Customer gives Target cashier a $100 gift card

Factual Questions
101

Minnesota, which is where Target is headquartered, does not escheat gift cards, by the way. The state where the gift card is purchased or where the gift card is owned may have different laws that override. Since Target does not provide a means of registering a gift card, they will not know the state of residence of the owner, so only the state of sale may escheat. In this case, the owner of the card is Target, if Target’s corporate ethics policy says, as I believe it does, that gifts over a certain amount must be refused or turned over to the corporation - which would make Target the owner. (Target, like most companies, would donate the gift card - probably in Targets case at the manager’s discretion, and I’d guess to a local school).

(In practice, this means that the big box of candy gets left out for the department and anyone who sits nearby, even though it went to the purchasing manager. Purchasing departments are the BEST place to hang out during the holidays as its a revolving door of boxes of Godiva that the purchasing staff can’t take home unless they are the LITTLE boxes of Godiva - and frankly, there are only so many tins of popcorn and chocolate covered pretzels you want to drag home. Also, in practice, when I was working in/with Sourcing, it means that you get a lot of calls from your vendors asking what your ethics limit is so they only give you things under that value - I got a lot of bags - with the vendors name splashed across them, candy, and ornaments).

Best Buy, which is also headquartered in Minnesota, makes a LOT of money off of unused gift cards- which are accounted for in a fashion similar to bad debt on an aging schedule.

102

I didn’t say anything about morality. Employers can do wrong. Facebook most certainly is public unless the post is hidden and friend locked. Other than that, you might have a point.

My opinions on employment mean something because I have been working since I was fifteen and have worked for a number of companies in different fields for decades. I am self supporting and know what it’s like in the real world. This is in sharp contrast to one who only knows what such things are like in theory.

You can’t reasonably expect to continue to get paid by an entity or person if you bad mouth them publicly. Nothing illegal or ever close to it took place in the OP. No mistreatment took place either in my opinion given what we know to be true at this point. It has already been explained exhaustively why the policy about tipping would be in place.

I don’t care why you come to GQ.

103

The card is her property, regardless of what the handbook states, so yes, IMO, is it THEFT is they insist she give under duress.

I can see you are no legal expert either, and I never claimed to be one, even in my OWN state.

104

A “CHRISTMAS GIFT” is just that. This is not a “work for hire” where you invent something on company time and then they own the patent.

What if the tip/gift, whatever you wish to call it, was for $10.000.00 instead of 100, like hell I am giving it back. If it is target’s property, as you claim, then they can sue for it, that is if she did not give it up already.

What would Target’s COA be??

105

Yes, a Christmas gift is a Christmas gift. In what sense is this a Christmas gift?

106

Isn’t is a GIFT card?

107

She can keep it, but if she does, she has violated the terms of her employment and they are justified in firing her. So if you want to keep that $10,000 gift, you can do it, but chances are the manager will ask you to either return it, donate it, or not come to work Monday morning.

108

The question of a legal termination is not that clear on the surface, period.

109

If its a right to work state she can be fired because the boss doesn’t like her shoes. She can certainly be fired for violating the ethics policy.

110

That’s “at will” state, and no, even at will, there are statutory and common law exceptions, there are 2 states that are not at will, plus D.C.

If she works in a state that recognizes a “good faith and fair dealing” exception, the termination “may” be questionable.

Some state recognize a PP exception and an implied contract exception also.

111

Even in a good faith and dealing state she agreed to an ethics policy as a condition of employment. All Target employees do. She violated the ethics policy. Which, I’m willing to bet, she signed.

112

Uh… yes. So? If I pay my rent in cash in a “gift bag”, does that make my rent payment a gift?

113

But a contract, if we call it that, against PP is void. As a comparative example, no person can sign away their minimum wage rights, so even if a person signed a handbook to that provision, it is against PP and NON enforceable.

114

I am just pointing out, target calls it a GIFT card!

115

They can call it whatever they want. But although IANAL, I understand that “gift card” has no legal standing.

116

Could be, but let’s approach it from a different legal angle.

State laws govern wages for employees and have a separate section for TIPPED, employees.

People who work at target do not fall under TIPPED.

So if she is not a TIPPED employee, the store has no right to any part of it to reduce their MW obligation to her.

117

Who said that Target was attempting to use the gift card to reduce their MW obligation (by which, presumably you mean minimum wage obligation) to her?

118

The point was IF she was considered TIPPED, target could claim it to reduce the MW.

Since she is not TIPPED, it would be hard to classify it as a tip, legally?

I do not know what the legal answer is, even in my own state, the law at times is not crystal clear where legal minds/lawyers always come to the same conclusion.

119

This is not relevant.

120

It was accepted on company time. The gift card is not her property.

She accepted a form of payment (the gift card) while working as a cashier at a cash register. By pocketing the card, she could have been charged with theft. Instead, the company accepted it was a mistake and merely confiscated the card. The intent of the customer likely influenced Target in not immediately firing her, but is otherwise not relevant.