promoted me to guest for getting too many redcards

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sounds overly pedantic, in fact reminds me of an asshole guest we had. He asked if he signed up for the card if todays purchase would be put on it. Cashier said yes. His application was denied; he then tried arguing he should get the stuff for free because she didn't clarify, "Yes, if you are approved".
 
Sorry. I wrote this on quite a bit of xanax or I wouldn't have been so dramatic. Most of what I said is true except I don't think as many people quit as I said. I know of just 3 for sure...SORRY! Thanks for all the feedback. Got offered a job at cvs, interview at Starbucks later today. Still pissed tho I loved my store and my guests.
 
commiecorvus said:
I sure hope you refused to sign anything.
It's too late if you already have but the fact is they can't force you to sign anything.
In a situation like that your safest bet is to not sign a damned thing, end of story.
They can threaten you all they want, but just don't do it.
Click to expand...

I was totally against signing but I feel like if I didn't sign they woulda called the police and I don't think there's anything more embarrassing than getting escorted out of your job in handcuffs
 
Mhugh220 said:
If your state is an "at will employment" state then I don't see how this would be a valid lawsuit. Yes, you can sue for anything however they can hold the policy you broke against you. If your boss took money from the register and everyone else took money from the register, does it make it legal? 5% isn't much, and everyone did it, but taking a penny a day is also stealing and adds up. So...I wouldn't waste your money on a lawyer for a case you will lose. Hell, I bet you'd even lose the unemployment case. Our store has about a 98% success rate in unemployment cases.
Click to expand...

You can sue for being terminated from your job in spite of being an at will employee but it's pretty narrow. Basically, if you're terminated because you're part of a Title VII protected class (race, gender, religion, etc.) but it has to be because you're terminated for being one of those classes. So, if your boss walked up to you and said "you're fired because you're a man/woman/muslim/christian" then you'd have a civil rights act claim against them. It's never that blatant though which is where the minutiae of proving up the reason you were fired was because you were a man/woman/etc. comes into play. Now, sometimes there's state laws that add additional protected classes but the biggies are the federal protected classes and there's nothing to indicate he was fired for being part of a protected class.

I give him pretty good odds on an unemployment case. If he can actually show up that he had the implied authority to act in the way he did and continued to act in that way under the new leadership, without them making any attempt to correct it, he has a decent shot. He could likely call witnesses (not sure about Ohio's unemployment process though) including his old leadership that allowed him to give the discounts and show that not only was it permitted previously but potentially even encouraged.

As far as people saying he should sue, just to sue, or start a class action, that's not gonna fly. The biggest reason why it's not gonna fly is because he'd have to prove up damages. When you're an at will employee, you don't have damages for losing your job. Now, if we're talking systemic civil rights violations like I talked about above, well then yeah you got yourself a class action ready to go. Here, nah, nothing that would indicate a class action.

Now, where an attorney does come into play for OP is in protecting him against them attempting to collect on that civil demand letter he signed. I'm not sure how much money they made him sign for but we're potentially talking hundreds to thousands of dollars. He can, and should, seek the advice of a lawyer to see what his options are in spite of signing that civil demand letter.

As far as bringing an action to recover damages though? Nah, nothing much really. What it's about for OP at this point for contacting a lawyer is trying to protect himself from losing money from signing that civil demand letter. Hell, if I was licensed in Ohio (at least I think his store is in Ohio, based on the store number he gave) and near there I'd be willing to meet with him in person and review his situation for nothing but I'm not so I can't help personally. I'm actually a little incensed that they did this to him as the situation seems to be. I'd love to fight them on this one but I can't because I'm nowhere near there and not licensed in Ohio.

amply said:
I was totally against signing but I feel like if I didn't sign they woulda called the police and I don't think there's anything more embarrassing than getting escorted out of your job in handcuffs
Click to expand...

The decision to call the police is NEVER dependent on whether you sign the civil demand letter at Target. If they think they have enough for criminal charges against you, they will ALWAYS call the police to escort you out, regardless of whether you've signed the civil demand letter. Any promise/threat they made you to get you to sign that civil demand letter was almost certainly a lie.

Furthermore, I'm a little surprised at the process they used to terminate you. Back when I was an APL, unless an employee was explicitly stealing for themselves, it was considered an HR term. Basically, it was only an AP internal termination if we were calling the police and pressing charges against someone. It sounds like they went through the internal investigation process, including bringing in the APBP but they didn't actually go through with calling the police and pressing charges.
 
You may want to take your photo off as well. Your hacked up debit card still clearly displays your name.
 
PullMeBackIn said:
You can sue for being terminated from your job in spite of being an at will employee but it's pretty narrow. Basically, if you're terminated because you're part of a Title VII protected class (race, gender, religion, etc.) but it has to be because you're terminated for being one of those classes. So, if your boss walked up to you and said "you're fired because you're a man/woman/muslim/christian" then you'd have a civil rights act claim against them. It's never that blatant though which is where the minutiae of proving up the reason you were fired was because you were a man/woman/etc. comes into play. Now, sometimes there's state laws that add additional protected classes but the biggies are the federal protected classes and there's nothing to indicate he was fired for being part of a protected class.

I give him pretty good odds on an unemployment case. If he can actually show up that he had the implied authority to act in the way he did and continued to act in that way under the new leadership, without them making any attempt to correct it, he has a decent shot. He could likely call witnesses (not sure about Ohio's unemployment process though) including his old leadership that allowed him to give the discounts and show that not only was it permitted previously but potentially even encouraged.

As far as people saying he should sue, just to sue, or start a class action, that's not gonna fly. The biggest reason why it's not gonna fly is because he'd have to prove up damages. When you're an at will employee, you don't have damages for losing your job. Now, if we're talking systemic civil rights violations like I talked about above, well then yeah you got yourself a class action ready to go. Here, nah, nothing that would indicate a class action.

Now, where an attorney does come into play for OP is in protecting him against them attempting to collect on that civil demand letter he signed. I'm not sure how much money they made him sign for but we're potentially talking hundreds to thousands of dollars. He can, and should, seek the advice of a lawyer to see what his options are in spite of signing that civil demand letter.

As far as bringing an action to recover damages though? Nah, nothing much really. What it's about for OP at this point for contacting a lawyer is trying to protect himself from losing money from signing that civil demand letter. Hell, if I was licensed in Ohio (at least I think his store is in Ohio, based on the store number he gave) and near there I'd be willing to meet with him in person and review his situation for nothing but I'm not so I can't help personally. I'm actually a little incensed that they did this to him as the situation seems to be. I'd love to fight them on this one but I can't because I'm nowhere near there and not licensed in Ohio.



The decision to call the police is NEVER dependent on whether you sign the civil demand letter at Target. If they think they have enough for criminal charges against you, they will ALWAYS call the police to escort you out, regardless of whether you've signed the civil demand letter. Any promise/threat they made you to get you to sign that civil demand letter was almost certainly a lie.

Furthermore, I'm a little surprised at the process they used to terminate you. Back when I was an APL, unless an employee was explicitly stealing for themselves, it was considered an HR term. Basically, it was only an AP internal termination if we were calling the police and pressing charges against someone. It sounds like they went through the internal investigation process, including bringing in the APBP but they didn't actually go through with calling the police and pressing charges.
Click to expand...


it was a very weird termination. i was in my stls office (he brought me there telling me he just wanted to talk real quick...of coarse). he dropped me off with the district ap, our new in training APTL and a neighboring stores AP. only the district ap talked...for like an hour he went on and on about the specifics of what an AP actually does... for a minute i thought he was almost trying to recruit me for an AP position but obviously that made no sense. yeah then he told me i was caught doing something they consider theft, that its in my best interest to pay the $150 back, and its in my best interest to sign the form admitting to theft. i was so afraid of going to jail i just did it lol. then i asked DTL AP if this means termination and he said he doesn't know. 10 minutes later my STL walks in and says 'you're fired. obviously. don't even try to explain yourself, i saw the tapes'.

but i actually have a really good lawyer who works with big corporations all the time so i know im not paying them that $150 bucks thats literally just a collection of all the discounts i gave away to drive there frickin credit card.

thanks for all the advice
 
flexible fullfillment is NOT clear. uh oh, looks like i have to go in!

Evernote Camera Roll 20150311 123515.png
 
Why hide name but not order #? We can look up your identity via MyGo with the order number.
 
amply said:
I was totally against signing but I feel like if I didn't sign they woulda called the police and I don't think there's anything more embarrassing than getting escorted out of your job in handcuffs
Click to expand...
please say you read everything before signing it
 
Nauzhror said:
Why hide name but not order #? We can look up your identity via MyGo with the order number.
Click to expand...
Im sure they can track order #'s you look up too 😛 Honestly anyone who looks up this person by order # and then finds him is kind of stalkerish. And thats using Customer information for personal gain which is against Target rules. Inatant Term may apply if found. Be careful when trying to do something like this.
 
When I worked for target, My store did the same thing, we were very discount happy! I was a gsa and we pretty consistently gave the 5% on a declined app. No discount beyond that though. We also took back all merchandise even if we had to cheat the system. The only thing that people consistently got fired for was keeping the promotional gift cards.
 
oath2order said:
$150? That's it? I mean, I thought it'd be a lot more.

Seems pretty shady
Click to expand...
Nah, the amount isn't important. You can be termed for a lot less theft. One of my Starbucks consumption cases (had to end up being an HR term, like I talked about before) had only taken about $20-30 of Starbucks food/drinks and she got termed as well.

What I do find surprising is that if these discounts were going on for a long time, I expected it to be a much higher amount.
 
PullMeBackIn said:
Nah, the amount isn't important. You can be termed for a lot less theft. One of my Starbucks consumption cases (had to end up being an HR term, like I talked about before) had only taken about $20-30 of Starbucks food/drinks and she got termed as well.

What I do find surprising is that if these discounts were going on for a long time, I expected it to be a much higher amount.
Click to expand...


I'm pretty sure the amount was random.
It was a shady way to set up a case and keep from having to pay unemployment.
They knew he was just continuing the policies of the previous STL so the only way to term him was to make it look like he was a thief.
 
Last edited:
Tonight at work, it was whoever gets a redcard the TM gets a $10 giftcard.
Target does what they want. They allow what they want.
Every store has their own "rules".
I'd get me a lawyer and fight this.
 
The $150 amount seems like a guess. I still think the gift cards and drinks is what did it. I never would have did that. With the number of red cards you say you got, there had to be a lot of declines also.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

KarmaToBurn
Too many vendors
Replies
17
Views
1K
KarmaToBurn
KarmaToBurn
buliSBI
SCO is getting a bit ridiculous
Replies
15
Views
616
allnew2
allnew2
J
Store calling me while I am sick
Replies
10
Views
731
bymoonlight
B
E
New Rollouts for 2025?
2 3
Replies
69
Views
5K
RunForACallBox
RunForACallBox
F
Meant to pay for candy bar
Replies
8
Views
995
Lights
L
Back
Top