"Target Guilty of Age Discrimination"

This isn't really 'new' news for those working for Target, it has been around for several years and in the media now and then. It has been reported several times on this blog and in fact I set up a seperate blog site with information on Target's age discrimination in Tucson. 

If  you are a long serving Target employee and think that you will be able to 'retire' at Target, you probably won't and you will be considered a 'blocker' and set up to be fired. 

It is clearly Target Corporation policy to dump long serving employees to save money on wages and benefits and instead hire new employees at far less money. Unfortunately this sort of policy is not exclusive to Target but is found with other retail firms, Target as the 2nd largest retail chain just does a better job of it.  You better take a look at what happens to those Target employees who have put in years of work and how Target treats their long serving employees.

The Tucson case is referenced in the very first post on the www.Topix.com blog dealing with this sort of discrimination. The topix message board site was set up 8/9/10 and has posts as recent as 4/22/12 with 108 comments. Here is the direct link FYI: http://www.topix.com/forum/com/tgt/T3R7ARR8L9DC81BEF

Also the direct link to my blog reporting on the Tucson case, Lavonne C. Beckford v. Target Corporation at  http://beckfordvtarget.blogspot.com/
 
The Tucson blog summarizes a very interesting case in Arizona Federal Court where Target Corporation was accused by Plaintiff Beckford of systematically firing long service Target employees in order to save money by employing new hires.
====================================================
If you have additional time to do reading about Target you might take a look at these sites:
http://targetapdirectives2006.blogspot.com/
http://targetpayandbenefits.blogspot.com/
http://targetguidelines.blogspot.com/
http://diaz-target.blogspot.com/
http://targetccguidelines.blogspot.com/
http://www.citmedialaw.org/threats/target-corp-v-doe

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

Monday, January 16, 2012

Anyone Remember this case?

Target Corp. v. Doe NOTE: The information and commentary contained in this database entry are based on court filings and other informational sources that may contain unproven allegations made by the parties. The truthfulness and accuracy of such information is likely to be in dispute. Information contained in this entry is current as of the last event mentioned in the "Description" section below; additional proceedings might have taken place in this matter since this event. Posted June 19th, 2009 by  Staff Summary Threat Type: Lawsuit Date:  09/05/2006 Status: Concluded Location:  Georgia Disposition: Dismissed (total) Verdict/Settlement Amount: n/a Legal Claims: Copyright Infringement; Trade Secrets Target Corporation, a chain retailer, filed a lawsuit against an initially unknown Internet user with the handle “Target Sucks” for copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets for allegedly posting information on various retail-employee forums and blogs. Target identified the user as John Doe. Parties Party Issuing Legal Threat: Party Receiving Legal Threat: Target Corporaton John Doe Type of Party: Type of Party: Large Organization Individual Location of Party: Location of Party: Minnesota Georgia Legal Counsel: Legal Counsel: Jennifer C. Adair - Duncan & Mangiafico, PC; Dara D. Mann and Kerry L. Bundy - Faegre & Benson Description Target Corporation, a chain retailer, filed a lawsuit against an initially unknown Internet user with the handle “Target Sucks” for copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets for allegedly posting information on various retail-employee forums and blogs.  Target identified the user as John Doe based on the information it received after subpoening Internet providers. Defendant allegedly posted Target’s "Asset Protection Directives," an in-house theft prevention manual, on several websites critical of Target. Target asserted in its two-count complaint that the user “acquired a copy of Target’s AP Directives from a recently terminated Target employee, Scott Hundt.” Target alleges that Hundt emailed a copy of the AP Directives to the user, as well as posting that information on the website www.targetunion.org. After learning of the post, Target threatened legal action against Hundt, who admitted wrongdoing and cooperated with Target's subsequent efforts to block the further dissemination of the AP Directives.  Target and Hundt emailed cease-and-desist orders to the user and received no reply. Target alleges that instead of complying with its demands, the user posted the AP directives to “various retail-employee forums on the Internet.” Target sent cease-and-desist letters to those forums, and the AP Directives were removed.  Target asserted that the user’s “dissemination of the Target AP Directives is deliberate, willful, malicious, oppressive, and without regard to Target’s proprietary rights.” Compl. ¶ 33. Further, the complaint asserted that user had disclosed “such information without the express or implied consent of Target, for the benefit of himself.” Compl. ¶ 42. In an effort to discover the identity of the then-anonymous user, Target subpoenaed AOL, Yahoo!, Hotmail, Qwest, Comcast, and UPS.  Compl. Ex. B. The court granted these subpoenas.  Based on the information it obtained through investigation, Target identified the user as. Target claimed that it confirmed this identification based on the documents relating to IP address and P.O. Box information it received in response to its subpoenas to website, email, mail, and internet providers. Req. for Service. On 04/10/2007, a civil summons was issued for  Defebdabt. However, attempts to locate him for service failed. On 12/21/2007, the court granted a motion for service by publication to the Fulton County Daily Report. This notice was posted on 01/15/2008.  On 07/16/2008 the case was dismissed for want of prosecution pursuant to Local Rule 41.3(A)(3) because the case had been pending for more than 6 months without a substantial proceeding of record.   Related Links: Techdirt: Target Targets Blogger Who Posted Anti-Theft Procedures Target Security Info: Suit: Blogger posted Target trade secrets Minneapolis Business Journal: Target sues mystery blogger who leaked anti-theft secrets Details Website(s) Involved: Content Type(s): http://targetsucks.elavation24.com(defunct) http://www.targetunion.org (defunct) http://bullseyebb.awardspace.com(defunct) http://targetstoressuck.blogspot.com(defunct) http://www.retail-worker.com  http://people.tribe.net Text Publication Medium: Subject Area(s): Forum Website Anonymity Blogs Copyright Gripe Sites Trade Secrets Court Information & Documents Location of Filing/Threat: Source of Law: Georgia United States Court Name: Court Type: United States District Court Northern District of Georgia Atlanta Division Federal Case Number: 1:06-cv-02116-CC Relevant Documents:  Target-Doe-Complaint (09-05-2006)  Target-Doe-Service by Publication (03-26-2007)