Target no longer accepting checks as of July 15th, 2024

[SEWIGuy]

That's how I always saw the usage of guest in place of customers.  I recall having a debate with a girl I was dating about this over dinner at my house.  She very much was in favor of being called a guest at Target. Her view was that it made her feel good and therefore it wasn't stupid. 

We finished eating and as she was getting up from the table I asked her pay her meal.  She was taken aback by this and I pointed out that I was just asking her to pay as a guest like Target would. 

Wow. Wonder why it didn't work out.

It wasn't though I actually made her pay for dinner.  We dated for several years afterward.

It was really just a joke. Sorry.

[1995hoo]

Whose idea was it to name it "piece of shit system"?

Heh. I had thought several times about making a comment about how Bobby5280 almost certainly views it as a "POS system" regardless of others' comments.

I was thinking something similar.

Also, my coworkers and I derived entirely too much amusement from the abbreviation when reviewing resumes to hire an intern some years back.  The person had worked as a cashier at a car wash, but left out the h, leading to their resume saying "car was POS" at one point.  We were tempted to email them and wish them good luck in getting a job so they could get a "not POS car".

Your story about that a while back was part of why I was tempted to reply that way. I told my colleagues at work about your story. One of them howled with laughter, one seemed somewhat appalled, and one didn't get it.

[ZLoth]

We really need a better term than "Point of Sale" because of that acronym and it's other meaning. Of course, depending on the user experience, that POS system really is a POS.

[kkt]

I'm still way more perplexed by stuff like calling employees "Team Members" and customers "Guests."  You didn't have a "manager" at Target but rather an "Executive Team Leader."

I don't see what's so weird about that except maybe calling customers guests, but I doubt that actually happens on a regular basis. I've become accustomed to "clients" but don't think I would ever use "guests" in a business context.

I prefer to be called an employee over a demeaning corporate buzzword.  When I worked at Target I was an employee.  The only time I was ever a team member was off the clock when I played a couple softball games with co-workers.

To be honest I don't see why "team member" would be demeaning. If you don't feel it applies to you, then either the company has failed to create the culture they profess or you just weren't a good fit for that company to begin with.

Meh, I've been in the same line of work my entire adult life (retail Loss Prevention).  There has been nothing I've seen in over the decades to suggest my initial assessment that "team member" was a silly/undignified thing to call an employee was off the mark.  I feel equally sour towards other phony retail titles such as "associate" and "coach."

Shall I regale you with other examples of how weird and absurd retail culture can be?  The "Sowing the seeds of our culture" push at Sears circa 2007-2008 was probably the worst/most over the top I've seen.  That involved a device called the "silent square" that I would love to tell you all about. 

I'd be interested in hearing about it.  Sears is about dead, and any NDA you may have had surely died with them?  (IANAL)

[webny99]

Meh, I've been in the same line of work my entire adult life (retail Loss Prevention).  There has been nothing I've seen in over the decades to suggest my initial assessment that "team member" was a silly/undignified thing to call an employee was off the mark.  I feel equally sour towards other phony retail titles such as "associate" and "coach."

Depending on your job role, if your position is higher up in the company and/or you aren't working directly alongside a group of employees, then sure, "team member" may not be a suitable term for that job.

I agree.  I prefer that companies not use euphemisms for ordinary concepts.  "Guests" aren't required to pay.

At least regarding "team" and "team members", it's not supposed to be a euphemism. If it is, the company isn't doing it right.

Shall I regale you with other examples of how weird and absurd retail culture can be?  The "Sowing the seeds of our culture" push at Sears circa 2007-2008 was probably the worst/most over the top I've seen.  That involved a device called the "silent square" that I would love to tell you all about. 

I'd be interested in hearing about it.  Sears is about dead, and any NDA you may have had surely died with them?  (IANAL)

Second this. I am pretty familiar with how this stuff works in a smaller company and always interested to compare/contrast with what happens in larger more hierarchical companies.

[webny99]

We didn't use "team member" at my last job, but I tend to find that kind of euphemism kind of insulting to my intelligence. The employer is trying to camouflage the employer/employee relationship by instead insisting you're a "member" of a "team".

Again it depends on the context being used but it's not supposed to be a euphemism and if it is it's most likely a failure of implementation on the company's part.

That way they can later guilt you into calling them out on violating employment laws by saying "hey, we're all part of a team here."

I don't think I follow. Presumably the employer is saying this, but in what context? I don't think "team member" should ever be used in the context of the relationship between employee and employer/HR department, only between an employee and the immediate department/group of employees they work with.

[Big John]

We really need a better term than "Point of Sale" because of that acronym and it's other meaning. Of course, depending on the user experience, that POS system really is a POS.

I call it registers. (originally cash registers)

[Max Rockatansky]

Meh, I've been in the same line of work my entire adult life (retail Loss Prevention).  There has been nothing I've seen in over the decades to suggest my initial assessment that "team member" was a silly/undignified thing to call an employee was off the mark.  I feel equally sour towards other phony retail titles such as "associate" and "coach."

Depending on your job role, if your position is higher up in the company and/or you aren't working directly alongside a group of employees, then sure, "team member" may not be a suitable term for that job.

I worked in a department that had half a dozen equally cynical people who all agreed that we weren't a team. 

What do you think the term "team member" versus "employee" brings to the table exactly? 

[mgk920]

Maybe they should do the military thing and refer to them an 'officers' and 'enlisteds'.

Mike

[webny99]

Meh, I've been in the same line of work my entire adult life (retail Loss Prevention).  There has been nothing I've seen in over the decades to suggest my initial assessment that "team member" was a silly/undignified thing to call an employee was off the mark.  I feel equally sour towards other phony retail titles such as "associate" and "coach."

Depending on your job role, if your position is higher up in the company and/or you aren't working directly alongside a group of employees, then sure, "team member" may not be a suitable term for that job.

I worked in a department that had half a dozen equally cynical people who all agreed that we weren't a team. 

What do you think the term "team member" versus "employee" brings to the table exactly? 

What were you doing if it wasn't working together towards a common goal? If you weren't working together, then I guess it wasn't a team. It's not like team is some magical superword or something, it just implies that you're working together with others and if that's the case I don't see anything wrong with using it in a business context.

[Rothman]

Meh, I've been in the same line of work my entire adult life (retail Loss Prevention).  There has been nothing I've seen in over the decades to suggest my initial assessment that "team member" was a silly/undignified thing to call an employee was off the mark.  I feel equally sour towards other phony retail titles such as "associate" and "coach."

Depending on your job role, if your position is higher up in the company and/or you aren't working directly alongside a group of employees, then sure, "team member" may not be a suitable term for that job.

I worked in a department that had half a dozen equally cynical people who all agreed that we weren't a team. 

What do you think the term "team member" versus "employee" brings to the table exactly? 

What were you doing if it wasn't working together towards a common goal? If you weren't working together, then I guess it wasn't a team. It's not like team is some magical superword or something, it just implies that you're working together with others and if that's the case I don't see anything wrong with using it in a business context.

I agree with the statement that the term is used to the business' benefit and "You're not a team player" being used to guilt employees into going beyond job duties and the like, sometimes illegally.

To ignore the power dynamic between employer and employee otherwise is on par with Pollyanna.

[kkt]

We didn't use "team member" at my last job, but I tend to find that kind of euphemism kind of insulting to my intelligence. The employer is trying to camouflage the employer/employee relationship by instead insisting you're a "member" of a "team".

Again it depends on the context being used but it's not supposed to be a euphemism and if it is it's most likely a failure of implementation on the company's part.

That way they can later guilt you into calling them out on violating employment laws by saying "hey, we're all part of a team here."

I don't think I follow. Presumably the employer is saying this, but in what context? I don't think "team member" should ever be used in the context of the relationship between employee and employer/HR department, only between an employee and the immediate department/group of employees they work with.

We're a team, but you all do everything my way and if you don't I'll can your ass.
/s

[Max Rockatansky]

Maybe they should do the military thing and refer to them an 'officers' and 'enlisteds'.

Mike

In the Navy they called by their rate which includes their rank and Military Occupational Specialty. 

[vdeane]

Team team team... now I'm thinking of The IT Crowd.

[Scott5114]

You really can't own shares in the Federal government.

Bonds and T-bills, sorta.

[Scott5114]

We didn't use "team member" at my last job, but I tend to find that kind of euphemism kind of insulting to my intelligence. The employer is trying to camouflage the employer/employee relationship by instead insisting you're a "member" of a "team".

Again it depends on the context being used but it's not supposed to be a euphemism and if it is it's most likely a failure of implementation on the company's part.

That way they can later guilt you into calling them out on violating employment laws by saying "hey, we're all part of a team here."

I don't think I follow. Presumably the employer is saying this, but in what context? I don't think "team member" should ever be used in the context of the relationship between employee and employer/HR department, only between an employee and the immediate department/group of employees they work with.

Okay, so think about it a little bit. Why would management insist on calling someone a "team member" instead of an "employee"? It obscures the plain meaning of "employee" and is two words instead of one. So management must benefit in some way from it.

Which means they must benefit from the employee perceiving themselves as part of a team. Maybe it's just hoping that the employees will all be happier if they feel like the others at the company are backing them up. If that's the case, there's far more effective ways to foster teamwork than just saying "you're a team member now". So at the very least it's lip service, a sop to get people to do the teamwork thing without putting in the actual effort to truly build a group of disparate employees into a proper team.

On the other hand, management does clearly benefit if any criticism of management decisions can be deflected with "hey, ease up on your fellow team members. We're all on the same team here." Again, it could just be lip service to get people to trust management and its decisions (since that's easier than actually making good decisions that prove you're trustworthy)...but once you have that trust you can exploit it to get away with things that you as management really shouldn't.

I dunno. I've had a manager that has made sunny declarations about us all being a team and then afterward gone back to his office to redo the schedule to put the cashiers he wanted to fuck on first shift so he could lecherously leer at them all day. It's kind of hard to take that sort of misdirection seriously after that.

[kalvado]

We didn't use "team member" at my last job, but I tend to find that kind of euphemism kind of insulting to my intelligence. The employer is trying to camouflage the employer/employee relationship by instead insisting you're a "member" of a "team".

Again it depends on the context being used but it's not supposed to be a euphemism and if it is it's most likely a failure of implementation on the company's part.

That way they can later guilt you into calling them out on violating employment laws by saying "hey, we're all part of a team here."

I don't think I follow. Presumably the employer is saying this, but in what context? I don't think "team member" should ever be used in the context of the relationship between employee and employer/HR department, only between an employee and the immediate department/group of employees they work with.

Okay, so think about it a little bit. Why would management insist on calling someone a "team member" instead of an "employee"? It obscures the plain meaning of "employee" and is two words instead of one. So management must benefit in some way from it.

Which means they must benefit from the employee perceiving themselves as part of a team. Maybe it's just hoping that the employees will all be happier if they feel like the others at the company are backing them up. If that's the case, there's far more effective ways to foster teamwork than just saying "you're a team member now". So at the very least it's lip service, a sop to get people to do the teamwork thing without putting in the actual effort to truly build a group of disparate employees into a proper team.

On the other hand, management does clearly benefit if any criticism of management decisions can be deflected with "hey, ease up on your fellow team members. We're all on the same team here." Again, it could just be lip service to get people to trust management and its decisions (since that's easier than actually making good decisions that prove you're trustworthy)...but once you have that trust you can exploit it to get away with things that you as management really shouldn't.

I dunno. I've had a manager that has made sunny declarations about us all being a team and then afterward gone back to his office to redo the schedule to put the cashiers he wanted to fuck on first shift so he could lecherously leer at them all day. It's kind of hard to take that sort of misdirection seriously after that.

There is a much broader trend in using politically correct "humanizing" terms. Someone is probably getting grants for inventing those.

[hotdogPi]

At Stop & Shop, we were called associates.

A specific term for "employee of the company, excluding vendors" is useful. I prefer "associate" over "team member".

[Scott5114]

There is a much broader trend in using politically correct "humanizing" terms. Someone is probably getting grants for inventing those.

That's probably part of it too. Sadly, the sort of MBAs that come up with this sort of stuff usually haven't worked a day in their lives as an entry-level or frontline employee, so they don't realize that they're the only ones getting the warm fuzzies from it.

At Stop & Shop, we were called associates.

A specific term for "employee of the company, excluding vendors" is useful. I prefer "associate" over "team member".

"Associate" is...okay, although I would probably think of it more like a job title like "cashier" or "slot attendant". Just more general, since I imagine any associate could be called on to run a till, stock a shelf, mop up a spill, etc.

A specific term for "employee of the company" can be done with an adjective: Wal-Mart employees, Target employees, etc. It's just unfortunate that "Stop & Shop" is a long enough name that it makes that phrasing cumbersome.

[Max Rockatansky]

For about a year Sears tried to rebrand managers as "coaches" and employees as "team members."  I recall listening to a customer lose their mind over needing a manager to manage their problem and not coach it.  Apparently that was a Kmart thing and it was part of several failed attempts to blend elements of Sears Holdings. 

[jdb1234]

For about a year Sears tried to rebrand managers as "coaches" and employees as "team members."  I recall listening to a customer lose their mind over needing a manager to manage their problem and not coach it.  Apparently that was a Kmart thing and it was part of several failed attempts to blend elements of Sears Holdings. 

Walmart has done something similar.  Shift managers are known as "coaches," employees are "team associates" and hourly supervisors are known as "team leads."

[Rothman]

Mars, Inc. infamously called all their employees associates no matter what their actual rank.  Not sure how well that worked out at all times.

[kalvado]

There is a much broader trend in using politically correct "humanizing" terms. Someone is probably getting grants for inventing those.

That's probably part of it too. Sadly, the sort of MBAs that come up with this sort of stuff usually haven't worked a day in their lives as an entry-level or frontline employee, so they don't realize that they're the only ones getting the warm fuzzies from it.

"incarcerated person" instead of previous humane term "inmate" (aka "prisoner") and "person involved with criminal justice" instead of "convicted felon".
 I doubt that comes from the first-hand experience as well.   

[Scott5114]

"person involved with criminal justice"

Reminds me of the justice of the peace election here in Nevada where the two candidates were competing on the basis of who was "more involved with criminal justice" by being arrested more times.

[jeffandnicole]

I'd find it more inhumane to have the employees stand around in a group on the sales floor at a 'team meeting' or 'rally' or whatever the company wants to call it, to talk about the day's activity or sales or promotions while customers are walking around.  Take it into a back room for a few minutes.