Hot on HuffPost Parents:
27 Fantastic Books For Kids Of All Ages
Mike Ryan: Ben Affleck Bids Bill Hader & Fred Armisen A Fond Farewell
Toys R Us under fire
Filed under: Newborns, Toddlers Preschoolers, Your Pregnancy, Health & Safety: Babies, Development/Milestones: Babies, Media, Day Care & Education, That's Entertainment, Feeding & Sleeping, Baby-sitting, Research Reveals: Babies, Nutrition: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Expert Advice: Babies, Health & Safety: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Development: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Behavior: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Activities: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Gear Guides: Babies, Gear Guides: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Research Reveals: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Expert Advice: Toddlers & Preschoolers
I am not a fan of Toys R Us.
Perhaps that's unfair. I'm not a fan of the employees at my local Toys R Us, because of a very rude salesman and his dismissive manager who left me limping, tear stained out of the store with a one-week old baby in tow. I worked as a waitress for almost a decade, so I'm usually a model customer: I know what customer service staff has to deal with on a daily basis and the public can be very trying. But this particular salesman was so awful I wrote a letter to senior management detailing the nature of the incident. I never heard back.
Perhaps karma is on the case, because Toys R Us has found itself in some hot water over a baby sweepstakes.
The parent company of Babies R Us promoted a "First Baby of the Year" sweepstakes, promising to award a $ 25,000 savings bond to the first American baby of 2007.
Little Yuki Lin was born on the stroke of midnight at a downtown New York Hospital, and was slated to be one of the lucky prize winners. However, she was later disqualified because her Mother is not a legal US resident.
The issue has sparked controversy, with Chinese American advocates accusing Toys R Us of "second class treatment." Others say that the prize is for the baby, who is indeed an American citizen. Others note that the contest rules states that contest entrants must be legal American residents, and that Yuki was disqualified and should remain disqualified.
The news clip does not mention the resolution to the dispute, but at this point I think that Toys R Us needs to award all three finalist babies with the prize, and issue an apology to Yuki's family. She's an American baby, and she won the prize.
What do you think?
**Edited to add: news reports now say that Toys R Us has reversed its decision and will be awarding Yuki the $25 000 prize.
Your<span>Voice</span>
Ask Us Anything About Parenting
RelatedVideos
-
Dr. Phil's Advice: How to Not Spoil Your Children
When a couple can't agree whether their 2 1/2-year-old daughter is too spoiled, they turn to Dr. Phil to settle the argument.
-
Jenni Pulos Reveals the Best and Worst Pregnancy Advice
When 'Bravo' star Jenni Pulos stopped by the OK! offices, she filled us in on the best and worst advice she's gotten about pregnancy. Also, listen to the one thing you can stop telling her now about having a baby.
-
My Job Paid For My Baby Dreams
Full Segment: Infertility treatments are covered in only a fraction of insurance plans across America. Unfortunately, an infertile couple's job situation and geographic location can end up having a huge effect on the future of their family.
-
Single Dad On Balancing Life And Work
Corey Dade, a journalist & contributing editor at The Root, discusses the hardship of having to balance family life and work.
SitesWeLove
- Site Map
- |
- Staff
- |
- Terms of Service
- |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Trademarks
- |
- Advertise With Us
- |
- About Our Ads
- |
- AOL Downloads
- |
- Contact Us
- |
© Copyright 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Aol Family
ReaderComments (Page 1 of 1)
1-07-2007 @ 2:01PM
Sandy said...What about all of the American babies born over in Europe or other parts of the world? Or did they specify "born on American soil"?
Reply
1-07-2007 @ 12:28PM
Jacinda said...The Sweekstakes rules specifically states that a baby is entitled to the prize only if the mother is a legal U.S. citizen. Their sweepstakes; their rules. I'm diasspointed in the company for reneging.
Reply
1-07-2007 @ 1:53PM
lt said...I agree with Jacinda.
Reply
1-07-2007 @ 2:44PM
Barbara said...I'm surprised Toys R Us capitulated. LOTS of sweeps rules do not specify "legal" residents of U.S,; they simply say "residents of ..." Before I found the rules online, I thought Toys R Us had played a fast one, and added the notion of "legal" resident after the fact. Apparently not. It's right there in the rules, plain as day. I guess the lawyers calculated the negative publicity wasn't worth $25,000, even though in theory this move could make sweeps rules more vulnerable to challenges.
Reply
1-08-2007 @ 10:46AM
Ginny said...I am disappointed that they went against the rules too, because why have rules if u don't mean to enforce them. HOWEVER, I don't think that should have been a rule. It should have gone to ANY first baby born in America this year.
Reply
1-08-2007 @ 2:44PM
Lori said...The mother did not follow the contest rules and she and her child deserve to be disqualified because of that. Toys R Us should have stood their ground. One of the rules was for the submitting parent to be a legal resident and she wasn't. I am so tired of people breaking the rules and being rewarded for it. Political correctness has gone way too far. This woman and her child were not being discriminated against.
Reply
1-11-2007 @ 12:40PM
david said...I am very upset that Toys R Us gave in and gave back the college bond. It doen't matter if the baby was born here, the parents are illegal! If we keep on allowing illegal aliens to benifit in our country and big companies like Toys R US do not stand up to there own rules then our great country is going to seriouly feel the power of what certain groups can do to hurt the country you say you LOVE!
Reply
1-10-2007 @ 2:59PM
Janie said...It is a huge dissappointment that Babies R Us gave in and allowed the rules to be broken. This dangerous trend must be stopped; the president himself and many of our political leaders are doing the same by granting amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. They are being rewarded for breaking the law and by doing so they are encouraging more illegal immigration and being unfair to those who are obeying the laws. How arrogant of the babies mother to expect the bond. By awarding the bond, Babies R us has validated her illegal sense of priviledge. Babies R Us has set a very poor example.
Reply
1-12-2007 @ 5:37AM
Romantic Realist said...With respect to my legal analysis on whether Yuki Lin is entitled to the $25,000 U.S. Savings Bond from Toys-R-Us, I am firmly convinced that my legal position (as set forth in my e-mails to Toys-R-Us’ Legal Department during the week of January 1, 2007) is correct and unassailable. Before I decided to start this uphill battle as a valiant seeker of Truth, Liberty and Justice, I did consult with various friends and family members who are reputable and competent lawyers.
The most important legal issue is:
Whether Toys-R-Us can discriminate against a First Baby of the Year (e.g., Yuki Lin, who is born in New York City, State of New York and undeniably a United States citizen), by refusing to award the $25,000 U.S. Savings Bond promised to be awarded by Toys-R-Us in accordance with the terms of its own Sweepstake Official Rules, based on the baby’s parents’ marital status, race, color, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, education, criminal history, legal status or any other factors unrelated to the baby’s rights to U.S. citizenship under our Constitution, as amended by the Fourteenth Amendment.
I am firmly convinced that my legal analysis is accurate, and my legal position tenable. If this legal issue were argued in a U.S. federal court or New York State court, I strongly believe that Yuki would be able to prevail on the merits.
. . . . . . . . a romantic realist,
aspiring to be a valiant seeker of Truth, Liberty and Justice.
Reply