Posted on 12/02/2004 8:07:01 AM PST by SmithL
The Salvation Army has received an outpouring of support after reports that two major department store chains -- Target and Mervyn's -- had banned the charity's holiday bell ringers from collecting donations in front of their stores, a spokeswoman said Wednesday.
The Salvation Army's office in San Francisco received scores of calls from people who said they were shocked by the chains' decision to boot the little red kettles off their property after years of permitting the collections. Some callers said they were writing letters to the corporations; others promised to boycott the stores.
"People are saying they are saddened that the stores won't let the bell ringers be there,'' said Jennifer Byrd, the Salvation Army spokeswoman for the area from the Bay Area to Bakersfield. "People are really coming out to tell us stories about how important the Salvation Army is."
A spokeswoman for Target said its no-solicitation policy would remain in force. Representatives for Mervyn's did not return phone calls seeking comment.
Target and Mervyn's have banned the kettle collectors altogether. Safeway has cut back the number of days that Salvation Army collectors can stand in front of its supermarkets this holiday season.
That means the loss of big money. Donations to the kettle pots, a tradition that started in San Francisco in 1891 with a crab pot at the foot of Market Street, accounted for $93 million nationwide last year.
In response to the ban by Target and Mervyn's, other retailers have called to offer their storefront locations to the kettle ringers.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Hell, I'd take the storefront beggars any day over the busy-intersection beggars. They drive me NUTS. They don't even pretend to want to wash my windshield anymore - they just beg. Get a JOB!
Wow in one fowl swoop target has managed to alienate the leftists of San Fran, and the conservatives of the red states.... Real smart decision making Target (pronounced Tar - Jay)
Target is a private company, they can allow anyone they want to collect money.
You know, we consider ourselves capitalists, where corporations take decisions for the sake of the corporation. This is what Target had to do, took a decision which made them NOT liable because of idiots out there upset if they were going to give preferential treatment to Salvation Army but instead offered them funds in a different way (grants). I've been volunteering to SA for many years now and been a donor for longer so by no means I am defending Target. All I am saying is that they were forced to take an unfortunate decision where they were not in a situation where they would have been sued. Blame that on greedy lawyers and liberal organizations like ACLU who would have enjoyed having Target for breakfast if they would have only allowed SA on premises. Target has supported many charitable organizations in my community so I was extremely surprised when I first heard the story. It is your right to boycott Target, however I am wondering if the money you would have spent there is going to be dropped in a SA kettle instead! Many decide to boycott Target yet so many more do nothing when it comes to donations.
I know where it's based. You need to relax a bit. It's a play on the rather infamous "Tarjay" pronunciation.
the only thing is......they are annoying IMO....although I hate to see them banned....
Check your ego at the door or you will not advance. Only will remain frustrated and selfish.
It bugged people when God sent his Son to say the same thing.
Yep, and in this case, the corporation made a decision I didn't agree with, and so, I'm taking my business elsewhere. That's part of capitalism as well. :)
I avoid locations with bell ringers. That's why I stick to Costco, Sams Club, Guitar Center (Hey, I'm a musician) and online buying. They cannot successfully "shame" me into giving, and that is the only reason I would give money to ANYBODY on the street.
This aint India.
I applaud these stores.
Unless it was directly challenged by the individual being quoted, I doubt the Chicago Trib would go out of their way to make a correction. You have to presume the man quoted read the quote AND cared enough to challenge it.
>>I'm sorry that I annoyed you.<<
Your apology is accepted. 8^>
A little over reaction to his point, I believe.
They shoot at you too. With high-caliber pistols. Even shotguns sometimes.
(sarcasm OFF)
I find it amazing how people can assume so much about me based solely on my dislike of people standing in front of stores ringing bells. Isn't it possible that I simply find it annoying because I don't like people standing in front of stores an ringing bells? Or for that matter people standing in front of stores and soliciting for anything at all?
No, it's not possible.
You're right about Dayton Hudson owning both. Worked at a major sportswear company here in the NW for a number of years (NOT Nike), and all the purchase orders, etc., were Dayton Hudson. Plus, I had to comply with Letters of Credit from Target (talk about a FREAKING NIGHTMARE), and it's all under the Dayton Hudson banner.
Mama
Of course they're French. Why do you think they pronounce it TAR-jhay?
;)
You mean like this?
They cannot successfully "shame" me into giving, and that is the only reason I would give money to ANYBODY on the street. This ain't India
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.