Leaked training documents from Target, one of the largest retailers in the US, reveal how the company is directing management at stores to prevent workers from organizing unions.
At the end of January 2022, Target emailed store management new training guidelines on labor relations to complete, prompting managers to look for warning signs of worker and labor union organizing within their stores and coordinate with corporate human resources to quell union organizing campaigns.
The training email and documents were leaked anonymously to the workers’ advocacy group, Target Workers Unite, and come as other large US chains including Amazon and Starbucks are fighting unionization plans.
“This training will help you understand Target’s philosophy on unions and how unions could impact our Brand and our team,” states an introduction slide to the training.
The training goes on to characterize unions as “a business that makes money from the dues and fees paid by its members”, but then explains a union is formed when employees come together and express the desire to have a union represent them, typically through an election process.
Target warns a union could reduce flexibility and narrow job descriptions, increase operational costs and create conflict between managers and employees. The company emphasizes preferring working directly with its workers over directly negotiating with workers represented by a union.
“We don’t believe that a union or any other third-party representative would improve anything – not for our team members, our guests, or the company,” states the training.
Target also claims in the training the company isn’t “anti-union” but rather “pro team member and guest”.
Managers are informed during the training that their critical role in leadership is to create an environment where workers don’t feel the need to organize a union, and provides managers with training on how to determine and intervene in any behavior of workers that signals dissatisfaction with working conditions and flags potential warning signs of union organizing.
Some examples included small gatherings of workers, the emergence of employees as leaders in vocalizing concerns, seeing workers meet with recently terminated workers, and work-related conversations among employees regarding issues such as pay, benefits, job security or other grievances.
The training also flagged “unusual activities”, such as union flyers distributed in store parking lots or missing corporate documents such as schedules or payroll rosters.
“Early detection and response to the signs of organizing is vital in maintaining a union-free environment,” states the training.
The training includes a question-and-answer section on different theoretical scenarios prompting managers to take actions in response to union organizing signs, such as surveilling workers’ participation on worker-related blogs or pages on social media, and notifying human resources for guidance on proper action.
Adam Ryan, an organizer with Target Workers Unite and an employee at Target in Christiansburg, Virginia, said the training documents were leaked from his store shortly after his flyers to promote a local event presentation on Black labor in Richmond, Virginia, for Black History Month co-hosted by Target Workers Unite, were removed from the break room.
“I confronted HR about it. We still have a standing settlement from the NLRB [National Labor Relations Board] in 2018 and taking down the flyer was in violation of that settlement. I argued with them that the no solicitation policies would be true but they didn’t consistently enforce those policies,” said Ryan.
He claimed the bulletin board at the time included non-work-related content such as a memorial for Betty White and new baby pictures from employees and that managers began questioning employees one-on-one shortly after the incident on work-related issues, as the labor relations training directed.
Ryan is currently involved in a union card authorization drive at his store location in an attempt to garner enough support from his co-workers to form a union that Target must directly negotiate a contract with.
“If you look at the training, they try to say they’re not anti-union, that they’re pro guests and pro team members, but they wouldn’t be having these training forced on management at our stories if they weren’t actually trying to union-bust and prevent us from exercising our rights,” said Ryan. “Target is no better than any other company out there. They talk a big game, they say they’re this very progressive company that cares about their workers, but then when workers start exercising their rights, they respond just like any other company that doesn’t want a union coming in.”
Andrew Stacy, a Target employee in Indianapolis, Indiana, for over two years who is also trying to organize his coworkers to form a union, experienced similar issues, which he has since filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board over.
In December 2021, Stacy explained he was distributing union flyers with a co-worker and a manager confiscated and removed the flyers, then interrogated his co-worker about it.
The labor relations training, Stacy argued, undermined the company’s claims of being pro-worker.
“It just shows how little Target thinks of us, that we don’t know what we want and they know what’s best for us,” Stacy said. “This union-busting training, that unions are a business is 100% untrue. We’re the union. Unions are the workers and what I’m organizing in my store is a rank-and-file effort.”
A Target spokesperson said: “At Target, we’ve always been committed to listening to our team and creating an environment of mutual trust where every team member’s voice matters.
“We regularly provide training to leaders on a variety of topics, and this particular training was recently used in a few stores to help leaders build and maintain Target’s culture of care, identify and address any team member concerns and ensure our team members feel supported and their voices are heard. This training also makes it clear that Target wants our team members to make informed decisions and respects our team’s right to discuss their varying viewpoints on representation.”