A Target on My Back
I was publicly humiliated at the local Target store this afternoon by one of the employees, a young woman who yelled at my children from a distance of 25 feet for being improperly respectful of Spongebob Squarepants decorative microbead pillows.
Unbeknownest to me, Target Team Member Emily had stalked us all the way from the toy section to housewares, enraged when we haphazardly reshelved Parasol Kids foam chairs.
If you're ever in Target and your demand for the manager is met by an employee's ominous walkie-talkie request for an "LOD," don't panic. You are not going to be dragged off for a full cavity search by Target Team Interrogator Günter. LOD stands for Leader on Duty, the person in charge of placating irate customers by feigning concern for their grievances until they go away.
There's a really boring story I could tell here, but I'll skip to the moral: My children are perfect angels, Emily's a delusional harridan, and it's not my fault her years of full flower are being spent patrolling endcaps in a red fitted Polo that's not slimming.
The best part of the disagreement was when a middle-aged customer stepped out of the crowd of shoppers-by, declared that her children never misbehaved in stores when they were young, and berated me for gross parental neglect until the manager arrived.
Outraged by my mistreatment, I'm now plotting all of the meaningless gestures I could undertake to teach a lesson to a 1,300-store chain with a $47 billion dollar market cap. Target Corporation will rue the day it kissed off a customer who spent $957 in calendar year 2005! Let's see how Emily feels when her dream of becoming a Price Accuracy Team Leader must overcome an incisive letter of grievance from a journalism school graduate!
I'd threaten to create an anti-Target web site, but that's already been done by a guy who swore revenge after the company wouldn't exchange a cordless phone.
Besides, after reading online postings by disgruntled employees on Target Sucks, I've come to realize that the best response is not to boycott the store or write a letter that will cause her to add secret sauce to my burger at her next job.
What I should have done, rather than slinking out of the store in shame, was turn the kids back around and spend another hour shopping for toys.
Comments
Your humiliation at Target sounds pretty bad, but I don't think it can compare to the Hadean nightmare of shopping at Wal-Mart.
First, there's the sport of dodging stretch-clad women with yard-wide derrieres in the obscenely narrow aisles.
Then, there's the religious exercise of praying that the merchandise stacked to Tower of Babel heights doesn't come tumbling down (even with the knowledge that Wal-Mart considers resultant lawsuits merely a cost of doing business).
Finally, there's the omni-present Wal-Mart TV monitors blasting at decibel levels surely harmful to human hearing.
If Satan himself had conceived a shopping experience to torture shoppers in Hell, I don't think it could top the Wal-Mart "ambiance".
I must say, though, that I hope I never cross Rogers Cadenhead. Those rapier thrusts would hurt.
That's the saddest part of the story -- there's nowhere else to go. I would shop at Target even if they staff the entire store with clones of Team Member Emily. At Target, you leave without your dignity. At Wal-Mart, you leave without your soul.
Rogers you were the victim of two converging trends: Americans are ruder than ever as a result of (finally recognizing) we have almost no control over our lives on any scale worth measuring. So we take it out on each other, expecting results when the person on the other side has the same lack of ability to do anything about our complaint.
I had a similar situation this week with an institution almost as well loved as Walmart, the US Postal Service. I had an order from Amazon returned because the carrier didn't bother to follow my change of address and, right up the management chain to the local postmaster, no one could do anything but say sorry and that they hope it doesn't happen again. Very frustrating to me, I wanted the Rails book to work with over the weekend, but really what did I think these people could do?
I'm beginning to understand, finally, how insightful the Wachowski Brothers really were with that first Matrix movie.
Had you tried that at a Walmart you might have had to confront a Dobson-Radio groopie greeter banging a bible next to your head like Kruschev size 14 black shoe.
I don't understand why you are shopping at Target or Walmart, since they are neocolonial community strip-miners. . .? Seems everyone here hates the stores but can't seem to find the local community small businesses which provide the same, or better, merchandise. . .and not manufactured under slave labor in China.
Those small business owners are the backbone of the neihborhoods and are the ones sitting on schoolboards, BBB, PTA and other civic organisations -- not Walmart executives; probably not even residing in those communities, at all.
Well, of course I understand -- it is necessary because of the 1/4 million+ mortgages, SUVs, stock/mutual funds and private schools and the de rigor annual pilgramages to DisneyLand/World or Vegas. That makes it necessary to cut corners somewhere; too bad for the neighborhood mercantile establishments, druggists, et al.
Besides, you can salve your guilt by complaining about some individual who crabs about your children's innocent testing of just how bouncy the foam chairs happen to be, or how stain resistant Bob's microbead pillows are.
How about the Old Navy? Getting too big for their britches, too, what?
Why don't you just stuff it, you impudent snot, Tadowe?
Everyone's having a pleasant day, and you come along and stink the place up with your self-important bloviating.
Anyone with half a brain and the ability to type can crank your humourless twaddle out all day, with one hand tied behind his back.
Is your spell check not working?
Besides, you can salve your guilt by complaining about some individual who crabs about your children's innocent testing of just how bouncy the foam chairs happen to be, or how stain resistant Bob's microbead pillows are.
Actually, they were testing their efficacy as weapons. That aisle has trouble written all over it, so I tried to steer them to an alternate route through comforters.
Vince whines, "Why don't you just stuff it, you impudent snot, Tadowe?"
Why don't you make me, you supercilious jerk?
"Everyone's having a pleasant day, and you come along and stink the place up with your self-important bloviating."
I suppose you consider yourself the very icon of laconical commentary?
"Anyone with half a brain and the ability to type can crank your humourless twaddle out all day, with one hand tied behind his back."
I dote on freudian compliments like this one, Vince, I truly do.
"Is your spell check not working?"
A spelling flame, Vince? Wait. . .I might just cry from chagrin. . .!
...impudent..self-important bloviating...humourless twaddle
...supercilious jerk...icon of laconical commentary...dote on freudian compliments...cry from chagrin
Alright you two, that's enough. Put down the thesauri and back away from your keyboards.
Bill dictates, "Alright you two, that's enough. Put down the thesauri and back away from your keyboards."
A vocabulary flame, Bill? Wow, I am really weeping now. . .
You and Vince are so cruel. . .
I didn't dictate anything, Tadowe, I typed that myself. (It's Sunday, and my secretary gets weekends off.)
Hey Bill,
I don't think any of us here needs a thesaurus to write this kind of stuff.
It's just a little bored, harmless Sunday fun.
Vince opines, "I don't think any of us here needs a thesaurus to write this kind of stuff."
Well I expect, considering the 'flame,' that Bill required a dictionary, at least. Probably because his secretary isn't around. . .
You might be right about that.
You might be right about that.
There you go--nothing unites warring parties like a common enemy. My work here is done.
Bill, sir,
Since when are dabblers deputized to police our little games? I told you we were just playing, you silly Babbit.
What I should have done, rather than slinking out of the store in shame, was turn the kids back around and spend another hour shopping for toys.
Heh - nice, I haven't thought if this yet. So far I've tried to keep Jr strapped into the trolley (tolley! tolley!) but woe betide any gum-chewing shop assistant who fails to pay attention or show respect.
If I can just get his calls of Bushshit! Bushshit! invoked on demand, I see a new era of shopper pleasure in front of me.
It's going to suck so bad when they come to Canada and take over the Zellers stores.
I have a Swiftian regard for mankind and comments like those appearing in this thread confirm my cynicism.
You hate the 'neocolonial' strip-mining, slave labor supporting discount stores, but can't seem to find anywhere else to shop. Then, when you get the treatment you fully expect from some individual in such establishments, can't wait to get even with the establishment and, or malign the corporation, behind their back -- even to the point of pretending to encourage disruptive behavior in your own children. . .
. . .or attack some 'messenger' who has the temerity to highlight your mealymouthed exclamations and supercilious judgements. No use advising any of you hypocrites to 'wake up!'
Where do you shop, Tadowe? And what do you do when an employee is rude to you? I'm guessing you're not the shy retiring type.
Rogers asks, "Where do you shop, Tadowe?"
I shop where I can find what I need. The 'point,' in this case, being that I don't complain about how 'evil' they might be while still doing business with them.
"And what do you do when an employee is rude to you? I'm guessing you're not the shy retiring type."
I've already said 'what' I would do, and that is not blame the organisation for the actions of one individual. Also, I don't dislike the rich for being rich, unless they are a member of my political party or give it large donations; e.g., hate Murdock but loveSoros. I try to be consistent in my morals and principles and apply them equally in living my life, not play at being a hypocrite for my 'party,' and adopt some dogmatic ideology to suit their propagandadistic efforts to gain political power.
I am nothing like some yellow-dog-democrat, and that's for sure. . .
Zed, I've trained the little ones to say 'George Bush is a doody head' on command.
Shopping trips are a joy for us!
Oh, so Target employees should spend all day properly reshelving items that your bratty little kids put in the wrong place? Sounds like the blame is squarely on you, Cadenhead!
Full disclosure: I own 100 shares of TGT.
Hi Dave, my crotch-fruit's exclamations would be especially valuable if he lived in the U.S. of A, but in this instance, he's just copying daddy's habit of pronouncing most things to be "bullshit".
Tadowe, you are clearly a wise, balanced and ethical person. I look up to you. Especially how you masterfully avoid answering 1/2 the questions put to you. God bless you. Bushshit! Bushshit!
Zed expresses some hero worship, "Tadowe, you are clearly a wise, balanced and ethical person. I look up to you. Especially how you masterfully avoid answering 1/2 the questions put to you. God bless you. Bushshit! Bushshit!"
I always try and answer the 'questions' presented to me, Zed, and as you know very well by now. However, I am in no way impelled to reply to questions which beg the answer(s.) I can, as is my right, answer on point, rather than be led by the inference intended to belittle it.
BTW, in consideration of 'projection,' it is apparent why your child parrots your favorite factious phrase. . .
For Vince: Sorry to have mistyped the word 'fractious,' Vinny. Ironically, the term 'factious,' also applies to Zed's political commentary, in that he uses the exclamation there quite often in place of 'reason.' It is his 'idea' of what debate is all about.
You guys are hilarious. I love overblown internet histrionics.
Moxie says, "You guys are hilarious. I love overblown internet histrionics."
Kush mir in toches, zeeskyte. . .
A shaynem dank dir im pupik.
Rog I feel your pain but I lost my soul so long ago to the corporate shopping ethic that your story is just background noise over the beep of the price scanner.
Visitor says, "A shaynem dank dir im pupik."
Lol! That tickles!
Rogers goes shopping:
Buy Me This Daddy
Get a life! Making a website about one bad experience at a store- pathetic.
It's fun. You go, bro.
What? no "Fast, Fun and Friendly"? I work for Target (and no I'm not Emily...so don't worry) and I know as a Team Member the way she reacted to a "guest" shopping is just uncalled for. There are many times when our team members have to deal with problem guests yelling, getting rude, fighting and the whole time you have to be friendly with them. So what you kids put things back on the shelfs wrong...atleast they put them back on the shelfs! It's her job as a team member to help keep the store looking good...not you or your kids job. If I was you I'd check back into that Target to see if she's still there or to talk to a manager again about what was done. We have a 3 strikes rule...after messing up the 3rd time they have the right to fire you...if she's getting enough complains about her...she can be let go. Also it'll be a good idea to write to the district office in your area which you can get from the store manager or even try the local phonebook for their address...and if that fails to get a response...write headquaters. I hate hearing of 1 team member just ruining the shopping trip of 1 guest that in turn will stop shopping there because of it. I'm sure that store has around 100 team members...you just got stuck with the bad one no one else likes ;)
I've had fairly good luck with Target, though I did go head-to-head with an obnoxious cashier that informed me that federal law prohibited me from purchasing cough syrup and a decongestant in one transaction. Her follow-up was that it's her job to know these things and not her fault that I don't.
Apparently the Jacksonville Sherrif's Office shirt I was wearing didn't steer her from thinking I was secretly hording these huge quanities of product for my meth lap back home.
The manager that I requested wasn't much brighter, though she finally agreed that it was their company's policy and not federal law.
Hmmmmmm... Let's see you are ready to take one person who was having a very bad day( possibly) out of three hundred employees at each store and say that the store chain sucks and you WILL NEVER go there again!!...... you exaggerate your experience and yet you want us to believe that your children were"perfect angels" ?
typical
oh furthermore, if your children ARE the perfect angels you say, then why did you need to steer them away from the "trouble" isle? They would have been good right?@#$!
target does suck for the people who work there and the people who shop there. i just quit there the paid is none to talk about management is bad yelling all day about getting work done and getting credit card aps.
that is the job of a team member and for u to berate someone for no reason...please do take you and yor friends to anywhere but TARGET...like WAL- mart...PLEASE!!!!!!!!
I'm sorry but this is the biggest bunch of crap I've heard in a while. First off, I don't know how we're supposed to believe that your kids are perfect angels, according to the person who has raised them and brought them to a store, then went online and complained about it. The one Team Member does not represent every Target in the nation so please don't expect any of us to change our opinions of the store due to your "bad experience". If your kids were in fact "perfect angels", then none of this would have happened. Not one person in the right state of mind would have done this if these children were in fact what you state. No offense to your children, but I'm just saying that this is a bunch of crap.
Why do you assume that Target Team Member Emily was in her right mind? I haven't seen the teen rageaholic at the store since then, which suggests she didn't go on to become a Target Team Leader, Team General, or Team Commander in Chief.
Besides, we've all known people who go apeshit from the stresses of serving customers. When I was a kid working in the bottomless pit of despair that is Toys 'R Us, there were days I thought one of my coworkers would stalk and kill belligerent customers with makeshift weaponry appropriated from the sports aisle.
Sorry you are not renewing, we need all the bloggers that we can get.
===============
www.targetstoressuck.blogspot.
com
www.targetfiling.blogspot.com
I work at target and we are all not like that... i dont want you to look at it as every target is that way. the one i work at everyone is very friendly and fun.. we dont stalk our guests.. i just thought i would say... and let me tell you at Wal-Mart you're lucky to find someone that speaks english... well where i live anyway... you could make a Wal-mart bashing site and they wouldnt be able to read it! ok thanks! i hope you have a great day!
Okay....I do not have nearly the command of the english language as you, Rodgers...but I am sitting here laughing my ass off at your great sense of humor! I find it to be a lot like mine. And to think, I found you while googling Gaucho Marx for an answer to a dang crossword puzzle I was working! (and the first one since maybe elementary...my husband just got home after a year in Iraq as an XO and now that he is home I find myself enjoying all kinds of things that don't involve all the slack I had to pick up for a year lol).
Seeing how the last entry was in 2005 I do not think you will ever read my little addition to a page you once created but just in case you do please note my big belly laugh at not finding a clue about "gaucho's weapons" but rather a rant on tar-shjay (as pronounced by my sister).
Living in Germany is the utter bomb compared to shopping in the States. Even the wal mart has class and NO SMILEY FACES. Customer service is the ultimate while shopping, eating, hotel stays, and on and on. You will find cloth napkins in the smallest family owned restaraunt. I got my hair cut in a german wal mart and it came with head massage and served a beverage of choice (coffee in china...mineral water in crystal). Retail does not mean lower customer service standards with the lower prices. Here care and attention is still given to the customer. Sure, some of this may change in the future with new laws being passed in government in terms of store hours, price fixing, etc... but it will take a long time to pulverize the way that europeans have pride in their german heritage and workmanship. I get my meat from the metzkerei (butcher) my brotchen from the bakerei (bakery), and my vegetables from the three time weekly farmer's market. I ride my bike there to get it. I ride alongside all ages of people doing the same thing and not for the novelty of it...it is just the way of life...and maybe that is why the only spandex wearing fat asses you see in german walmart are american made. And to think....I have to go back to the states soon for a new assignment to the place with no bike paths, shitty customer service, cheaply made things, and target Emilies. Fun.
Another rant on target...they do not ship to apo addresses (military overseas all over the world have apo addresses that are basically an american post office box (apo) but overseas. Most of the zips are new york based). They also do not allow salvation army bell ringers. Could any of those things have anything to do with their relationship to FRANCE? Hmmmmm....
Rodgers...if you really want to shop somewhere great pack up your family for Germany. We are thinking of retiring here in a few years. 20 years in the military is not easy but we get to retire at 40 years of age...that is SWEET! We will even get to retire again perhaps! I am scared that back in the states my ass, too, will blow up like a blimp. Frankly all the biking here keeps it just right and also makes you spend less while shopping. If it don't fit in the bike basket you don't get it (and yes, I have a stadt fahr rad with front and rear baskets lol). There is no "great depression" style cache of food in homes either. You buy it and eat it and than go shopping again and buy some more and eat it. Fridges are normally the size of the american college dorm type. I grew up with a family that had enough food and dry goods to stock a bomb shelter. If toilet paper was on sale we got twenty of them.
Wow did I go on and on! Anyhow, pleasure finding your page while looking for Gaucho. Any chance you happen to know a five letter word for Gaucho's weapons?
Your kids mostlikely needed to have there ass beet off, and your an ass for not handling them.
Here is a small sample of what you can find at both:
www.targetsucks.wordpress.com and www.targetfiling.blogspot.com
==========================
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.
I am looking for information on Targets store policy on what they do with employee's that under-ring!
My son was an employee of TARGET,he under rang the price of a DVD for a friend.(WRONG I KNOW),the securtiy device went off has the person was leaving the store,the person was brought back to my sons register and then PAID the correct price for the item,took the DVD and left.My son was not fired,they WROTE HIM UP(internal personal file)the 3 strikes and your out policy!We my husband,I and my son beleived this issue was over,he got his hand slapped,they got paid for their item.My son continued to work for Target another 2 weeks,he was scheduled to work 2 days (at the end of the second week)that he could not work because we were going out of town for my daughters graduation for the UOI,they would not let him take off so he just stopped going in."Sure that he would be fired anyway"!Low and behold 2 weeks after he stops going in-1 month after the DVD issue,the police call my house,TARGET IS PRESSING CHARGES - A WARRENT ISSUED FOR HIS ARREST!for this DVD issue.I bring my son to the police station,to find out whats going on.HE IS ARRESTED,PUT IN HANDCUFF,PUT IN A CELL AND FINGERPRINT,AND CHARGED WITH RETAIL THEFT!!!----No,there were no other items,no other under rings,or thefts.
Somebody en-lighten my,what is there policy,REVENGE!
Target gets sued by customer - A Tulsa, Ok Case F.Y.I.
Here a nice bystander goes to help out a Target AP Thug and gets stabbed by the shoplifter. Does Target want to compensate the person? Well read on folks. But in summary it was sent back to the Ok. District Court so the case goes forward.
I hear a lot of BS about posting the 'Target AP Directives of 2006', but if you bother to read the below pending case and you are familiar with the Directives you know that the Target Thug should have backed off when the shoplifter resisted, should have backed off when a weapon was produced and should never have called for 'guest assistance' in an AP stop.
Gee, wouldn't the lawyers for this guy like to have a copy of these Directives? Well, guess what folks, they now have one and hopefully this poor customer will make a few million from Tarbutt. You can see why Kerry L. Bundy has her nickers in a wad about having these Directives posted. They were never intended for you cartpushers to read, they are out there so that lawyers know about them and can hold Targets feet to the fire.
Soon they will be entered into evidence as a plaintiffs exhibit and they will be officially posted by the court and available 'legally' to anyone who wants them or who wants to repost them.
==============================
======
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
------------------------------
----------------
TIMOTHY S. THERRIEN, an individual,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
TARGET CORPORATION, a Minnesota corporation,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 06-5110
(D.C. No. 06-CV-217-JHP-FHM)
(N.D. Okla.)
------------------------------
----------------
ORDER AND JUDGMENT(*)
------------------------------
----------------
Before HOLMES, McKAY, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges.
------------------------------
-----------------
Timothy S. Therrien was shopping at a Target store when a Target loss-prevention employee confronted a suspected shoplifter. The Target employee and the suspect became involved in a physical confrontation. When the suspect began to overwhelm the employee, the employee called out to bystanders for help, and Mr. Therrien responded. During the ensuing struggle, the suspect stabbed and injured Mr. Therrien.
Alleging various theories of negligence, Mr. Therrien filed suit against Target Corporation in Oklahoma state court. Target removed the case to federal district court and moved under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for dismissal of the complaint.
The district court granted Target's motion, and Mr. Therrien appeals. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291, and we REVERSE and REMAND for further proceedings.
I. Standard of Review
We review de novo a district court's Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal of a complaint for failure to state a claim for relief. Ruiz v. McDonnell, 299 F.3d 1173, 1181 (10th Cir. 2002). We take all well-pleaded factual allegations as true and view them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Id. "[A] complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief." Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957). "The issue in reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint is not whether the plaintiff will prevail, but whether the plaintiff is entitled to offer evidence to support [his] claims." Ruiz, 299 F.3d at 1181. Because this is a diversity case, we apply federal law to procedural questions, but state law to the analysis of the underlying claims. Haberman v. The Hartford Ins. Group, 443 F.3d 1257, 1264 (10th Cir. 2006).
II. Analysis
Mr. Therrien argues that he set forth at least five distinct claims: (1) negligent provision of store security; (2) negligent training and supervision; (3) negligent handling of the situation with the suspect leading to the physical altercation; (4) negligently requesting assistance and directing such assistance from bystanders; and (5) liability under the rescue doctrine. To proceed with a claim of negligence under Oklahoma law, Mr. Therrien must establish that (1) Target owed him a duty to protect him from injury; (2) Target failed properly to perform its duty; and (3) he suffered injuries that were proximately caused by Target's breach of its duty. See Jackson v. Jones, 907 P.2d 1067, 1071-72 (Okla. 1995).
A. Oklahoma Landowner Liability for Criminal Attacks
The primary issue is whether Target owed Mr. Therrien a duty to protect him from injury from a criminal attack by a third party. Mr. Therrien contends that, under Oklahoma law, Target has a duty to use reasonable care to prevent a criminal attack when it knows that the attack is occurring or is about to occur. See Taylor v. Hynson, 856 P.2d 278, 281 (Okla. 1993).
Oklahoma premises liability law classifies Mr. Therrien as an invitee. See id. ("It is well established that a person who goes on land to conduct business is a business invitee for the purposes of establishing liability."). A business generally does not have a duty to protect an invitee from criminal attacks by third persons. Id. Oklahoma, however, has recognized such a duty in "unique circumstances." Id. An invitor's knowledge "that the acts of the third person are occurring, or are about to occur" may constitute such circumstances. Id. at 281-82 (quotation omitted). Thus, Oklahoma law recognizes that, "[w]hen an invitor has knowledge that an invitee is in imminent danger, the invitor must act reasonably to prevent injury." Id. at 281.
In Morgan v. Southland Associates, 883 P.2d 205, 206 (Okla. Civ. App. 1994), a case involving a criminal attack on plaintiff at a mall food court, the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals reversed the trial court's dismissal of plaintiff's petitions. After describing Taylor's teachings, the court stated that because plaintiff had pleaded defendant's knowledge of the attack, which would give rise to a duty on defendant's part, as well as breach of the duty and damages, the trial court had erred in dismissing the petitions for failure to state a claim. Id. at 207. "To hold otherwise would be to find that the rule a business invitor has no duty to protect invitees from criminal acts of third parties is absolute." Id. at 206-07.
Similarly, Mr. Therrien pleaded that Target was aware that a criminal act was imminent or occurring, so that Target had a duty to use reasonable care to prevent the suspect from harming Mr. Therrien; that Target breached its duty; and that Mr. Therrien suffered harm as a "direct and proximate result" of Target's breach. Aplt. App. at 7-9. As in Morgan, these allegations are sufficient to state a claim under Taylor.
Target urges us to decide that the fight between the Target employee and the suspect was an open and obvious condition and that Mr. Therrien had knowledge equal to Target of the unsafe condition, so that Target owed Mr. Therrien no duty of care. See, e.g., Dover v. W.H. Braum, Inc., 111 P.3d 243, 245 (Okla. 2005) ("There is no duty to warn the invitee of any defect or danger which is as well-known to the invitee as to the owner or occupant or which is obvious or which should be observed by the invitee in the exercise of ordinary care."); Pickens v. Tulsa Metro. Ministry, 951 P.2d 1079, 1084 (Okla. 1997) ("Even vis-a-vis an invitee, to whom a landowner owes the highest duty . . ., the law does not require that the landowner protect the invitee against dangers which are so apparent and readily observable that one would reasonably expect them to be discovered."). But since Taylor, Oklahoma's premises liability cases involving criminal attacks focus on the invitor's knowledge of criminal activity; they do not appear to incorporate the "open and obvious danger" analysis found in physical-defects cases. See, e.g., Taylor, 856 P.2d at 281-82; Rogers v. Burger King Corp., 82 P.3d 116, 122-23 (Okla. Civ. App. 2003); Young v. Bob Howard Auto., Inc., 52 P.3d 1045, 1048-49 (Okla. Civ. App. 2002); McClure v. Group K Enters., Inc., 977 P.2d 1148, 1150-51 (Okla. Civ. App. 1999); Folmar v. Marriott, Inc., 918 P.2d 86, 87-89 (Okla. Civ. App. 1996); Edington v. A & P Enters., Inc., 900 P.2d 453, 455 (Okla. Civ. App. 1994); Morgan, 883 P.2d at 206-07; see also Wells v. Boston Ave. Realty, 125 F.3d 1335, 1340 (10th Cir. 1997) ("Plaintiff has cited no cases that support treating a criminal assault as a 'defect' creating premises liability."). In any event, whether or not a particular condition is open and obvious generally requires an examination of all of the circumstances. Zagal v. Truckstops Corp. of Am., 948 P.2d 273, 275 (Okla. 1997). Thus, we decline to hold, at this initial stage of the proceedings, that the "open and obvious danger" rule necessarily bars Mr. Therrien's claim as a matter of law.
Target also argues that Mr. Therrien's "attempt to create five distinct claims is contrary to law." Aplee. Br. at 9. We agree that four of Mr. Therrien's five claims (the exception being the negligent training and supervision claim) appear to stem from Taylor, rather than stating separate bases for recovery. But in light of the limited record before this court, we will let the district court evaluate each of Mr. Therrien's claims in the first instance to determine whether each should proceed separately.
B. Negligent Training and Supervision
Mr. Therrien also alleges that Target was negligent in its training and supervision of the loss prevention employee. This claim invokes a recognized basis for recovery in Oklahoma: "[e]mployers may be held liable for negligence in hiring, supervising or retaining an employee." N.H. v. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), 998 P.2d 592, 600 (Okla. 1999); see also Morgan, 883 P.2d at 206-07 (reversing dismissal of petition that included claims of negligent training). Negligent hiring and supervision is a separate theory of recovery based on the employer's direct negligence, rather than liability under the doctrine of respondeat superior. N.H., 998 P.2d at 600. In Oklahoma, this claim is only available if an employer's vicarious liability is not established. Id. Consequently, while Mr. Therrien has stated a claim sufficient to withstand a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss on this issue, how far this claim can proceed will depend on the evidence before the district court during further proceedings.
III.
The judgment of the district court is REVERSED and the case is REMANDED for further proceedings in the district court.
Entered for the Court
Monroe G. McKay
Circuit Judge
==============================
====
Here is a small sample of the Directives FYI it is available in full at: www.targetfiling.blogspot.com
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.
I just read all of the comments and I am totally disgusted. I am a Presentation Team Member at Target and a very hard working one at that. I love my job and I take it very seriously. There has never been any complaints against me from guests. In fact many guests tell my boss how helpful and nice I am. I take these comments to be very insulting and an uncalled for slap in the face. Just because you had 1 bad experience with a team member at 1 store does not mean that every team member/store is like that. Therefore your opinion is just that an OPINION. Understand that we the team members that are in good standing deserve better. Also you all argue and bicker like 2 year olds. All of this nonsense about creating anti-Target websites and trashing the company's good name is childish and not necessary. If you have that big of a problem with us and the company just don't shop here any more and leave it at that.
I am so sick and tired of guests coming up to team members and using the age old defense.." But I spend 1000s of dollars here. Which am I supposed to reply like some servant a 1000 dollars oooo boy I'm sorry! Your story is so whiny, your just another spoiled middle ager...your kids are probably little brats, and sorry but sometimes we are tired after an 8 hour shift to pick up after you. Target employees are harassed and a lot of times we take it just because people decide to be mean. We depend a lot on LODs to help us with disgruntled guests, and just because you think you are better then the "lowly target worker" who you describe her next job to be in the fast food chain...you are mistaken about the target employee. Most of us are going to college and go on to other things. Just because you think you made it big doesn't give you the right to take it out on a worker there. Perhaps she was just doing her job. Yes there are mistakes but there are two sides to every story. I am so sick and tired of people thinking we are lower class citizens i have been with target for 4 years since being in school because I like helping people, good flexible hours,and I love the store...sorry I didn't want to work in a cubicle or in the mall. For one person saying they will never shop at target, I have 20 guests that give me a huge smile, or say that I have made their day. Shame on you for making fun of her shirt and making a remark to her size, I sure hope your kids don't learn their morals from you.
Hey Proud Target Team Member....your attitude is EXACTLY what's wrong with the service industry as a whole. You do not get paid to make moral evaluations of customers or their children. You are paid to provide excellent customer service during your assigned shift, to help Target maintain a good image within the community, and a reputation for top-notch service. Doing your job helps Target become more profitable. These are some basic principles in a system known as Captialism, which has made our country so successful all these years.
People such as yourself do not take pride in your jobs. You are only concerned with "getting by" or "moving on" to whatever is next. And while aspirations of a brighter, more prosperous future for yourself are admirable, that doesn't mean you should shit on your current situation and act like a malcontent on the way up.
I wish you luck in whatever you eventually do, but bear in mind that the lessons you learn at this stage of your life are the foundation upon which you will build your future. If you cannot find a way to take pride in and excel at your present job, you're likely to be one of those grouchy people who is never happy at any stage of your life.
I read your blog because I really enjoy your style of writing. I don't often care much about the content, but your choice of language and your dry, self-deprecating humor often make me laugh out loud. Occasionally I even share them with friends. Workbench has become an addiction over the last three or four years.
Thanks!
P.S. I was disappointed when you opened up cruel.com to more moderators. There is more material, but few of the other moderators can match your ability to highlight the often subtle points that make your posts so damn funny.
Obviously David K. has not had the pleasure of trying to support a family on $5 an hour working in retail. Self righteous people like him make me puke. You people complain about rude clerks -- how do you think they got that way? They're rude because they have to put up with rude behavior from you people.
I discipline my children in public. I forbid them to make messes in a store. I was not brought up to leave messes for workers in a public establishment. Even though clerks are paid to keep the store straight, purposely trashing it and leaving it for them to clean up is pathologically anti-social and bad citizenship.
I don't condone Emily's behavior, but I don't blame her, either. People who let their kids run rampant ought to have the kids taken away.
Monkeybusiness, you are completely correct. David K has clearly not tried to support himself, let alone a family, on retail wages. In fairness, though, $5 is considerably less than minimum wage, and Target pays better than minimum wage, even to it's lowest paid employees. I commend you for keeping your kids under control in stores, I personally believe if their kids are misbehaving parents should leave the store immediately. I should not have to put up with someone else's misbehaving kids. I also believe that store employees should step in if parents clearly aren't going to stop a child's inappropriate behavior. I am handicapped and walk with a cane and have, on several occasions, been knocked down or nearly knocked down by kids running up the aisle with a cart or those stupid skate-shoes. If this is the biggest complaint that can be made about Target, they're pretty darn good! Try WalMart if you really want something to complain about.
i can tell your a liberal who lets your kids experience everything for themselves rather than training them up in the way they should go. (being respectful and subdued in public places). your children don't have the right to use items on shelves until they are ready to purchase. your responsibility as a parent is to teach them to respectfully blend in with society and follow the expectations of society as a whole. as a liberal journalist, i would imagine you think you and your children have a right to mishandle others goods and do any thing else that trips your trigger. you may feel it's a free country and everyone else should just put up with you and your childrens offspring. why don't you enjoy your freedoms and go jump in a cold lake.
Any person will always say that their children are "perfect." Be realistic, when anyone goes to a public place such as a Target. There are many people and if your children do not behave or cause trouble whether by screaming or throwing things the APS or TPS (Assets Protection, or Target Protection Specialist) reserve the right to tell your children to please stop or tell you, the Parent/Guardian. Target employees must call the LOD because he or she must decide to throw you out of the store and report the incident for law suit purposes.
Grow up!
I use to work for Target. I hated calling customers "guests". They are not guests more like pests. They come in trash the store, crap all over the bathrooms, knock merchandise down and run it over with their shopping carts, let their children climb all over racks and become disgruntled when you tell the children they might get hurt if they keep doing that. When you are shopping in a store you should be in control of your children. They shouldn't be allowed to touch anything. If they were raised correctly, they wouldn't do this. I am so glad that I no longer work for Target because of the lack of courtesy the shoppers have for the employees.
I think your just a bittcch, who has little Cunnnt children, learn that a good slap once and awhile does them some good. Dont blame the team member for your stupid kids.
I work in food ave and I swear the guest are closer related to swine than primate. Its pretty sad when I can wash down the soda bar then go ring up one guest for thier popcorn and then turn around and the soda bar lookes worse than it did before I cleaned it
I never trust anyone who refers to their children as "perfect angels". That usually means a person is blind to their children's wrongdoings, and doesn't care if their kids create issues that other people have to fix. I have yet to meet a child who is a "perfect angel". Children are still learning, make mistakes, do things they should not, and anyone who believes their child is incapable of such things is delusional, and is very likely raising their children as if they are the center of the universe brats who's mother believes they can do no wrong and the rest of the world be damned.
The best part is you left out any detail as to who did what, what the accusation actually was, or how your view diverged from what they claimed had occurred. Likely because the truth would show your kids were doing things they shouldn't and were making a mess in the store.
No. The best part is the steady procession of judgmental people who lack the ability to recognize when somebody's kidding.
I love how many people wander in here to tell a total stranger how he's failing as a parent, based on an anecdote about an unpleasant experience at a chain store and the utter futility of boycotting the business.
OP,
You have to realize that people are people, no matter what position they hold. Just because they are employees of a store and are supposed to be "fast, friendly, and fun" doesn't mean they're incapable of anger or frustration. Trying to boycott an entire corporation based on ONE bad experience with ONE bad employee is ludicrous and only shows how self-absorbed you are. Putting yourself in someone else's shoes is a simple concept and one which you have obviously never attempted.
A few weeks ago McDonalds gave me a fish sandwich without the fish patty. I had to drive a few miles back down the road and was pretty pissed. Did I fly into a pretty little temper tantrum over it? No, I drove back the way I came, got my damn fish patty, and went on my way.
People eat those fish sandwiches?
Hmm.. What you as a GUEST don't seem to understand about hardworking Target team members is just how hard they have to work. Yeah, I fully understand you have children and "kids will be kids" but haven't you as a parent ever taught your children to put something back from where they found it? Yeah, you don't teach it to your children when you pick up a toy... decide as you're in the hairbrushes... "OH, I don't want this afterall..." and just ditch it. As a guest, you've got to understand the annoyance that is. In addition to the ticked off people who aren't getting their cordless telephones returned for whatever reason, we've got a method to retail madness. Respect it and we'll resepect you. If you so choose to "ditch" something, take it to the register, it's a lot easier on someone. LODs generally do care about guests and want to keep them satisfied but when you're an uptight, seeing complete innocence in your child kind of person, not much they can do to help you. So when you so willingly choose to complain about a company rethink what you as a parent are teaching your children.
Wow. I had a bad experience with one person at a Target Store and now I am going to take down the whole company becuase they upset me. Nice. Very nice. You are less mature than your " angel children". Grow up.
wat a baby!!!!!!
You live in a dilusional world if you think your kids are angels. Your kids are little devils and you are satan. Wow you spend a whopping $957 in one calender year your a high roller. I'm sure Target won't miss that seeing that they make millions. So take your business elsewhere, better that they don't have to clean up after your mess.
Hahaha okay guys, you've all got to admit that this has gotten way out of hand. Sure, as a Target Team Member, I know just how much we have to put up with. Soooo many guests come into my store who feel entitled to do whatever they want and act however they please without repercussions. It's not really that Target has much of a problem with it, but people in general do. Nobody wants to be shopping and have other shoppers disrupting their experience.
At the same time, I think that the Team Member in question took the wrong approach, and should have come up and talked to the child or parent in question. Making a scene out of the situation is disrupting the other guests just as much.
But the fact of the matter is this: I have the feeling that Mr. Rogers here is not truly as enraged about the incident as you might think. Some people just like to write and entertain others, and who on earth would find it entertaining to read about the same story if it was in police report fashion: just the facts and as little biased diction as possible. Surely we wouldn't get to see all of these colorful responses. So guys, don't get all butthurt when someone writes a story about Target. How about focusing on what you can do to make yourself a better Team Member, and that consideration might rub off on guests.
Update on the Tulsa, OK suit by a customer against Target: he lost, but it is now on appeal, so the case is not over. It was dismissed by the judge on a defense motion before the case got to the jury. It will be back again as 3 reasons were stated in the appeal, so likely there will be another trial. Also the Target AP Directives were used against Target, someone seems to have sent the plaintiffs attorney firm a nice copy and boy did Target argue to keep it out!
I have had so many horrible shopping experiences lately that little surprises me these days. Some "lady" actually had the audacity to yell at my son in the Wal-Mart parking lot yesterday because he didn't put the cart in it's proper place.
In hindsight, I should have asked her if my son looked like the parking lot attendant. He's 11-year-old and couldn't understand why some old woman was "being mean to him."
I've been watching Pride & Prejudice, Anne of Green Gables and Sense and Sensibility over the holiday weekend, longing for days gone by, when good manners were considered "essential." Oh, that charm school were a required course in schools and employees were actually taught what customer service was all about.
Thanks for providing a needed diversion.
Look it's really simple, either keep your kids under control or don't take them shopping with you. I'm not saying it was right for Emily to follow you around, but your whole opinion of the store seems quite distorted. Target's a really good company, and it's not like the CEO sits down with his minions to discuss the most effective ways to terrorize their customers, seriously.
people no ones kids are perfect little angels. KIds will be kids. And it is the parents responsabilty to watch there kids. How ever when i kid comes up missing then you will understand the importance of keeping your children closer to you in a store instead of them running wild all over a store. Also it drives me crazy when snooty people thinking just because we team members work at a retail store and we wear our name on our shirt we are below your standards. But let me tell you one thing also when your kids get hirt the first thing you want to do is get sue happy when it is you as a parent to keep track of your child. I guess thats go to say that people who let there kids trash a store must be the way they live at home.
In Sept 2006 Tarbutt filed suit against a blogger who posted the firms AP Directives, the suit was tossed out of Federal Court in Atlanta on Julyu 16, 2008. Tarbutt spent an estimated 250k on this useless quest. The information is not only on a dozen internet site but was used in a civil suit against Tarbutt in Tulsa, Ok. See:
targetfiling.blogspot.com <>
True, team member Emily reacted badly to the situation, possibly you should shoulder some of the blame as well. I know growing up and going out shopping with my parents, if I messed it up, they made me fix it. Had you been paying attention to your "perfect angels" and being a courteous shopper the whole dilemma could have been avoided.
I know from experience that "fast, fun, and friendly" gets pretty near impossible when all you do is play maid all day to a bunch of people who treat you like it's your pleasure to pick up after them. I'm going to assume that you've never had to work retail....
If anyone remembers the Target v. John Doe case of 2 years ago, it was tossed out of court last month. I found the info on: targetfiling.blogspot.com <>
Add a Comment
