)

-------Distribution Center (DC) Positions-------

o Distribution Center Assets Protection Tech (DC-AP Tech)

o Distribution Center Assets Protection Analyst (DC AP Analyst)o Assets Protection Group Leader (APGL)

o Market Assets Protection Group Leader (MAPGL)

o Distribution Center Group Assets Protection Team Leader (DC-GAPTL)

-------Equipment-------

o Segway-
Reserved for high Security Index stores, the Segway is a two-wheeled electric vehicle. http://www.segway.com/patrol/images/.../security4.jpg

o T3-
Reserved for high Security Index stores, the T3 is the three wheeled successor to the Segway. http://www.t3motion.com/images/t3_airport2.jpg


-------Technology-------

o Analog, Loronix-
Analog Cameras running into one or more Multiplexes. Video is recorded onto VHS. If the store has Loronix, they have the added ability to connect some cameras into a PC. The Loronix software then makes playback possible, and even ties into Transaction Information.

o Target Digital Video (TDV)o Target Video Solutions (TVS)-
TVS is the current model for all new and remodeled stores. All video is stored on a local server, and all cameras can be accessed by the IC. The Genetec software allows for searches based on transaction information, motion, and time frame.

o Digital Video Storage (DVS)-
A recently rolled out pilot, currently being tested by several districts. DVS allows TVS and Loronix video to be uploaded directly to the IC.

o Common Investigation Management System (CIMS)-
Pronounced “sims”, this is the now defunct software for entering information regarding ongoing cases.

o Common Incident Reporting System (CIRS)-
Pronounced “sears”, this is the now defunct software for entering information about an incident.

o Target Case Management (TCM)-
This is the recently rolled out replacement to CIMS, CIRS, and IC's Sharepoint systems. TCM gives AP teams the ability to store all case information in one centralized location.


-------Common Terms-------

o Intelligence Led-
Intelligence Led is the most important term in the AP dictionary. It has no single definition, but ultimately implies all of the following:

We are pulling QUALITY externals. This means we need to focus on our average recovered amount per case.

We are gathering information from all resources (PITL, Empty Packages, Count Updates, Market / Company Trends, LE Information) and acting on it.
Can you speak to every action you take? Why did you move this camera? Why did you stop this person? etc.

Are you communicating this information to Investigations?
"Collect, Analyze, Action"

o Theft-
Theft is the loss of merchandise or property by either guest (External) or team member (Internal). There are two main types of External Theft. First is opportunistic, where a person takes an item simply because an opportunity was there. They are usually, but not always, amateur shoplifters. The second are boosters, where a person (or persons) takes expensive or high demand products as a source of income.

o Fraud-
Fraud is the use of a counterfeit or stolen form of payment, or a form of payment with insufficient funds. Like Theft, this can be either Internal or External.

o Safe & Secure-
Safe & Secure and Security Incidents are NOT the same as Safety. Security implies an overall feeling of being safe. Are all areas well lit? Do Team Members enter and leave as a group?

o Physical Security-
This term encompasses Key Control, Alarms, and Burglary or Robbery Prevention and Response.

o Security Index-
The Security Index grades a store based on how many Security Incidents occur, the surrounding area, the repetition of incidents, and the type of incidents that occur (severity).

o Merchandise Protection-
This is a blanket term applying to all Merchandise Protection methods, including but not limited to: Spider-Wraps, EAS Tags, Blu-Ray, DVD, and Video Game Keepers, CD Sleeves, and Bottle Security Wraps. The Logistics team is responsible for the application of all security devices.

o Branding-
The term “Branding” refers to the application of small Bullseye stickers to certain products. These stickers are difficult to remove, and help to identify Target Merchandise.

o Shortage Indicator-
The Shortage Indicator is a monthly report that grades the store's shortage potential using the following categories: Receiving (Orders not Rec'd), POS (Unidentified Sales (999)), Instocks (Research), Price Accuracy (Final and Salvage Markdown), Flow (Baffle %), and Reverse Logistics (Vendor Credits, CRC Aging, and CRC Error). While previous versions of the Shortage Indicator graded stores on their position within the company, the current version grades a store on itself, similar to DTK metrics.

o Directives-
The Assets Protection bible. The Directives state, clearly, what an Assets Protection Team Member can and cannot do. Failure to abide by the Directives usually results in a Final Warning.

o Non-Violent Intervention (NVI)-
NVI has two sections: Verbal De-Escalation, and Non-Violent Physical Intervention. All ETLs and GSTLs should take the Verbal De-Escalation course. AP Team Members are the only ones permitted to take the Physical portion.

o Target & Blue-
A program to encourage partnership between Target and Law Enforcement. This includes offering Grants, donating equipment, building sub-stations, and other opportunities for LE.

o National Night Out (NNO)-
Annual family event that takes place in August, to showcase Target's long-standing partnership with Law Enforcement. The events differ from location to location.

-------Reports-------

o Perpetual Inventory Tracking Log (PITL)-
A daily routine that involves physically counting high theft and current trend items. Theses item vary from location to location.

o Count Updates-
Similar to the new Drastic Count Change report, the Count Update report lists the top research items for the selected date range. AP Teams should audit this at least once a week to verify the correct counts were entered, and identify potential trends, or even Internals.

o Empty Package Tracking-
Still not officially released, this report should theoretically list items scanned in the system as being “Empty Packages”.

======================================

You might also find this site of interest:

When you finish looking at this site you might want to take a look at one called Job Vent. There are reviews of many firms, written by both employees and customers.

The one for Target has 18 reviews, 16 negative and 2 positive. You might want to put in your own opinions at:
http://www.jobvent.com/companyBrowse.php?CompanyID=2081

Rodent Infestation Closes Target Store

Dead Rodents, Chewed Bags Found In Store
April 2, 2009


PIKESVILLE, Md. -- The Target store on Reisterstown Road in Pikesville has been closed until further notice because of a rodent problem. The Maryland Department of Environmental Protection shut down the store because it was infested with mice and other rodents. Baltimore County officials said the store had a problem at its snack bar in February, but it has since spread to the entire store.

Customers told 11 News they tried to shop at the store, but a manager was there all day Thursday to turn them away with no clear reason as to why the store was closed.

Customers were turned away from the Target in Pikesville due to a rodent problem. Some said they were told the store was doing maintenance. One woman told 11 News the store told her it was a water main problem. "This is really very strange," said customer Judy Schwartz.

Jonas Jacobson, of the Baltimore County Department of Environmental Protection and Resource Management, said his office got an anonymous complaint at the end of March.

"We went out and found a much larger mouse infestation problem through the store," he said. Jacobson said rodent carcasses and feces were strewn throughout the store. He said pet food bags and human food containers were also chewed open.

Store managers wouldn't answer 11 News' questions Thursday, but the store's corporate office confirmed the problem. "We are working to clean up the store to prevent future problems and will work with Baltimore County to remedy the situation." - Target Corp.

"We acknowledge this is unacceptable. We are working to clean up the store to prevent future problems and will work with Baltimore County to remedy the situation," the corporation said in a statement.

The county said Target has taken many steps to rid the store of the problem, including setting traps, using pesticides and doing a wall-to-wall cleaning of the store.

"They're going to be submitting an integrated pest management plan, so they're taking action to eliminate the problem, and as soon as we're satisfied the problem has been dealt with, they will be allowed to reopen," Jacobson said.

Store officials said they're hoping to reopen late Friday, but county officials said it may take until next week to clean up the problem.

Target Corp loses a long running case in Oklahoma!

Therrien v. Target Corporation

On Feb 19th the case that has bounced around since approx 3/06 was resolved with a verdict against the Target Corporation for $500,000 (+15K in costs).

You might recall that last year it was dismissed after Target put on its case and before Therrien’s case could be presented. The matter was appealed on the basis that the Federal Judge James Payne had not considered the new changes to Oklahoma statutes and had thur ruled incorrectly. So the case was retired with the result that Target lost. (of course they also can appeal)

Briefly: "Plaintiff claims damages for injuries suffered as an invitee upon Defendant’s premises as the result of a criminal assault."

Translation: a good samaritan came to assist a Tarbutt screwup security weenie who was having a problem arresting a shoplifter, and had called out for help from anyone, the helpful customer (Timothy Therrien) ended up knifed and as usual this screwed up company wouldn't compensate the man for his serious injuries.

The moral of this story is: TARGET SUCKS. It was a lot of work for Therrien for a rather low award, but it is nice to finally see that he was the winner in this. You might be interested in knowing that the Target AP Directives were used against Target (I sent them a copy) and also a lot of other AP information was obtained and entered in the case including the newer version of the Directives.

Today in History:

Come in and

look around.

You might find

something here

you like!

How Target Corp is rated:

In trolling the web I found a site called: Job Vent, I was interested in the Company Reviews for Target Corporation, although you can look up other firms as well.

Here is one comment from the site:

Brandon, FL 06/26/2008:
....All LODs are both lazy and incompetent. You never see them out on the sales floor actually doing their jobs. The amount of theft is thru the roof 'cause security is rarely on duty or just too relaxed about it.

Here is the site, you can pull it up FYI:
http://www.jobvent.com/companyBrowse.php?CompanyID=2081

As to Target quality quality of employment rated by -5 to +5:
Company Summary (Averages of 11 reviews)

Pay -0.36
Work/Life Balance -1
Respect -2.55
Career Potential/Growth -1.91
Benefits -0.91
Location 1.18
Job Security -1.82
Co-worker Competence -1.82
Work Environment -1.36
---------------------------
Total -10.55

Positive Reviews 2 / Negative Reviews 9


Add Your Feedback About Target Corporation at:
http://www.jobvent.com/rate.php?ID=2081

Yes, this is a Target Sucks Site -

but just now and then something else really really stupid goes on and I have to give it a plug.

In the 'teaser' below we have one of those annoying wally World 'greeters' who got knocked on his ass by a pissed off cop, so just why am I bothering with this?

Well, we all would like to knock one of these morons on their butts but if we did it we would get a trip to the Grey Bar Hilton, this cop is just getting sued, but if these greeters are so annoying that even cops hate them and that should tell you something.

FYI: You don't have to show these clowns your receipt, I seldom do, I just smile and keep walking, so here goes:
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wal-Mart Greeter Suing Cop

February 2, 2009 - 9:23 PM By Kim Chapman

"Seventy-one year old Bill Walker says he's suing an off-duty Chattanooga police officer and the Chattanoog Police Department for 21 million dollars in a federal damage lawsuit.

Walker, a greeter at the Collegedale Wal-Mart, says he was shoved to the ground, and knocked unconscious by officer Kenneth Freeman. This happened Christmas Eve. Walker says as Freeman was leaving the store, he asked to see the officer's receipt. . ."

Click on this link to read more:
http://www.newschannel9.com/news/walker_975343___article.html/police_suing.html

If you are a dissatisfied Tarbutt AP secret squirrel or a laid off, or about to be laid off employee, you can always fax the new copy of the Target AP Directives or other interesting documents to Mr. Doe at 801 439-6387 and we can update this site (that should be good for another 2 years of litigation). Or you could just start a blog of your own and publish them and we can put a direct link to them here. This is a good site for new blogs: http://www.blogspot.com/

Got something to say about Tarbutt?

Post it at: http://pub44.bravenet.com/forum/3751272404

_________________________________________________

It is an Asset Protection Screw Up but

not at Target. Here is a Wally World item I found on line which may be of interest to you:
=======================

Wal-Mart & Local Police Detain Man, Threaten Arrest Over 4 Bags Of Sugar

By Chris Walters, Sat Jun 14 2008, 20,033 views

This guy was trying to make strawberry jam this morning, and he had to go buy 4 bags of sugar. The cashier threw away the original receipt but put the sugar in a couple of Wal-Mart shopping bags, so Ben left the store thinking everything was, you know, normal for a Saturday morning. Then he was stopped by a security guard, a store manager, and an off-duty police officer, all of whom went batshit crazy on Ben over his 4 bags of sugar and lack of receipt.

Before it was over one of the shopping bags was ripped open, a bag of sugar lay broken open on the parking lot, the guard had threatened to kick Ben's ass, and the police officer said, "you'd better not be lying to me." Ben was marched back into the store so they could verify with his cashier that he wasn't a sugar thief. Welcome to Wal-Mart, the police-state superstore where prices are low and civil rights don't exist.

"I was at the Germantown Wal*Mart to buy four bags of sugar because earlier in the day I had been at Butler’s Orchard picking 10 pounds of strawberries to turn into delicious jam. And to make delicious jam, you need lots of sugar. I grabbed four bags and headed to the checkout, where I also decided I could use some refreshment. I grabbed a Mountain Dew from the cooler, but the cashier had already processed my card for the four bags of sugar. He apologized and rang up another transaction for the Mt. Dew. At that point, he crumpled up my receipt for the four bags of sugar and handed me the receipt for the Mountain Dew.

I headed for the exit, and was greeted by Wal*Mart security who wanted to check my receipt. I produced the receipt for the Mountain Dew and explained that the cashier had tossed the other receipt for the sugar. I would repeat this explanation 6 more times before this affair ended.

At this point, I attempted to leave, but was told I could not. I immediately asked if I was being detained. I was told "no" but that I wasn’t allowed to leave unless I walked back to the cashier to get a receipt. I said that I was "happy to let the security guard talk to the cashier, but that I was heading home with my sugar." I attempted to leave again, and the door was blocked. I asked again if I was being detained, and was told "yes." I asked on what grounds, and the security guard said "Because you stole."

I informed the guard I had done no such thing, that the sugar was my property, and I was leaving with it. This time I pushed passed him and left the store, with him following me demanding I stop. As I left, he grabbed my bags, ripping them open. As he followed me he attempted to grab my bags, and grab the items inside of my bags. At one point, he told me that he should "kick my ass."

As I reached the end of sidewalk outside the store and headed towards my car in the parking lot, another employee came running and blocked my path. Soon afterwards a manager arrived. I again asked if I was being detained. I was informed by the manager that I was. I again asked for what reason, and was told by the original security guard that it was for stealing. I once again informed them that I hadn’t stolen anything and that I was leaving.

At this point, the manager informed me that Wal*Mart policy did not allow me to leave the store without showing a receipt. I said that I had paid for my merchandise, that it was in fact a store employee that had thrown away my receipt, and that I was not compelled to prove that items that I legally owned belonged to anyone but me. Again I inquired whether I was being detained, and was told my only options were to go back in the store to talk to the cashier or have the police called. I informed the manager that she was welcome to call the police, because I had done nothing wrong. At tht point, she radioed for someone to call the police.

Once again, I started to walk to my car as the two security guards again attempted to block my path in the parking lot.

At this point, and off duty police officer came to the scene (he appeared to be heading into Wal*Mart to shop, not the one called by the manager), showed his badge, and asked for an explanation. Everyone was calmed by this, and tensions visibly eased on the faces of the Wal*Mart employees. I explained my side, and Wal*Mart employees explained their side. After the explanations, I asked the police officer if I was being detained, and he said yes. I asked on what grounds, and he said "suspicion of theft." The officer told me I could give them "their merchandise back" and leave at that point or I could go inside and talk to the cashier. I indicated that since he was detaining me, I was willing to go back into the store and speak with the cashier, but that the merchandise belonged to me. At this point, one of the bags of sugar fell from my ripped bags and split open on the pavement. It was an accident, but I could tell no one believed me when I said so.

On the way into the store, the officer informed me that it was his day off, he had important things to do, and he didn’t want to take me to jail. But I had one last chance to give them their merchandise back and just leave, because if I wasn’t telling the truth, he would personally drive me to the station. I agreed wholeheartedly with him, and told him so. I’m fairly certain he thought I had actually stolen the sugar at this point. He then asked what I needed so much sugar for anyway.

At the time, I was literally covered with strawberry juice. It had stained my shorts and shirt red, and I thought it was fairly believable that I was going to make strawberry jam. He still seemed skeptical, asking where I had been picking strawberries, and only seemed to believe me after I was able to name Butler’s Orchard. He then asked if I had ID, what my name was, and how old I was. Upon telling him this, he said "You better not be lying to me," so perhaps I was too quick to think he didn’t assume I was guilty.

Of course, upon re-entering the store and speaking with the cashier, he informed everyone that I had paid for the sugar and the receipt was found in his trash can. His story differed slightly in that he told them he had given me the receipt but I had thrown it into his trash can. That was impossible based on where his trash can was from the checkout counter, but it didn’t matter. The original security guard was cordial, shook my hand, and apologized. The Wal*Mart manager and police officer lectured about how next time if I just cooperated and gave up my rights at the beginning, it would have been much easier on everyone. Trust me, Wal*Mart, there won’t be a next time."

If you defend Wal-Mart for this treatment of an average customer, you are a slave. There are other ways to prevent shoplifting. How about the security guard follows the suspected shoplifter to his car to take down his license plate while radioing someone in the store to confirm whether or not his story is legit? Besides that, Ben had four bags of sugar in Wal-Mart branded plastic bags—the likelihood that he was shoplifting them was low, and the value of the sugar to the store was virtually nonexistent compared to other merchandise that was and is probably being stolen from Wal-Marts all over America this weekend.

No matter how belligerent a customer is in this situation, the guard, manager, and officer should remember that if the customer is innocent, he has a right to be belligerent and offended that he's being harrassed to such a degree—especially over something as trivial as four bags of sugar.

===============================

As The Economy Sinks, Shoplifting Arrests Soar!

Always looking for interesting articles for my blog, here is one FYI:
=================================================

Shoplifting

By Meg Marco, 1:33 PM on Tue Dec 23 2008

The New York Times says that police departments all over the country are reporting an increase in shoplifting arrests — up to 20%.

Many of the shoplifters are first time offenders who panicked and did something stupid, but others are professionals taking advantage of cutbacks in retail staff.

“More people are desperate economically, retailers are operating with leaner staffs and police forces are cutting back or being told to deprioritize shoplifting calls,” said Paul Jones, the vice president of asset protection for the Retail Industry Leaders Association.

The problem, he said, could be particularly acute this December, “the month of the year when shoplifting always goes way up.”

Two of the largest retail associations say that more than 80 percent of their members are reporting sharp increases in shoplifting, according to surveys conducted in the last two months.
Compounding the problem, stores are more reluctant to stop suspicious customers because they fear scaring away much-needed business.

And retailers are increasingly trying to save money by hiring seasonal workers who, security experts say, are themselves more likely to commit fraud or theft and are less practiced at catching shoplifters than full-time employees are.
----------------------------------------------------

Why Target is losing market share to Wal-Mart

Here is an extract from an interesting article, the entire column can be found at the listed link:

Wal-Mart Weekly: Why Target is losing market share to Wal-Mart

http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/22/wal-mart-weekly-why-target-is-losing-market-share-to-wal-mart


"After shopping at a few local SuperTarget locations over the last few weeks, I compared several food and general merchandise items between Target and Wal-Mart and it was easy to see why hard times have fallen on Target recently. From bottled water to ravioli to toilet tissue to flat-screen TVs, Target was consistently higher on its prices than Wal-Mart. Anywhere from a 5% to a 15% price increase was seen on these items (same exact model number in some cases), and this during the busiest shopping month of the year.

Has Target increased prices or has Wal-Mart steadily lowered them to keep the low price perception alive? It's hard to say which, but in both instances, the Target locations were decently busy (but not packed). The two closest Wal-Mart stores, by comparison, were incredibly busy. Just a walk through the aisles was enough to confirm this. Either Target was not interested in competing on price with Wal-Mart this holiday season, or it was interested in profit instead of same-store sales figures on a month-to-month basis.

But, with the holiday retail shopping season about to wrap up this week and next, what is Target's plan in 2009? The recession will be lingering around quite a while, and shoppers may still continue to prefer Wal-Mart for their purchases as much as possible. Where does that leave Target? On interesting ground."

The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy defines the marketing division of the Target Corporation as ‘a bunch of mindless jerks who’ll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes,’ with a footnote to the effect that the editors would welcome applications from anyone interested in taking over the post of commercial correspondent.

CST Day and time

Don't forget that there is a message board which you can use to make comments or exchange views with other readers. Go to:
http://pub44.bravenet.com/forum/3751272404