BABY GAP on 5th Avenue

whyfi

AAARRRGGGGHHHH!!! MY EYES ARE BLEEDING!!!

Please don't mention a Wal-Mart within walking distance again...

citizen jane

nybt wrote: AAARRRGGGGHHHH!!! MY EYES ARE BLEEDING!!!

Please don't mention a Wal-Mart within walking distance again...

The hipsters in the East Village had the same reaction to the impending opening of the Astor Place KMart a few years ago: everyone was up in arms, outraged. Now they all buy their toilet paper there.

citizen jane

nybt wrote: AAARRRGGGGHHHH!!! MY EYES ARE BLEEDING!!!

Please don't mention a Wal-Mart within walking distance again...

The hipsters in the East Village had the same reaction to the impending opening of the Astor Place KMart a few years ago: everyone was up in arms, outraged. Now they all buy their toilet paper there.

whyfi

citizen jane wrote: [quote=nybt]AAARRRGGGGHHHH!!! MY EYES ARE BLEEDING!!!

Please don't mention a Wal-Mart within walking distance again...

The hipsters in the East Village had the same reaction to the impending opening of the Astor Place KMart a few years ago: everyone was up in arms, outraged. Now they all buy their toilet paper there.

I think that the Target at Atlantic Center is good enough, thank you! The pricing is almost as reasonable and the chain has a ton more style... That, and I have a bias towards MN companies!

whyfi

citizen jane wrote: [quote=nybt]AAARRRGGGGHHHH!!! MY EYES ARE BLEEDING!!!

Please don't mention a Wal-Mart within walking distance again...

The hipsters in the East Village had the same reaction to the impending opening of the Astor Place KMart a few years ago: everyone was up in arms, outraged. Now they all buy their toilet paper there.

I think that the Target at Atlantic Center is good enough, thank you! The pricing is almost as reasonable and the chain has a ton more style... That, and I have a bias towards MN companies!

jamzer

nybt wrote: AAARRRGGGGHHHH!!! MY EYES ARE BLEEDING!!!

Please don't mention a Wal-Mart within walking distance again...

Sorry! I did not intend to stir up trouble - this time anyway! :twisted:

jack

The difference between Wal-Mart and Target is Target actually cares about their workers.

Regarding Wal-Mart's contribution to the world:

New York Times wrote: Wal-Mart Targets Benefit Costs
Exec urges hiring young workers, more part-timers to reduce health care tab and to polish firm's image.

By Michael Barbaro and Steven Greenhouse / New York Times

An internal memo sent to Wal-Mart's board of directors proposes numerous ways to hold down spending on health care and other benefits while seeking to minimize damage to the retailer's reputation.

Among the recommendations were hiring more part-time workers and discouraging unhealthy people from working at Wal-Mart.

In the memorandum, M. Susan Chambers, Wal-Mart's executive vice president for benefits, also recommends reducing 401(k) contributions and wooing younger, and presumably healthier, workers by offering education benefits.

To discourage unhealthy job applicants, Chambers suggests that Wal-Mart design "all jobs to include some physical activity (e.g., all cashiers do some cart gathering)."

The memo acknowledged that Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, had to walk a fine line in restraining benefit costs because critics have attacked it for being stingy on wages and health coverage. Chambers acknowledged that 46 percent of the children of Wal-Mart's 1.33 million U.S. employees are uninsured or on Medicaid.

Wal-Mart executives said the memo was part of an effort to rein in benefit costs, which have soared by 15 percent a year on average since 2002. Wal-Mart has been squeezed by soaring health costs and is looking for ways to reduce those costs. The proposed plan, if approved, would save the company more than $1 billion a year by 2011.

In an interview, Chambers said she was focusing not on cutting costs, but on serving employees better by giving them more choices on their benefits.

"We are investing in our benefits that will take even better care of our associates," she said. "Our benefit plan is known today as being generous."

anonymous

Subject: Target is no saint

Actually, Target doesn't care about its workers either, it just doesn't upset the grocery workers union as much as Wal-Mart does.

Dominating the last category, of course, are the city’s unions—in particular the UFCW. As Wal-Mart has moved away from selling only dry goods and into the supermarket game, the grocery-workers union has become, across the country, the company’s fiercest opponent. In New York, the UFCW remains one of labor’s most robust divisions; its role in the Rego Park dustup was, by all accounts, pivotal. It’s also one reason, say many economists, that food prices in the city are so much higher than they ought to be. In any event, if you’ve ever wondered why Target has set up shop here with very little hassle—despite being nonunion and paying its workers as poorly as Wal-Mart does—the reason is that Target doesn’t compete with grocery stores (yet) and thus imperil the UFCW.

Read Full Story Here:
http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/bizfinance/12399/index.html

livetotravel

Here's another reason to stay away from Target...Target allows pharmacists to choose not to fill requests for birth control pills and emergency contraception, also known as Plan B, if it is against their religious beliefs.

http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthsuperior/13143123.htm

bigbubba

OHHHH THE SHAME! Target actually cares about an employee's personal beliefs. Burn it down!

carnivore

BigBubba wrote: OHHHH THE SHAME! Target actually cares about an employee's personal beliefs. Burn it down!

When those beliefs interfere with their job, and it's service people absolutely depend on, that is a problem. I don't think a rib shack would hire someone whose religious beliefs wouldn't let them serve someone pork. If someone needs emergency contraception, time is of the essence, because although the pills work for up to 72 hours, they are much more effective if taken earlier. If the only pharmacist on for a given shift is unable to perform their job because of their religious beliefs, this interferes with people's health care, and that pharmacist has no business being there.

rah

Carnivore wrote:
When those beliefs interfere with their job, and it's service people absolutely depend on, that is a problem. I don't think a rib shack would hire someone whose religious beliefs wouldn't let them serve someone pork. If someone needs emergency contraception, time is of the essence, because although the pills work for up to 72 hours, they are much more effective if taken earlier. If the only pharmacist on for a given shift is unable to perform their job because of their religious beliefs, this interferes with people's health care, and that pharmacist has no business being there.

very well said.

not to mention that when target/walmart giants move into rural communities they usually put local pharmacies out of business leaving women faced with a denial to fill her EC prescription to travel great distances to find the next closest pharmacy willing to fill it.

bigbubba

Carnivore wrote: [quote=BigBubba]OHHHH THE SHAME! Target actually cares about an employee's personal beliefs. Burn it down!

When those beliefs interfere with their job, and it's service people absolutely depend on, that is a problem. I don't think a rib shack would hire someone whose religious beliefs wouldn't let them serve someone pork. If someone needs emergency contraception, time is of the essence, because although the pills work for up to 72 hours, they are much more effective if taken earlier. If the only pharmacist on for a given shift is unable to perform their job because of their religious beliefs, this interferes with people's health care, and that pharmacist has no business being there.
If you read the article you will see that Target requires pharmacists who refuse to dispense the drug to pass the prescription on to someone at the store who will fill it. If there is no one else working at the pharmacy, they have to call another store to have the prescription filled. Seems like a very accommodating policy to me. Not all doctors perform abortions (perhaps you think all Catholic Hospitals should be shut down??) and not all pharmacists should have to fill a prescription they oppose on moral grounds. Sorry friend, this is not proof that Target is an evil company.

pitu

BigBubba wrote: Not all doctors perform abortions (perhaps you think all Catholic Hospitals should be shut down??) and not all pharmacists should have to fill a prescription they oppose on moral grounds. Sorry friend, this is not proof that Target is an evil company.

In the real world, it's the Catholic hospitals that force the closing of abortion services.
For example, when Soho OB/GYN became affiliated with St Vincent's, they had to stop performing abortions.

:shock:

rah

BigBubba wrote:
If you read the article you will see that Target requires pharmacists who refuse to dispense the drug to pass the prescription on to someone at the store who will fill it. If there is no one else working at the pharmacy, they have to call another store to have the prescription filled. Seems like a very accommodating policy to me. Not all doctors perform abortions (perhaps you think all Catholic Hospitals should be shut down??) and not all pharmacists should have to fill a prescription they oppose on moral grounds. Sorry friend, this is not proof that Target is an evil company.

Referral to a different pharmacy is not an accommodating policy. As Carnivore stated earlier, when it comes to EC there is a limited window in which pregnancy can be prevented. In addition to superstores pushing smaller pharmacies out of business, they are also often the only 24- hour pharmacy in a local community. It should be no surprise that requests for EC are highest late nights and on weekends.

Many pharmacies have good EC policies that require in-store filling of all prescriptions that in no way compromise the religious beliefs of a pharmacist on duty or places an obstacle in the path of woman in need. If a pharmacist on duty has made clear to his or her supervisor that they will not fill EC prescriptions (or any birth control prescription for that matter) for religious reasons, then the pharmacy can put a system in place that will still allow for these prescriptions to be filled on-site.

As for Catholic hospitals, they don’t just threaten elected abortion services. Many emergency rooms of catholic hospitals fail to tell rape victims about EC much less provide the victim with a prescription. Catholic hospitals have denied women facing medical emergencies relating to their pregnancies lifesaving abortions. And many of these hospitals will refuse to perform sterilization services. Big deal. Just go to another hospital. Well, nearly one in every five hospital beds in the United States is now operated by a religious entity. And in many communities all of the local hospitals are Catholic. Clearly there is a fine line between respecting religious liberty and protecting reproductive rights, but with so many hospital mergers taking place and more and more hospitals becoming religiously affiliated this question becomes harder to answer.