Bowling in Target's Toy Department
Chad Rushing
from where I live. I managed to strike up a conversation while there
with a guy who worked in the toy department. (He was trying to figure
out where to put some TF toys, and I pointed out which ones went on
which pegs which is really not that hard to figure out.)
I asked him why it seemed so many of the boxed TFs they had were
completely crushed. Did they come that way in the cases? Were they
crushed by the people stocking the shelves? Or was it just kids who
shopped there doing it?
He told me that the nighttime stockers do what they call "bowling"
after the store is closed. The figure out which aisle a boxed toy to
be stocked belongs on and then just toss/roll it down the aisle like a
bowling ball. Afterwards, someone (the morning guy?) picks the items
off the floor and puts them on their respective shelves. They guy who
told me about it said that he did not do it (he was the helpful type),
but he knew that some of the other toy department people did after
hours.
Now, I do not know about you, but I think that kind of practice
strikes me as incredibly loser-ish. If I was a manager at Target and
found out my employees were damaging store goods like that, I think a
few guys would find themselves fired. It really explains why some of
the boxed TFs on the shelves look like they were handled by that
gorilla in old Samsonite commercials. I have to wonder how widespread
"toy bowling" is at Targets or in the industry at large
- Chad
Zobovor
>I have to wonder how widespread "toy bowling" is at Targets
>or in the industry at large.
Wal-Mart's a little different from Target in that the store doesn't
close at night, but the overnight stockers employ a similar strategy
called "staging" in which they bring the pallets of merchandise to the
salesfloor and separate it by aisle, putting it on the floor in front
of that item's home on the shelf. Sometimes they'll take the time to
walk the shipping case to the correct spot and lay it on the floor,
but just as frequently, I've seen them give the box a good toss and
allow it to tumble or slide down the aisle to approximately the right
spot.
Generally speaking, I fear retail employees on the whole are
predominantly concerned with the fastest and easiest way to complete
their jobs. I've worked for three major retail chains over the past
ten years so I think I can speak on this matter with some degree of
authority. Though there are exceptions, generally speaking, very
little care is taken of the retail merchandise. It's not just the
stockers, though. It's also the freight handlers who load the trucks
poorly so that merchandise is damaged before it ever arrives at the
store; truck unloaders at the stores who literally throw, step on, and
climb on cases of merchandise. Of course, the stockers also do their
fair share of damage, whether it's ripping open packages that were
meant to be individual sell units, or just slicing right through
packaging and into the product with their box cutters.
If you ever saw the back room of any of these stores, Chad, you'd be
surprised just how much damaged merchandise never makes it to the
sales floor in one piece. So much merchandise ends up getting shipped
back to the distribution center, or destroyed at the store level,
because every item in the shipping case was crushed due to somebody's
carelessness. I'll be the first to admit that working at retail ain't
rocket science, but sometimes I really wonder about the people that
the company hires. I wouldn't trust them to pick their own noses, let
alone place hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of merchandise in
their care.
Zob
Thunder Magnificent!
> It's not just the
> stockers, though. It's also the freight handlers who load the trucks
> poorly so that merchandise is damaged before it ever arrives at the
> store; truck unloaders at the stores who literally throw, step on, and
> climb on cases of merchandise.
A few years ago I was going to work at Walmart as a truck unloader (I
forget the exact job title now, but...) Anyway, I can confirm Zob's
comment about how they load the stuff in the trucks--you've never seen
such a mess! Delicate electronics just thrown in there haphazardly at
random with furniture and housewares... it really is a wonder anyone can
sell anything after they come off the trucks (given that it *should* all
be broken!)
t.k.
SteveD
>If you ever saw the back room of any of these stores, Chad, you'd be
>surprised just how much damaged merchandise never makes it to the
>sales floor in one piece. So much merchandise ends up getting shipped
>back to the distribution center, or destroyed at the store level,
>because every item in the shipping case was crushed due to somebody's
>carelessness.
Hmm - I wonder if there are toys in the storage areas of large stores
where the packaging has been shredded but the toy itself is still OK, and
whether it would be worth it to the store to sell them at a discount
rather than send them back.
-SteveD
Zobovor
> Hmm - I wonder if there are toys in the storage areas of large stores
> where the packaging has been shredded but the toy itself is still OK, and
> whether it would be worth it to the store to sell them at a discount
> rather than send them back.
A lot of Wal-Marts actually do this, and it helps to recover lost
sales to a certain extent by making money off something that might
otherwise just get marked down to a zero-dollar value in the inventory
system and then chucked in the compactor. If the stores receive
credit for the full value of an item by sending it back to the
reclamation center, though, then they'll do that instead. The
reasoning behing whether or not stores get their money back for a
specific item seems fairly arbitrary, but I can tell you that Hasbro
toys are always sent back.
Zob
Onslaught Six
> I'll be the first to admit that working at retail ain't
> rocket science, but sometimes I really wonder about the people that
> the company hires. I wouldn't trust them to pick their own noses, let
> alone place hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of merchandise in
> their care.
And this is pretty much precisely the reason 'why' these people work
at retail in the first place.
Not to belittle your own choice of employment, Zob, since I know
you're a smart guy and everything. I'm sure you enjoy your job and
take pride in it. It's Joe Schmoe 23-Year-Old-College-Dropout-Because-
I-Was-Drinking-Too-Much that I'm talking about. 'Stupid' people.
But yeah. They work retail because anyone who actually has a real
shred of intelligence will rise up through the ranks of their job,
typically, unless they have some kind of specific reason not to. My
father's girlfriend worked as a waitress for 27 years because
management positions offered less money, taking tips into account.
Onslaught Six
> A lot of Wal-Marts actually do this, and it helps to recover lost
> sales to a certain extent by making money off something that might
> otherwise just get marked down to a zero-dollar value in the inventory
> system and then chucked in the compactor. If the stores receive
> credit for the full value of an item by sending it back to the
> reclamation center, though, then they'll do that instead. The
> reasoning behing whether or not stores get their money back for a
> specific item seems fairly arbitrary, but I can tell you that Hasbro
> toys are always sent back.
This situation intrigues me in another aspect--stolen figures and/or
figure swaps.
About six months ago or so, I went to a KB and found a Cobra five-pack
with the Cobra Trooper ripped out of it. I brought it to the attention
of the cashiers, and they were all "Aww, not again." Apparently, in
this case, they send it back to Hasbro, but I was curious if they
would sell it to me for a sweet discount. Custom fodder, hey. They
didn't, suck, but that's the way things go.
Chad Rushing
>
> But yeah. They work retail because anyone who actually has a real
> shred of intelligence will rise up through the ranks of their job,
> typically, unless they have some kind of specific reason not to. My
> father's girlfriend worked as a waitress for 27 years because
> management positions offered less money, taking tips into account.
One of my friends is in a similar situation. He is a mail carrier
(aka mailman) that walks an outrageous number of miles in the
scorching and/or rainy Louisiana weather every day. However, he does
not want to be "promoted" to an inside/office job at the Post Office
because it would pay much less than what he makes now, especially the
overtime pay (which is pretty lucrative for government jobs).
I was also in a similar situation at my job. After being there many
years, I was eligible for a promotion with higher pay, but I would
have also had to largely forfeit my very flexible schedule for an 8-5
schedule instead and be willing to be more available after hours and
on weekends, personal adjustments that would have not been worth the
extra money to me.
In some ways, the most personally satisifying jobs I have ever had
were relatively simple ones that paid minimum wage (ex. sorting and
repairing books at the library or maintaining the computer lab at the
university). If I could work in the toy department at a large
retailer and actually make enough money to maintain my current
standard of living -and- hobby expenditures (which would never
happen), I would probably try it out for a while.
- Chad
Zobovor
> Not to belittle your own choice of employment, Zob, since I know
> you're a smart guy and everything. I'm sure you enjoy your job and
> take pride in it.
No offense taken. (I certainly don't plan on working there forever,
mind you. I am destined for far greater things.)
> They work retail because anyone who actually has a real
> shred of intelligence will rise up through the ranks of their job,
> typically, unless they have some kind of specific reason not to.
I've had lots of people ask me why I haven't gone into the assistant
management program yet, as if it were a foregone conclusion that I'll
eventually do so. Salaried managers are never really "off the clock,"
though, and if you do the math they only make about six dollars an
hour. I have no intention of selling my soul to Wal-Mart.
Also, on Jul 23, 10:33 am, Onslaught Six wrote:
> This situation intrigues me in another aspect--stolen figures and/or
> figure swaps.
I used to see a lot of that sort of thing when I worked at Toys "R"
Us. The figure swaps struck me as particularly amusing, since people
were essentially counting on the fact that the people working at the
customer service desk wouldn't know any better. Toys "R" Us also had
a really liberal return policy (they'd pretty much take anything back
for any reason, except for opened video games) so I'm sure that may
have partially encouraged some "creative" merchandise returns.
Zob
Phillip Thorne
>I asked [Target stocker] why it seemed so many of the boxed TFs they
>had were completely crushed ... the nighttime stockers do what they
>call "bowling" ... which aisle a boxed toy to be stocked belongs on
>and then just toss/roll it down the aisle [...]
It seems to me it would be just as easy to shove the entire case down
the main aisle. They only contain, what, ten boxed toys? But maybe
the cases sufficiently heavy and rough-surfaced that they glide too
quickly to a stop.
For that matter, don't they have *wheeled push-carts* in these stores?
Stack the boxes and move down the aisles, dropping off at each one. Do
some sorting beforehand. Okay, maybe that requires some attention to
detail. OTOH, wouldn't it be worth the while of the retailer to have
a database in which you scan the case's barcode, and the aisle number
pops up? Like sorting at a mail facility.
(Disclosure: I temped for a couple of weeks at the shipping warehouse
of a major computer game retailer. There was much lobbing of boxes to
stack on pallets, but they were filled with store-display promotion
paperwork.)
And people wonder why Hasbro puts so many twist-ties in the package.
It's an attempt to protect against damage at every step of the
shipping process between the Chinese factory and your shopping cart.
** Phillip Thorne ** peth...@comcast.net **************
* RPI CompSci 1998 *
** underbase.livejournal.com ***************************
LiamK
> On Tue, 22 Jul 2008, Chad Rushing <notu...@aol.com> reported:
Although Animated seems to have far fewer twist ties than previous
lines. Perhaps the boxes are stronger?
http://transformers.wikia.com/wiki/Toy_swapping
That's an interesting look at some fairly horrific, well, stealing
that goes on.
-LiamK
Chad Rushing
>
> Although Animated seems to have far fewer twist ties than previous
> lines. Perhaps the boxes are stronger?
>
> http://transformers.wikia.com/wiki/Toy_swapping
>
> That's an interesting look at some fairly horrific, well, stealing
> that goes on.
I have seen that kind of thing in stores a few times. I always bring
it the attention of a store employee and tell them the item in
question should be taken off the shelves/pegs so as to not cheat a
future customer.
- Chad
SteveD
>I've had lots of people ask me why I haven't gone into the assistant
>management program yet, as if it were a foregone conclusion that I'll
>eventually do so.
I had that in an office job, with people pressuring me to take supervisory
positions. Only... I was already making as much as the top supervisors,
and I'd done enough filling in for them here and there to be absolutely
sure that I would hate the job and spork myself to death in a week.
The major problem was that the lower-ranked job was technical, and the
supe job was 95% people and paperwork. If there's one thing I've never
been described as, it's a people person.
The local management, of course, wanted me in a supervisor job because I
_was_ making that amount of money (because of some odd internal job
history with the organisation), they couldn't decrease it, no-one else at
my level was getting that much, and if they could bump me to supervisor
then they could put a low-paid replacement into my position.
They partially got around it in the end by redefining the senior tech jobs
as having a mandatory supervisory component for a couple hours a week.
More supe work (if less tech work) got done for the same price.
On the odder side, almost everyone on the greasy pole up to the local
manager got their job redefined as just being a position on a task
continuum. Which meant that when things were slow on the tech end, the
more experienced techs got handed the supervisory paperwork and the
supervisors got handed the management paperwork, and when things heated
up, the techs could shanghai higher-level staff temporarily.
There was at least one incident where the supes, mid-level managers, and
even the bossman himself were all part of the digital front line for a
couple of hours. It really depended on which end of the job spectrum had
the heaviest workload at any point as to what the people in the middle
levels would be doing on any given day, but at least it cut down on
situations where one level would be getting hammered by work and another
level would be sitting around staring at the ceiling.
It was interesting, I guess, and it did lead to learning how to do the
jobs above and below you as well as your own (which made for better
workplace understanding and communication), but it could be a bit tough on
the newbies who were still learning their own jobs first, or might see
their supervisor doing completely different things on different days with
no apparent pattern.
Still, it had its moments.
-SteveD
Chad Rushing
>
> I had that in an office job, with people pressuring me to take supervisory
> positions. Only... I was already making as much as the top supervisors,
> and I'd done enough filling in for them here and there to be absolutely
> sure that I would hate the job and spork myself to death in a week.
I hear you loud and clear. It is hard enough to get all of your own
work done, much less be responsible for others getting their work done
correctly -and- on time, too. I had been temporarily placed in a
supervisory position on a few occasions (manager busy or out of town),
and I never enjoyed it ... way too many meetings.
LOL, "spork myself to death" ...
> The major problem was that the lower-ranked job was technical, and the
> supe job was 95% people and paperwork. If there's one thing I've never
> been described as, it's a people person.
I get along with people very well (I think), but my work preference
has always been "closet programmer/writer." I would often choose to
work at the office late at night when no one was around rather than
during the bustling day.
> The local management, of course, wanted me in a supervisor job because I
> _was_ making that amount of money (because of some odd internal job
> history with the organisation), they couldn't decrease it, no-one else at
> my level was getting that much, and if they could bump me to supervisor
> then they could put a low-paid replacement into my position.
What was funny about my situation is that I was eventually expected to
do the tasks associated with the position above mine (despite having
declined a promotion to that level) just because I had been around a
long time and was getting paid accordingly.
I enjoyed doing the low-level, technical work myself, but I had
friends who could not get promoted up out of it fast enough. I
sometimes wondered why they got a technical degree rather than a
management degree if all they ever wanted was to be a non-technical
manager. Go figure.
- Chad
SteveD
wrote:
>On Jul 24, 7:53 pm, SteveD <use...@vo.id.au> wrote:
>>
>> I had that in an office job, with people pressuring me to take supervisory
>> positions. Only... I was already making as much as the top supervisors,
>> and I'd done enough filling in for them here and there to be absolutely
>> sure that I would hate the job and spork myself to death in a week.
>
>I hear you loud and clear. It is hard enough to get all of your own
>work done, much less be responsible for others getting their work done
>correctly -and- on time, too. I had been temporarily placed in a
>supervisory position on a few occasions (manager busy or out of town),
>and I never enjoyed it ... way too many meetings.
That was a major point, too. I *hate* being in a position where my own
ability to do my job, or the results I'll be evaluated on, are dependent
on what a bunch of other people do.
And HELL YEAH on the meetings. I remember one day I was filling in at the
supervisor level but still expected to get some of the tech-work squared
away. If it wasn't one meeting or another, it was backed-up HR paperwork
which had to be completed, or stats which had to be pulled together for
reports, or walking 'my' techs through some fix or other... by the time I
got two minutes to myself, it was thirty minutes from shift-end. Pissed me
off something chronic.
-SteveD