"And while many people prefer to work part time — for instance, college students eager for extra spending money" What a ridiculous thing to say in this age where college tuition can easily be $20K a year. You do realize that many college students work not for spending money (man if only I could afford to get pepperoni on my pizza) but to help pay for tuition and books. Yes, they still prefer part time because they have classes and studying, but many aren't doing it to afford the weekend bar specials.
2
Ok, let's image there was no Walmart, would these workers even have a job?
1
Providing only part-time work allows Walmart to skirt labor laws that typically kick in for full-time workers, such as state law requirements to provide workers compensation and disability insurance. It is the same mentality that drives Walmart's rock-bottom hourly wages and last minute scheduling of worker hours: save every penny possible no matter how miserable the resulting employment conditions to its workers.
3
Any one working for Walmart planning on getting married has rocks in their head. You'll never survive or pay for a wedding unless your parents are CEOs.
3
At 22 and 26 years old, the two Wal-Mart employees highlighted in the article still have time to get education and training which should be their priority over getting married and having children. They can marry and have children when they have the education and training to earn enough money for weddings, mortgages, and children. What's the rush to have these things at such a young age anyway? Enjoy being young and relatively carefree! Do they really not understand that with only a high school education, this is the kind of work they will be doing for the rest of their lives? Or is it a motivation problem? If they only work part-time, they have plenty of time to go to college. There is financial aid to cover the cost. It's not easy, but then neither is working in these kinds of jobs over a lifetime.
9
I find so many of these commenters' remarks interesting. Big bad Walmart. Well if "we" wouldn't have acquiesced and given in to lower prices Walmart could never have grown to such monolithic size and those nasty capitalists, those Walton demons, would never have become billionaires. We Americans are great at pontificating and those on the left are great at telling us how capitalism is so inhumane. Let's tear it down. But guess what? it's just human nature. I, nor you, will pay more than we have to. We complain of the loss of "Main Street" to Walmart but we let it happen. We became Walmart shoppers. Walmart is delivering what we want......and then we complain that they are the low cost provider.....
4
THe Walton heirs did NOTHING to earn their billions - except pick the right person as mommy and daddy
THey merely got lucky and won one mega-sweepstakes.
THey merely got lucky and won one mega-sweepstakes.
6
RE: " I, nor you, will pay more than we have to. We complain of the loss of "Main Street" to Walmart but we let it happen. We became Walmart shoppers. Walmart is delivering what we want......and then we complain that they are the low cost provider....."
Sadly, your comment is true for the many who shop Walmart. I for one, and I know I'm not alone prefer shopping "Main Street" and local. And, no, I'm not wealthy but I don't need the "junk" Walmart sells. One can find equivalent prices for equal merchandise at other stores. Much of the lower price hype at Walmart is because the quality of the items is lower. I like the slogan, "low prices, at what cost"?
Sadly, your comment is true for the many who shop Walmart. I for one, and I know I'm not alone prefer shopping "Main Street" and local. And, no, I'm not wealthy but I don't need the "junk" Walmart sells. One can find equivalent prices for equal merchandise at other stores. Much of the lower price hype at Walmart is because the quality of the items is lower. I like the slogan, "low prices, at what cost"?
3
@Ann S: so long as you apply that EQUALLY to all rich people -- to the Kennedy clan or to John Kerry who married a Heinz ketchup heiress. And not just "the bad old Waltons".
In this nation, it is still legal to leave your wealth to your children. If you don't like that, you have to work to change inheritance and tax laws.
BTW: Walmart is a corporation, not a family business. It is run by a CEO and stockholders and a Board of Directors (which included HILLARY CLINTON!) -- not directly by the family. (I'm sure with all that loot, they have a lot more fun stuff they can be doing.)
The profits from Walmart stock support MILLIONS of Americans in their stock portfolios, including many who are in public unions. Without a profit, there goes their retirement!
In this nation, it is still legal to leave your wealth to your children. If you don't like that, you have to work to change inheritance and tax laws.
BTW: Walmart is a corporation, not a family business. It is run by a CEO and stockholders and a Board of Directors (which included HILLARY CLINTON!) -- not directly by the family. (I'm sure with all that loot, they have a lot more fun stuff they can be doing.)
The profits from Walmart stock support MILLIONS of Americans in their stock portfolios, including many who are in public unions. Without a profit, there goes their retirement!
Suppose there were two lines at Walmart,
line 1 - regular pricing
line 2 - plus 10% that goes directly into the cashiers pocket
I'd bet most of the hypocritical commenters here would be waiting on, the much longer, line 1.
It's easy to talk big about how underpaid Walmart workers are.
line 1 - regular pricing
line 2 - plus 10% that goes directly into the cashiers pocket
I'd bet most of the hypocritical commenters here would be waiting on, the much longer, line 1.
It's easy to talk big about how underpaid Walmart workers are.
3
LOL. I remember reading a story where a mortgage company tested customer loyalty to higher-paid American workers.
They offered refinancing customers two options: outsourced offshore processing at the lower prices and faster turnarounds they offered and onshore (US) processing with high prices and slower turnaround.
Guess which option 90% of customers picked...
They offered refinancing customers two options: outsourced offshore processing at the lower prices and faster turnarounds they offered and onshore (US) processing with high prices and slower turnaround.
Guess which option 90% of customers picked...
2
Regarding wedding costs, ours was $166.00. We paid the judge $100 and the county $66. Could the stay-at-home mom do some babysitting to supplement their income? Could she take in any kind of work? I stayed home when my children were young and we also did without a lot of things. This is really a problem for many people. You can't get sick or have any kind of a car problem. Living on the edge of being homeless is not a thriving lifestyle. It is almost impossible now to "live within your means" because costs for everything are very high. Debt is an easy trap to fall into.
7
Come on, Nova, that's mean. You think that she should wait and save to get married? And that she shouldn't have her wedding at a fancy location? The government should mandate Wal-Mart to give this employee whatever she wants....and the government can pick up any costs that Wal-Mart can't afford.
4
The slave owners used any means to justify their way of life . Corporations do the same.
People are exploited by their basic needs as beings . Corporations were supposedly created to benefit not just their investors and employees but society as a whole. All Walmart has done has put millions of people in the poor house and now keeps them there. Taking advantage of human beings is not hard, espicially no harder then is running a business with slaves.
People are exploited by their basic needs as beings . Corporations were supposedly created to benefit not just their investors and employees but society as a whole. All Walmart has done has put millions of people in the poor house and now keeps them there. Taking advantage of human beings is not hard, espicially no harder then is running a business with slaves.
5
same old treat the people/workers. how can a super rich company go on forever paying it's workers way under poverty wages compounded by keeping their status as part-time workers. this should be something that a righteous Supreme Court could/would address, however the SC is too hell-bent on making sure that oppression of Black and other poor stays the same.
3
Why not just get a better job or move?
4
Just to put it in perspective...the town I grew up in...Greenwood, SC...is planning for a SECOND Wal-Mart....just a mere 4.5 miles down the highway from the first "superstore"....and this is in a former textile town where low-income folks never had it good in "the good days."
4
When I was in college, a part time job as cashier or a stock person at Walmart is mostly for us college kids to make extra cash while we were in school. It was never meant to make a career out of it. Therefore, the minimum wage was what it meant to be - a starting point. Everyone is supposed to be responsible for his own well being. Walmart is the only company I know provide job for our GI soldiers. Does any other retailers do that? Without Walmart, there will be more than a million people and how many more households will be un-employed I wonder?
Walmart is usually the only store a poor family in a small town can afford to buy anything they need at the cheapest possible price. These families would have paid more without a Walmart. Walmart makes things affordable for the low income families, so why that makes them villain?
Walmart set the trend on increasing minimum wage to $9.00 when they dont have to; which is above many states minimum wages in the country and this will set a benchmark for other retailers to follow suit.
Walmart is usually the only store a poor family in a small town can afford to buy anything they need at the cheapest possible price. These families would have paid more without a Walmart. Walmart makes things affordable for the low income families, so why that makes them villain?
Walmart set the trend on increasing minimum wage to $9.00 when they dont have to; which is above many states minimum wages in the country and this will set a benchmark for other retailers to follow suit.
4
the minimum wage was what it meant to be - a starting point
--
WRONG
Minimum wage was passed in the 1930s to put a floor under wages and be enough for a person to support their family
YOu are chanting one of the biggest lies from the rightwing about minimum wage
What makes them a villain is that we taxpayers have to come up with BILLIONS a year in food stamps, housing and medical care for their workers - while Walmart makes far more billions in profits and could easily afford to get its workers off the taxpayer dime
--
WRONG
Minimum wage was passed in the 1930s to put a floor under wages and be enough for a person to support their family
YOu are chanting one of the biggest lies from the rightwing about minimum wage
What makes them a villain is that we taxpayers have to come up with BILLIONS a year in food stamps, housing and medical care for their workers - while Walmart makes far more billions in profits and could easily afford to get its workers off the taxpayer dime
9
Some of these comments are cruel, and written by folks who have no clue or compassion. These big retailers, from Walmart to Home Depot want as few full time employees as possible so they don't have to pay employee benefits. It seems they'd rather send their people off to county to get food stamps and Medicaid rather than pay benifits for their employees. Most of the workforce is part-time employ, with no knowledge of the following week's hours - or - what two days of the week they will have off, which are usually not consecutive days. They don't know if they will work graveyard, opening, afternoon, or evening hours until the very end of the proceeding week - based on the current week's sales. They don't know if they will be working 12 hours or 38 hours. Try getting a second job with a schedule like that; try setting up day care and consistency in your child's life with a schedule like that; and try registering for college courses with a schedule like that. Most management in these stores are inflexible and unwilling to work these things out with their employees to help them have consistency in their lives, while at the same time implying to them that soon they will be full time employees. This was exactly my experience while working at Home Depot, which I used as a stepping stone to get into a better position - but I lived in a metropolitan area and had choices. In many places Walmart and its ilk are the only game in town. Let's hear a little more compassion here.
7
I 'm weary reading about nasty working terms and less than subsistence pay endured by employees at Walmart, McDonalds, etc. Clearly these corporations which, I also read are experiencing declines, cannot believe their customers who also work hard for their livings, are not turned off by these cold, cruel realities endured by their fellow working citizens. While 1/2 of 1 percent of our population sucks up 40+% of this country's income, guess which side of that statistic owners of these corporations wake up to each day, their workers seeking simple sustenance are forced to put on their shoes and head to jobs of legalized slavery. (No one forces them to do so Yes, they are addicted to food and shelter, clothing and needing a doctor or dentist from time to time. And forget the fantasy of home ownership, college educations, and other indulgences to stimulate the economy.) Millions of us express anger at exploitation of the vulnerable by boycotting their corporations. The time is coming when one of them will try the radical idea of treating their employees well. They will - wonder of wonder - see an uptick in their customer base, equal to or exceeding their outlay. Want an example of a hugely successful company which draws a hard line on cost of their retail goods while paying their employees twice that of Walmart? Go Costco! Look also at Costco's stock history. Today I need 2 electronic gadgets I'd like to check out at Walmart. But excuse me while I shop the internet.
4
For cripes sake -- Costco is NOTHING like Walmart. Costco is a MEMBERSHIP warehouse club. It costs $55 to join (last time I checked), which is a fortune for a poor family. That's just to JOIN -- you still have to pay for merchandise.
Of the 3 major warehouse clubs, Costco has (IMHO) the worst selection and the highest prices, the fewest sales & coupons, and they don't take credit cards OR manufacturer coupons as others do. They also keep shorter hours.
ALL warehouse clubs charge membership fees, and compel shoppers to buy items in HUGE quantities -- 36 rolls of toilet paper, 12 tubes of toothpaste -- that is not practical for a poor family who has no big house to store this stuff in, nor the cash up front to buy such a big lot of goods.
Walmart on the other hand is a discount department store, that is free to enter and you can buy single items or small size containers. The Walmart corporation does own a warehouse club -- Sam's Club -- that does compete with Costco.
It would be more fair to compare Walmart with Target -- but I notice elitists never do that. Target has hip, trendy merchandise! so you'll never boycott them. Never mind they pay the same low wages and part time hours.
Of the 3 major warehouse clubs, Costco has (IMHO) the worst selection and the highest prices, the fewest sales & coupons, and they don't take credit cards OR manufacturer coupons as others do. They also keep shorter hours.
ALL warehouse clubs charge membership fees, and compel shoppers to buy items in HUGE quantities -- 36 rolls of toilet paper, 12 tubes of toothpaste -- that is not practical for a poor family who has no big house to store this stuff in, nor the cash up front to buy such a big lot of goods.
Walmart on the other hand is a discount department store, that is free to enter and you can buy single items or small size containers. The Walmart corporation does own a warehouse club -- Sam's Club -- that does compete with Costco.
It would be more fair to compare Walmart with Target -- but I notice elitists never do that. Target has hip, trendy merchandise! so you'll never boycott them. Never mind they pay the same low wages and part time hours.
1
One thing that I never hear discussed on topics such as this is how the taxpayers are subsidizing some of the wealthiest people in the country (maybe the 0.025%).
By not paying their employees an adequate, those employees depends on government benefits (food stamps, medicaid, etc) paid by us.
Would it really cause the Walton family and those like it into the poor house if they took out a couple of billions dollars less per year?
In a just world, the taxpayers would be able to sue the Walton family to repay back some of those billions we helped subsidized.
That is the real crime - the 1% whose wealth is so dependent on the taxpayers keeping more money in the super rich folk's bank account.
Instead of a future race war as depicted in the Turner Diaries, maybe we'll have something along the line of the French Revolution or as the queen in Tim Burton's version of "Alice in Wonderland" would scream, "Off with their heads."
By not paying their employees an adequate, those employees depends on government benefits (food stamps, medicaid, etc) paid by us.
Would it really cause the Walton family and those like it into the poor house if they took out a couple of billions dollars less per year?
In a just world, the taxpayers would be able to sue the Walton family to repay back some of those billions we helped subsidized.
That is the real crime - the 1% whose wealth is so dependent on the taxpayers keeping more money in the super rich folk's bank account.
Instead of a future race war as depicted in the Turner Diaries, maybe we'll have something along the line of the French Revolution or as the queen in Tim Burton's version of "Alice in Wonderland" would scream, "Off with their heads."
7
Let's suppose that Walmart decided to convert its hourly employees to full-time by offering them a 40 hour workweek. Assuming that half the hourly workforce (650,000) is currently working 29 hours per week. Then that would mean that Walmart would have to layoff 178,750 workers. And then we'd all be talking about the big bad Walmart that added so many people to the unemployment line...
5
Why did Mr Rodriguez and his girlfriend have a child when they have so little income?
Is it the responsibility of WalMart to raise their child?
Why doesn't he get a better job that pays more instead of playing the victim and begging Walmart for more hours?
Yet again the emphasis is directed away from the personal responsibility of individuals and parents toward mindless bashing of big companies.
As usual the NYTimes promotes its agenda of disowning personal responsibility.
Is it the responsibility of WalMart to raise their child?
Why doesn't he get a better job that pays more instead of playing the victim and begging Walmart for more hours?
Yet again the emphasis is directed away from the personal responsibility of individuals and parents toward mindless bashing of big companies.
As usual the NYTimes promotes its agenda of disowning personal responsibility.
9
It's not his fault he has no education, no skills, a kid, a fiancée and zero apparent desire to find a better job.
4
No. He could have chosen to be born to a wealthy family that told him to go to college, and provided the funds.
3
My sister volunteers at the Food Bank in Phoenix. When people are hired at Walmart, they are given the address for he food bank because there's no way they will be able to afford to pay rent and buy food!
I'm kind of glad that NYC outlawed Walmart, even though I have shopped there when I was working out of town. However, I have to admit that their practice of "cutting" hours to keep from paying benefits is a common practice.
I feel bad for Mr. Rodriguez, but his son is 2 years old - old enough to be potty trained - so they shouldn't need diapers.
If there is a Costco in his area, he should look into a job there. They pay A LOT better than Walmart.
I'm kind of glad that NYC outlawed Walmart, even though I have shopped there when I was working out of town. However, I have to admit that their practice of "cutting" hours to keep from paying benefits is a common practice.
I feel bad for Mr. Rodriguez, but his son is 2 years old - old enough to be potty trained - so they shouldn't need diapers.
If there is a Costco in his area, he should look into a job there. They pay A LOT better than Walmart.
6
Mr. Rodriquez is 26 years old, without a skill - assume this as he chooses to work at Walmart and didn't talk about his efforts towards a different career. Guess he believes, like many here, that he is owed hours and money for a job that requires no skill. His plan is a lousy one, and I hope he and his fiancee are not planning another child anytime soon. BTW, what does the fiancee do for a living?
He states that his managers won't give him more hours because they don't care. His managers don't care about 'him' and give hours to others? Or is it they don't have hours to give as they are 'given' to other workers?
Remember, Walmart's business design is simple, and has not changed - reason for it's success. They buy in bulk, keeping costs down. They stock warehouse like environments, enabling a large variety of items to purchase while keeping staff needs to a minimum - not designed for those that want customer service. They don't go to Walmart.
Most here attack businesses for making big profits and not giving it to the workers, but don't forget that without part time at Walmart, there would be half the jobs at Walmart.
Lastly, the NYTimes doesn't really illustrate what is happening at a statistical level, just a few sad stories as usual. About 3.6% of part time Walmart employees wanted more hours in 2007, now 7% want more hours in 2015. Really? And we're to hear the NYTimes whine about 1.4 million workers out 19 million that 'want more work?' Go out and get it!
He states that his managers won't give him more hours because they don't care. His managers don't care about 'him' and give hours to others? Or is it they don't have hours to give as they are 'given' to other workers?
Remember, Walmart's business design is simple, and has not changed - reason for it's success. They buy in bulk, keeping costs down. They stock warehouse like environments, enabling a large variety of items to purchase while keeping staff needs to a minimum - not designed for those that want customer service. They don't go to Walmart.
Most here attack businesses for making big profits and not giving it to the workers, but don't forget that without part time at Walmart, there would be half the jobs at Walmart.
Lastly, the NYTimes doesn't really illustrate what is happening at a statistical level, just a few sad stories as usual. About 3.6% of part time Walmart employees wanted more hours in 2007, now 7% want more hours in 2015. Really? And we're to hear the NYTimes whine about 1.4 million workers out 19 million that 'want more work?' Go out and get it!
10
The problem is Americans like cheap up-front prices over everything else -- over long-term costs, over long-term effects, and over morals. If two stores are selling the same product, one for $25 and the other for $20, Americans will shop where it's $20, completely disregarding how the company operates. This is also why there's so little American manufacturing these days. Again, Americans only care about their own wallets, not others'.
The solution to the Wal-Mart problem is YOU. Simply, don't shop there. If you disagree with how Wal-Mart treats their workers, don't support it. If you give $1 to Walmart, YOU'RE encouraging them.
My office provides free Sam's Club (part of Walmart) memberships to us. I instead have a personal Costco membership and choose to shop there instead. Employees are happy, most of them have worked there for at least 5-10 years, and I know they're paid well. Costco also treats its customers quite well.
The solution to the Wal-Mart problem is YOU. Simply, don't shop there. If you disagree with how Wal-Mart treats their workers, don't support it. If you give $1 to Walmart, YOU'RE encouraging them.
My office provides free Sam's Club (part of Walmart) memberships to us. I instead have a personal Costco membership and choose to shop there instead. Employees are happy, most of them have worked there for at least 5-10 years, and I know they're paid well. Costco also treats its customers quite well.
6
Low wage workers who can not afford to live indoors are a huge issue in my area's economy based upon summer tourism.
On the other hand, when will the NYT stop using people in their stories who have all the sense of a gnat? Such as
(1) If they have produced a kid that is 2 years old & there is no wedding scheduled SOON, she is not his fiancé - she is his shackup & he is the baby daddy. It is nonsense to call her his 'fiance' & makes a mockery of legal marriage & responsibilities.
(2) When she got pregnant (& it happens even with birth control) , she should not have had the kid. She should have had an abortion. (And before the anti-choice crowd pile on - if you think that awful then fine but you personally support that kid with food & housing & medical instead of the taxpayers)
(3) Get cloth diapers & wash them!
(4) The woman can get off her backside & get a job.
The state welfare office will pay for childcare so she can work because they are below Federal Poverty Level for a household of 3
Yes employers like Walmart really abuse their workers & leave the rest of us to pay to house them, fed them & pay for their medical care & the Walton heirs should personally have to pay that bill
On the other hand, popping out kids they couldn't afford 2 years ago, not saving every penny possible with cloth diapers & her sitting on her backside is just plain stupid & irresponsible (like the calling a shack-up your fiancé for years & years with no wedding date ever.)
On the other hand, when will the NYT stop using people in their stories who have all the sense of a gnat? Such as
(1) If they have produced a kid that is 2 years old & there is no wedding scheduled SOON, she is not his fiancé - she is his shackup & he is the baby daddy. It is nonsense to call her his 'fiance' & makes a mockery of legal marriage & responsibilities.
(2) When she got pregnant (& it happens even with birth control) , she should not have had the kid. She should have had an abortion. (And before the anti-choice crowd pile on - if you think that awful then fine but you personally support that kid with food & housing & medical instead of the taxpayers)
(3) Get cloth diapers & wash them!
(4) The woman can get off her backside & get a job.
The state welfare office will pay for childcare so she can work because they are below Federal Poverty Level for a household of 3
Yes employers like Walmart really abuse their workers & leave the rest of us to pay to house them, fed them & pay for their medical care & the Walton heirs should personally have to pay that bill
On the other hand, popping out kids they couldn't afford 2 years ago, not saving every penny possible with cloth diapers & her sitting on her backside is just plain stupid & irresponsible (like the calling a shack-up your fiancé for years & years with no wedding date ever.)
11
"Fiancee" used to mean a woman who was engaged to be married. Today it's just double speak for "my old lady" or "my baby mama". There is no real indication this couple ever intends to marry. After all their child is 2 years old, plus a 9 month pregnancy, plus we assume they went out for a while before this -- FOUR years and a 2 year old kid, and they can't go downtown and get married at City Hall? Like every gay-married couple can do?
The truth is, most young moms today don't even KNOW there is such a thing as cloth diapers or that diapers can be washed. They have never seen this. Their moms AND their grandmothers all used disposables. They don't have any concept of any other kind of diaper, or of the labor that used to be involved in washing diapers -- or that THAT is why women stayed home with children (rather than working). The sheer mountains of labor to cook and clean. Instead they pull out a paper Pampers and order pizza for dinner and watch TV all day and think "I'm a stay at home mom"! My own mom and grandma would have fallen on the floor laughing at them!
The truth is, most young moms today don't even KNOW there is such a thing as cloth diapers or that diapers can be washed. They have never seen this. Their moms AND their grandmothers all used disposables. They don't have any concept of any other kind of diaper, or of the labor that used to be involved in washing diapers -- or that THAT is why women stayed home with children (rather than working). The sheer mountains of labor to cook and clean. Instead they pull out a paper Pampers and order pizza for dinner and watch TV all day and think "I'm a stay at home mom"! My own mom and grandma would have fallen on the floor laughing at them!
3
Don't forget Facebook. It's really time-consuming for a bizzy mawm to keep up her Facebook posting pace and be in touch with other struggling single moms.
1
With the regulations imposed by the government, via ObamaCare, if a company employees someone over 29 hours, health insurance and other benefits must be provided. Company cost skyrocket. Walmart, and every other company, are only responding to govt regulations. They are following the law. And Walmart is blamed for it.
Prior to the implementation of the ACA, this were problems, but they seem to be getting worse. Not better.
Not only have hours and benefits been cut, but there are other negative ramifications.
I am a pediatrician, and I see a lot of these low wage workers in my office. The last few years, when I ask a parent what they do for work, I often get "two job" answers. "I wait tables at night 2 days a week and work at Walmart two to three days a week". At first I wondeed why, but now I realize why.
The ACA has made doing medicine much more burdensome and expensive. it has made running Walmart and any other business more burdensome and expensive.
But the real cost fall on the moms and dads I see & the ones depicted in this article. Two part time jobs does not a career make. Two part time jobs won't give you an opportunity to make a name for yourself & move up the ladder.
Corporate America is responding to govt imposed regulation. The common man, we the citizens pay the price. And we blame the wrong person-the employer, and not the politician who came to our rescue, & made things worse.
I'm with the government and I'm hear to help. It ain't helping.
Prior to the implementation of the ACA, this were problems, but they seem to be getting worse. Not better.
Not only have hours and benefits been cut, but there are other negative ramifications.
I am a pediatrician, and I see a lot of these low wage workers in my office. The last few years, when I ask a parent what they do for work, I often get "two job" answers. "I wait tables at night 2 days a week and work at Walmart two to three days a week". At first I wondeed why, but now I realize why.
The ACA has made doing medicine much more burdensome and expensive. it has made running Walmart and any other business more burdensome and expensive.
But the real cost fall on the moms and dads I see & the ones depicted in this article. Two part time jobs does not a career make. Two part time jobs won't give you an opportunity to make a name for yourself & move up the ladder.
Corporate America is responding to govt imposed regulation. The common man, we the citizens pay the price. And we blame the wrong person-the employer, and not the politician who came to our rescue, & made things worse.
I'm with the government and I'm hear to help. It ain't helping.
1
You are WRONG
(1) Walmart has done this for years - hiring a bunch of people and only giving them part-time hours
(2) The worst Walmart would have to do is offer coverage to a 30 hour + employee where the employee pays up to 9 1/2% of their wages for INDIVIDUAL coverage. If they offer it, they are off the hook.
ANd with that kind of price tag for individual - individual, not family which cost as much as the employer choose to charge- less than 5% of low wage workers sing up.
(3) So you would rather pay for these workers to live indoors, eat and get medical care?
Even if this guy worked 40 hours a week, that household of 3 is BELOW poverty level.
Get that rather large woman he lives with off her backside and make her get a job even at 26 hours a week at the same pay, then with the Earned Income Credit, they being in nearly $28000 a year - still Food Stamp Level for a household of 3 but not as much paid to them in Food Stamps
ANd BTW, the bottom 50% in US simply are NOT smart enough to "have a career" - couldn't even get through a dumbed-down community college certificate. They get by on hourly wage jobs which these days means retail, restaurants, lawn service, home health care -- all low paying jobs.
(1) Walmart has done this for years - hiring a bunch of people and only giving them part-time hours
(2) The worst Walmart would have to do is offer coverage to a 30 hour + employee where the employee pays up to 9 1/2% of their wages for INDIVIDUAL coverage. If they offer it, they are off the hook.
ANd with that kind of price tag for individual - individual, not family which cost as much as the employer choose to charge- less than 5% of low wage workers sing up.
(3) So you would rather pay for these workers to live indoors, eat and get medical care?
Even if this guy worked 40 hours a week, that household of 3 is BELOW poverty level.
Get that rather large woman he lives with off her backside and make her get a job even at 26 hours a week at the same pay, then with the Earned Income Credit, they being in nearly $28000 a year - still Food Stamp Level for a household of 3 but not as much paid to them in Food Stamps
ANd BTW, the bottom 50% in US simply are NOT smart enough to "have a career" - couldn't even get through a dumbed-down community college certificate. They get by on hourly wage jobs which these days means retail, restaurants, lawn service, home health care -- all low paying jobs.
3
"Even if this guy worked 40 hours a week, that household of 3 is BELOW poverty level."
No one disputes that -- but the logical response to low wages is to not create a household of three, rather than expect one's employer to support personal lifestyle choices.
At age 26 with virtually no marketable credentials he should be single, childfree and living or boarding with relatives while diligently and in a focused manner building up skills, work history, a career network and education. Instead he chose to produce a child at a very young age and in dire financial straits. We live with the consequences of these monumental choices and making another human being is about as monumental as it gets -- hence the consequences are going to be pretty grave.
Funny how we lock people up for dealing a few kilos of weed but don't do the same to individuals who deliberately, selfishly and negligently bring children into disadvantaged situations -- yet the latter is a far worse crime against society.
No one disputes that -- but the logical response to low wages is to not create a household of three, rather than expect one's employer to support personal lifestyle choices.
At age 26 with virtually no marketable credentials he should be single, childfree and living or boarding with relatives while diligently and in a focused manner building up skills, work history, a career network and education. Instead he chose to produce a child at a very young age and in dire financial straits. We live with the consequences of these monumental choices and making another human being is about as monumental as it gets -- hence the consequences are going to be pretty grave.
Funny how we lock people up for dealing a few kilos of weed but don't do the same to individuals who deliberately, selfishly and negligently bring children into disadvantaged situations -- yet the latter is a far worse crime against society.
7
“Walmart always provided jobs at the margins of the labor force — to people who were just re-entering the labor force after many years, for example, or supplementing a spouse’s income,” said Gary N. Chaison, professor of industrial relations at Clark University.
As if that justified paying slave wages to powerless people with no other options. In Mr. Chaison's statement we find all that is wrong with the corporatocracy:
the inhumane treatment of working people, the debasement of working people as they become worth less than the pennies these greedy managers will save by refusing to consider workers' needs and the needs of these workers' families. They debase human beings into inanimate widgets.
And it should be further noted that most of the middle class in the US pays a much higher percentage of Federal taxes than does this company. It's high time America rejected this corporatocracy and elected uncorrupted politicians who think that people are just as important as profit.
An honest discussion of the destruction of our economy by free trade policies would be a good place for honest politicians to start the conversation.
As if that justified paying slave wages to powerless people with no other options. In Mr. Chaison's statement we find all that is wrong with the corporatocracy:
the inhumane treatment of working people, the debasement of working people as they become worth less than the pennies these greedy managers will save by refusing to consider workers' needs and the needs of these workers' families. They debase human beings into inanimate widgets.
And it should be further noted that most of the middle class in the US pays a much higher percentage of Federal taxes than does this company. It's high time America rejected this corporatocracy and elected uncorrupted politicians who think that people are just as important as profit.
An honest discussion of the destruction of our economy by free trade policies would be a good place for honest politicians to start the conversation.
3
I worked at Athleta (owned by GAP) recently and they are just as bad as Walmart. Yes, I did get $10.00/hour but I was only given 12-15 hours per week even though I asked for more hours. The store had at least 40 sales associates on their payroll who were less than part-time. Athleta hires so many workers and only gives them a limited number of hours.
7
send walmart the bill for cost of foodstamps and other forms of support that is subsidized by the taxpayer else give people an income that they can survive on.
8
The lawsuit against Walmart over workers being made to work off the clock is indicative of how much work there is to do at each store and yet how little Walmart wants to pay to get that work done. Their margins are razor thin on most products and so their payroll is also cut to the bone at most times of the year, but at the same time the work demands put on the store staff are often unreasonable and yet the store will avoid making part time workers into full time workers because they do not want to have to pay benefits to those people.
Meanwhile, the existing full time workers will work off the clock after they hit forty hours because Walmart absolutely will not pay overtime and yet there is no one else to do the work. They have alerts in their system that go up the chain to the district managers if the store is paying out overtime to anyone without prior authorization. Payroll is rigidly controlled and monitored.
Having worked as a Walmart manager I've seen how it goes and even more sad I've actually had full time employees volunteer to work off the clock because they wanted to get stuff done and they knew I couldn't pay them overtime. That Walmart has employees that value their jobs enough to volunteer to work for free is probably the thing that gets to me the most as they don't deserve people that dedicated.
Meanwhile, the existing full time workers will work off the clock after they hit forty hours because Walmart absolutely will not pay overtime and yet there is no one else to do the work. They have alerts in their system that go up the chain to the district managers if the store is paying out overtime to anyone without prior authorization. Payroll is rigidly controlled and monitored.
Having worked as a Walmart manager I've seen how it goes and even more sad I've actually had full time employees volunteer to work off the clock because they wanted to get stuff done and they knew I couldn't pay them overtime. That Walmart has employees that value their jobs enough to volunteer to work for free is probably the thing that gets to me the most as they don't deserve people that dedicated.
5
And who was once on Walmart's board? Hillary Rodham Clinton, who is very concerned with income inequality in America.
3
For six years!
1
The problem isn't Walmart it's capitalism.
Walmart is just a particularly bad symptom.
Walmart is just a particularly bad symptom.
5
You're thinking of corporatism. Walmart doesn't participate in capitalism; it's a cancerous growth fed by over-regulation.
Walmart. Target. ToysRus. PetSmart. Bed Bath & Beyond. TJMaxx. etc. et al.
They. Don't. Care. Period.
They. Don't. Care. Period.
5
No other American company treats its "subjects" to a life of poverty and hopelessness the way Walmart does. Meanwhile, every member of the Walmart family is worth $35 billion EACH.
It says a lot for Walmart's besieged, hard-working, law-abiding employees that they haven't turned into terrorists. As a country who touts its freedoms and its opportunities, let's help them before they do.
It says a lot for Walmart's besieged, hard-working, law-abiding employees that they haven't turned into terrorists. As a country who touts its freedoms and its opportunities, let's help them before they do.
4
I worked for Wal-Mart in 2014 at $7.60 an hour. They would tell me to work over 8 hours if a truck needed unloading and then force me to take a 3 hour lunch the next day, all to make sure no one is paid overtime. Their employee manual states that working and getting paid for more than forty hours in a week is cause for termination of employment.
5
If it weren't for Walmart many of the uneducated, disabled and minority Americans wouldn't be working.
A Walmart job is better than no job. Much better.
A Walmart job is better than no job. Much better.
8
Was, or should, Walmart be ever considered a "career"? It shouldn't be. It is incumbent on people to get educated, and something that can be construed as a career. The president is constantly telling us how the economy is picking up and unemployment is falling due to all the new jobs being created. There has to be something out there other than Walmart and McDonalds that will enable someone to pursue a career.
4
I worked for years in discount department stores when I was younger. Then we had full-time employees and part-time employees. The full-timers worked 40 hours a week Monday through Friday and the part-timers picked up evenings and weekends. The companies were flexible with regard to appointments and things that needed to get done. We never took on extra help for the holidays but we also never laid off anyone in the slow times. We made minimal contributions to our health insurance. It was a business model that worked and there isn't one good reason why it can't work still.
3
The wage Walmart pays - or any other business pays - reflects the skill level needed to perform the job. You don't need much more than an 8th grade education to work at Walmart. Same with fast food.
As far as the schedule: 30 years ago, when I worked fast food, my schedule was always changing. Came with the territory. Slow night? I was sent home. Busy? I was called in. My paycheck reflected the hours I worked.
We have a very large population of people willing to take these jobs. If this guy quits, there are 2 or 3 others willing to step in. Is that Walmart's fault? If Walmart were to shut down, would that help the unemployment rate? Walmart is part of the "solution" - it is making jobs. So what if the Walton family is worth billions.
What we need is for families like these to take responsibility for their actions. Like maybe using birth control. Maybe she should work and he stay home. Maybe they need to move back home with parents for a year and take classes to gain jobs that have more stability and better pay.
Our society needs to help folks like these do research and train for jobs with a future and not set themselves up to be "victims" of ANY employer.
As far as the schedule: 30 years ago, when I worked fast food, my schedule was always changing. Came with the territory. Slow night? I was sent home. Busy? I was called in. My paycheck reflected the hours I worked.
We have a very large population of people willing to take these jobs. If this guy quits, there are 2 or 3 others willing to step in. Is that Walmart's fault? If Walmart were to shut down, would that help the unemployment rate? Walmart is part of the "solution" - it is making jobs. So what if the Walton family is worth billions.
What we need is for families like these to take responsibility for their actions. Like maybe using birth control. Maybe she should work and he stay home. Maybe they need to move back home with parents for a year and take classes to gain jobs that have more stability and better pay.
Our society needs to help folks like these do research and train for jobs with a future and not set themselves up to be "victims" of ANY employer.
5
Sorry, CB, but the wages business pays reflect the least amount they can get away with given the competition for available jobs. If business could pay people nothing, they would.
2
I think you make good points. What if counseling was provided and promoted for the working poor (if of course they can find a way to work it into their impossible work schedule) that might be useful. On the other hand, the fact that massively rolling-in-it on one end of the Walmart system due to inherited wealth, and the wrungout workers at the other end, is just a little too unbalanced it seems to me for the good of our people, our economic system, our country. Ever wonder how much a person inheriting Walmart wealth must spend, just rolling over in bed each day, to break even with the income automatically generated? If we guessed $30 million annually, earning a smidge more than you and I get from the bank, compared to a Walmart employee working his or her backside off for a year - assuming he or she was a 40 hour per week employee which no Walmart employee would "assume" . We could then weight the employee's "so what?"diaper decision with that of the Walmart owner's determination of how to spend his lavish income from inherited money - an accident of birth . Which contributes the most to our society? economic system? country? You say that does not matter? It matters to me. "We need families like these to take responsibility for their actions."
1
This is the future for many of my students, who are not going to be able to afford college. With the manufacturing industry gone, there are really no options now for people without a college degree. Without serious salary increases for these workers, there is no hope for them to enter the middle class. So tragic to see our country reverted back to the old days of extreme income inequality.
9
diana
I could not disagree with you more. The world needs painters, carpenters, farmers, auto mechanics, HVAC technicians, nurse's aids, etc. All of these jobs can be had almost anywhere and most community colleges can provide the training.
I could not disagree with you more. The world needs painters, carpenters, farmers, auto mechanics, HVAC technicians, nurse's aids, etc. All of these jobs can be had almost anywhere and most community colleges can provide the training.
3
Whatever do you mean? Without a college degree you can even be governor of Wisconsin!
2
I believe that workers in the US need at least a 36 hour workweek making $15 per hour minimum!
I also believe that it's a lot better to postpone parenthood until one is prepared to deal with the expenses of children!
I also believe that it's a lot better to postpone parenthood until one is prepared to deal with the expenses of children!
7
The Walton family ( 8 people) takes in 43% of the total American income earnings each year, according to this newspaper. They control the tanker costs from China, and therefore, world shipping prices. At Walmart this family won't give their workers 40 hours a week because they do not want to have to give them health insurance, and basic benefits. How much power and wealth do these people need in their 8 lives? Do they have a conscience? Are they really Americans?
5
This is the real "American Exceptionalism," wage slavery and corporate fascism unique among supposed first world countries. I just love it when a WalMart spokesperson proudly crows about "one million extra hours per week," neglecting to mention that dividing those hours among more than one million employees means less than an extra hour per week per worker.
4
The NYT should run an article about how much it costs to raise a child in the USA. Think before you have a baby. Babies are EXPENSIVE.
8
Walmart makes an easy media villain because of their magnitude and familiarity (easy to caricaturize, like the Monsanto of retail), but without cherry picking exceptional examples (e.g. Wegmans), how much better do other typical mainstream retail employees have it? Or independent retail employees? Is Walmart really the worst and only offender, or do they get more coverage because there’s inherent page-click equity when calling out big names? Not saying Walmart can't do better, but I'd like more complete context.
5
Agreed. I never worked at Walmart, but I worked at Borders for a few years. They paid around $8 an hour (this was 10 years ago) and provided health insurance and paid vacation/sick time. A beloved indie bookstore in town paid $7 an hour with no benefits.
3
@Laura: AND Borders is out of business. Their business model FAILED.
1
"Walmart and other retailers, facing stiff competition and shrinking margins, have taken a more severe approach to controlling labor costs..."
This is always the excuse from the low-wage service sector. And yet the Walton family literally has billions from this company and have not worked for it. It is the structure of our economic system that gives us this disparity, and a slight increase in wages will never change this structure. If we want real economic justice we have to change how we do business. Right now business is done for those at the top and we have all become slaves to that system. We can continue to demand change and maybe get an occasional increase in wages, but it is a fight that will always be an uphill battle. Better to get rid of the shareholder system of business, put the power into the hands of workers as partners in a business, who have the power to make real decisions on how they are paid, how they spend or invest their profits, etc. After all they are the ones who make a business work. Better to have a system of economics in which we are more equal partners and no one is in a position to buy elections from the money made off the backs of the rest of us.
This is always the excuse from the low-wage service sector. And yet the Walton family literally has billions from this company and have not worked for it. It is the structure of our economic system that gives us this disparity, and a slight increase in wages will never change this structure. If we want real economic justice we have to change how we do business. Right now business is done for those at the top and we have all become slaves to that system. We can continue to demand change and maybe get an occasional increase in wages, but it is a fight that will always be an uphill battle. Better to get rid of the shareholder system of business, put the power into the hands of workers as partners in a business, who have the power to make real decisions on how they are paid, how they spend or invest their profits, etc. After all they are the ones who make a business work. Better to have a system of economics in which we are more equal partners and no one is in a position to buy elections from the money made off the backs of the rest of us.
3
Walmart is not an Adam Smith sort of capitalist, a cooperative enhancing the lives of its members by leveraging the efficiencies of specialization and comparative advantage. It is a latter-day capitalist, one that treats workers as capital, little more than machines to be used to the point of disrepair, all the while dependent for its survival on treating its customers as people. In effect, Walmart is humanitarian organization externally, promising low prices and good service for the benefit of mankind, that achieves its humanitarian aims by treating its workers worse than most dogs.
But if you don't like Walmart, blame it on your government. Capitalists and government long ago--since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution--agreed amongst themselves to collaborate in exploiting the unwashed masses (including the military). The only time the agreement was seriously questioned was during the Great Depression, and then with the Keynesian reprieve from it that World War Two represented. Except for that brief interlude, all of America's great capitalists have behaved more or less identically to Walmart. The difference today is that many of them go overseas to exploit workers (e.g., Apple, etc.).
If you want to boycott something, you'll need to boycott the entire American economic system. Ditch the iPhone and the cars and the cozy warm houses for returning to the land to fend for yourself. Which sort of sounds appealing, when I see it written down like that.
But if you don't like Walmart, blame it on your government. Capitalists and government long ago--since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution--agreed amongst themselves to collaborate in exploiting the unwashed masses (including the military). The only time the agreement was seriously questioned was during the Great Depression, and then with the Keynesian reprieve from it that World War Two represented. Except for that brief interlude, all of America's great capitalists have behaved more or less identically to Walmart. The difference today is that many of them go overseas to exploit workers (e.g., Apple, etc.).
If you want to boycott something, you'll need to boycott the entire American economic system. Ditch the iPhone and the cars and the cozy warm houses for returning to the land to fend for yourself. Which sort of sounds appealing, when I see it written down like that.
As wages and hours go up for what should be an entry level and not a career job Walmart will be forced to go out and find only the cheapest goods around. This will result in further loss of middle income manufacturing jobs in the US. And when there are less Walmart shoppers since people either lost their manufacturing jobs or find the quality of goods offered appalling the very Walmart workers pushing for these increases will be laid off and become totally dependent on Government handouts. Exactly what the Democratic party wants.
1
You know it's easy to say, "let them eat cake", especially if you haven't been in their shoes. The reality is, even manufacturing jobs are paying less then in the "good old days". We have a gentleman in the Detroit area who walked 21 miles everyday to work. He had just gotten a raise to $10.55 an hour after 10 years on the job and never missed a day! Our area has some of the highest vehicle insurance rates and gas tax rates in the nation and no mass transit to speak of. To say to someone, go to school and get an education. Well, a college degree is no guarantee any more either. And not everyone has the ability to be a college student. Training for something other than a degree in English lit would be a good place to start. And making higher education more affordable would help too. Not everyone has the intelligence to be a biologist and we need to take care of those at the lower rung of the ladder. Low wage jobs is the new norm, we are all going to have to buckle our belts a little tighter and realize that what many of our parents had is no longer affordable for us. And after all, there but by the grace of God go you.
2
OK, so instead of lamenting the "good old days" how about adjusting to "the new normal." the days of a low-skill factory worker having the nice house, the cottage up north, the five kids and snowmobiles for all -- without ever cracking a book since high school (if then, as many of these very workers have told me) are over. They are not coming back. And why should they? The American standard of living was artificially inflated post WWII and quite frankly, since humans have not seen fit to curb their own growth and are fast approaching 10 billion, life is going to get more competitive and revert to being the struggle it almost always was, for most of human history.
The numbers really don't allow for anything else.
The numbers really don't allow for anything else.
4
Anonymous says: Get a better education and change your job and stop blaming others..
I say,
OK, so how is one to do that when you're living hand to mouth? Last I checked, people were going into six-figure debt to their degree. This guy is already in debt. Problem is, that if he is lucky enough to move up, it benefits only him. The company hasn't changed. Someone else is stuck working for slave wages. The system needs to change, not just the individual.
I say,
OK, so how is one to do that when you're living hand to mouth? Last I checked, people were going into six-figure debt to their degree. This guy is already in debt. Problem is, that if he is lucky enough to move up, it benefits only him. The company hasn't changed. Someone else is stuck working for slave wages. The system needs to change, not just the individual.
5
I see commenters talking about a living wage. I think if we are going to do that, we need to be specific. A living wage for a single person is different from a living wage for:
Two people, both working, no children
Two people, both working, 1 child; or 2, or 10
Two people, only one working, children or no children
One person supporting a multigenerational household
One person supporting a household where there are members with disabilities and special needs
When we say "Walmart needs to offer a living wage," to which I am not unsympathetic, which scenario are we talking about?
Two people, both working, no children
Two people, both working, 1 child; or 2, or 10
Two people, only one working, children or no children
One person supporting a multigenerational household
One person supporting a household where there are members with disabilities and special needs
When we say "Walmart needs to offer a living wage," to which I am not unsympathetic, which scenario are we talking about?
3
Exactly. No one who repeats the "living wage for all!" drumbeat ever wants to answer your question, though, Laura. Would we discriminate even more than we already do against the unmarried and childfree by establishing different living wages for different households?
Furthermore, what expenses are reasonably covered by a living wage? New clothes or thrift? Meat or beans? Water or soft drinks? Cigs? Smartphones? Vacations? A bedroom for everyone? Flat-screen TV or no TV at all? A car or a bus pass?
When pressed, the living wage crowd seldom can answer these and many other questions. How about, instead of making employers fit the wage to the desired lifestyle, the worker fit his/her lifestyle choices to the wage he/she is able to command in the marketplace? And focus on improving instead of consuming?
Furthermore, what expenses are reasonably covered by a living wage? New clothes or thrift? Meat or beans? Water or soft drinks? Cigs? Smartphones? Vacations? A bedroom for everyone? Flat-screen TV or no TV at all? A car or a bus pass?
When pressed, the living wage crowd seldom can answer these and many other questions. How about, instead of making employers fit the wage to the desired lifestyle, the worker fit his/her lifestyle choices to the wage he/she is able to command in the marketplace? And focus on improving instead of consuming?
7
The minimum wage in 1970 was about $20/hr in today's dollars. That wouldn't make a family of four wealthy. But they could certainly eat without the taxpayer having to cover the cost. Why don't we start by looking at what used to work for America? Then we wouldn't need programs like "free community college" (because people could pay for it themselves) or "increased food stamps" (because people could buy their own food.) It's really that simple.
3
Rachel, fyi:
From the Department of Labor:
The minimum wage went to $1.00 an hour effective February 1967 for newly covered nonfarm workers, $1.15 in February 1968, $1.30 in February 1969, $1.45 in February 1970, and $1.60 in February 1971. Increases for newly subject farm workers stopped at $1.30.
$1.60 in 1971 has the purchasing power of $9.23 today, according to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics.
When you factor in technology gains, population growth and globalization, it seems min wage has held its own pretty well over the years. It's just the people's expectation of an average standard of living has amped up quite a bit since then.
From the Department of Labor:
The minimum wage went to $1.00 an hour effective February 1967 for newly covered nonfarm workers, $1.15 in February 1968, $1.30 in February 1969, $1.45 in February 1970, and $1.60 in February 1971. Increases for newly subject farm workers stopped at $1.30.
$1.60 in 1971 has the purchasing power of $9.23 today, according to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics.
When you factor in technology gains, population growth and globalization, it seems min wage has held its own pretty well over the years. It's just the people's expectation of an average standard of living has amped up quite a bit since then.
3
The lesson that Wal Mart has not yet learned is that workers who earn decent wages and have a future ahead of them are also good employees and they are the same people that buy more goods and services. A red flag went up when Wal Mart realized that in the middle of the month to the end of the month it's sales were sagging. Wal Mart also noticed that people on food stamps were buying less and Wal Mart had created a dependency for itself by creating a sales model that built upon the poor rather than upon those who could truly afford to buy more. In other words Wal Mart contributed to unemployment and poverty and then proceeded to drive prices down further by savaging suppliers and vendors and demanding ever lower prices. The result of that was continued outsourcing and even greater unemployment.
It was a shortsighted policy. America now has a vast class of unemployed and under-employed. Wages are stagnant. Jobs are few. And the sales of Wal Mart are falling. Shoppers in search of better customer service and fully stocked shelves are going elsewhere. Poor and unemployed are buying less because they simply don't have the means to shop. No matter how loud Wal Marts touts "Always the low price" the fact remains when you're unemployed or under-employed those people can't afford anything.
Wal Mart is not going to change. It's not truly aware of the plight of it's employees or middle class Americans. The objective of Wal Mart is to create a class of serfs. Dismantle Wal Mart.
It was a shortsighted policy. America now has a vast class of unemployed and under-employed. Wages are stagnant. Jobs are few. And the sales of Wal Mart are falling. Shoppers in search of better customer service and fully stocked shelves are going elsewhere. Poor and unemployed are buying less because they simply don't have the means to shop. No matter how loud Wal Marts touts "Always the low price" the fact remains when you're unemployed or under-employed those people can't afford anything.
Wal Mart is not going to change. It's not truly aware of the plight of it's employees or middle class Americans. The objective of Wal Mart is to create a class of serfs. Dismantle Wal Mart.
5
With a price tag of almost $5,000, even a modest wedding at the All in One Banquet Center in Ohio — her dream wedding venue with a gazebo and pretty white fencing — seems very much out of reach.
I'm pretty sure a license and a minister or whatever probably totals up to about $50.
I'm pretty sure a license and a minister or whatever probably totals up to about $50.
5
Might be a good idea, considering she's in debt and doesn't own a car.
1
Walmart should be held accountable for their dis service to the planet. Substandard working conditions and pay for the countries who now have our manufacturing jobs. Taxpayer funded employee health care and foodstamps. Deplorable scheduling practices for people who are on the front lines. Now they have self service check out because cashiers smiling and thanking you for letting them screw you with no kiss first is a thing of the past.
Do they still buy life insurance policies on employees naming themselves as beneficiary or have they stopped? It's all about the shareholder dividend isn't it? Wall Street and Walmart can't come tumbling down soon enough for the good of us all. Something for nothing never looses its appeal, but the cost of Walmart"s smiley faced bargains is to high. I remember when monopoly was just a game.
Do they still buy life insurance policies on employees naming themselves as beneficiary or have they stopped? It's all about the shareholder dividend isn't it? Wall Street and Walmart can't come tumbling down soon enough for the good of us all. Something for nothing never looses its appeal, but the cost of Walmart"s smiley faced bargains is to high. I remember when monopoly was just a game.
1
And yet, there is no concern for the poor people who shop at walmart and will have to pay that extra billion in wages at the checkout line. Walmart is merely admitting what we're not allowed to say -- inflation is much worse than reported and is hurting their employees.
8
Walmart makes an astronomical level of profit. In one year the major shareholders, the Waltons, make more money than they can spend in their lifetimes. It would not hurt Walmart at all to pay good wages, benefits and provide full time work. They drive the wage rates in the areas that they have stores. They also drive out smaller local businesses.
2
Inflation is about 20%, not the 2% the Fed wants you to believe. Under Clinton, the calculation for inflation changed. But the Fed doesn't want you to know this because then their actions of keeping the prime so low would be against all economic theory, as would the daily printing of money.
1
I'm sorry, John. I am elderly and living on Social Security and savings. But I don't buy the "serving the poor's need" rationale of Walmart, etc. I literally don't buy it. I shop at Costco, don't buy what I can't afford, and don't believe I have to exploit my fellow hard working citizens to the degree Walmart seems to demand to stay in business. I can live just fine, for example, thank you, without Macdonald's French fries.
2
Thank you President Obama
Thank you Democrats
Thank you American liberals
and... thank you ACA!!!
May you reap what you sow.
Thank you Democrats
Thank you American liberals
and... thank you ACA!!!
May you reap what you sow.
4
"Walmart and other retailers, facing stiff competition and shrinking margins . . ."
Shrinking margins? excuse me, but what are we talking about here: "For the fiscal year ended January 31, 2014, Walmart increased net sales by 1.6% to $473.1 billion and returned $12.8 billion to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. Walmart ranked first on the 2014 Fortune 500 list of the world’s largest companies by revenue." (from Walmart's website).
Returning almost 13 BILLION to its shareholders is hardly earthshaking in its shrinkage. Let's get real: Walmart represents the quintessence of capitalism's anything-for-profit formula and the ongoing income inequality in the US and elsewhere. Sure, it's not illegal, but is it healthy for a consumer-driven economy that thrives on a strong middle class? Hardly --- since it almost guarantees that the majority of its associates don't have a prayer of achieving a middle-class existence.
Shrinking margins? excuse me, but what are we talking about here: "For the fiscal year ended January 31, 2014, Walmart increased net sales by 1.6% to $473.1 billion and returned $12.8 billion to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. Walmart ranked first on the 2014 Fortune 500 list of the world’s largest companies by revenue." (from Walmart's website).
Returning almost 13 BILLION to its shareholders is hardly earthshaking in its shrinkage. Let's get real: Walmart represents the quintessence of capitalism's anything-for-profit formula and the ongoing income inequality in the US and elsewhere. Sure, it's not illegal, but is it healthy for a consumer-driven economy that thrives on a strong middle class? Hardly --- since it almost guarantees that the majority of its associates don't have a prayer of achieving a middle-class existence.
5
Moral of this story. Get an education, learn a trade, become a plumber, a carpenter, an auto mechanic, a painter. Do not have kids unless you can support them.
9
Funny that so many Republicans have bought the myth that the less fortunate are just all lazy and shiftless, when here's a perfect example of how the working poor are trying to improve their lives, but the capitalist class refuses to allow them to do so. Want people to "understand the dignity of work" as so many Republicans claim is their goal? Then how about treating the workers with dignity and respect.
5
I have found WalMart repugnant in myriad ways for years - a feeling which was reinforced after having watched The High Cost of Low Price (http://www.bravenewfilms.org/walmartmovie. I'm proud to say I've never stepped foot into a WalMart or supported the Waltons with even one penny.
4
Some years ago, I read Barbara Ehrenreich's book "Nickled and Dimed in America", which told me everything I needed to know about Walmart.
Not only did they use the phony term "Associate" (which might better have been "Wage Slave") to describe their employees, they required them to "cheer" for the company before they went on shift. Can you imagine that? Surely that preposterous custom is gone, but I really don't know, because I've never set foot in a Walmart since I turned the last page of that wonderful book.
Not only did they use the phony term "Associate" (which might better have been "Wage Slave") to describe their employees, they required them to "cheer" for the company before they went on shift. Can you imagine that? Surely that preposterous custom is gone, but I really don't know, because I've never set foot in a Walmart since I turned the last page of that wonderful book.
11
I believe that cheering practice might still go on. A friend of mine once worked for a K Mart located across the street from WalMart. He said that, at the end of the night shift, management would force them to stand in the parking lot and scream, "We're number one!" at the Walmart across the street. I suspect that practice was designed by a corporate shill masquerading as a consultant who realized its an excellent way to instill a sense of dependence through humiliation.
5
That "preposterous custom" is not gone. I know because I have friends that unfortunately have to put food on the table by working at Walmart and they are all required to do it every shift.
4
If you don't cheer does that mean you are forbidden to stop by the food donations area after you punch out?
I'm a pro union guy. Wal Mart is the pits of the workforce. In many states the minimum wage is already demanding more than $9 /hr. I personally say, organize a walk out and everybody quit at once. These Walton ilk need blunt trauma to their psyche before rational and altruistic behavior comes into mind. The tax payers are already footing the bill for many things. I would hope Obama has not forgotten the need to raise the federal minimum wage, he should use it in his ongoing charade with the inept GOP/tea party.
Otoh this guy needs a skill, some technical training. I didn't catch their location, but still. If his record is clean he could get hired as a CDL truck driver, a postman at USPS (Unionized) or many other jobs. Leave Wal-Mart it's for your own good
Otoh this guy needs a skill, some technical training. I didn't catch their location, but still. If his record is clean he could get hired as a CDL truck driver, a postman at USPS (Unionized) or many other jobs. Leave Wal-Mart it's for your own good
3
"In many states the minimum wage is already demanding more than $9 an hour." Have you taken a look at the debt of those states? Do you know the cost of living varies across the country?
"Organize a walk out and everybody quit at once" Being a Walmart employee doesn't take any skill--they have no leverage. It's practically impossible to replace electricians on strike, but replacing a Walmart employee? Are you kidding?
"Organize a walk out and everybody quit at once" Being a Walmart employee doesn't take any skill--they have no leverage. It's practically impossible to replace electricians on strike, but replacing a Walmart employee? Are you kidding?
1
I'm pro union too. But considering "blunt trauma", try not having food to put on the table, or dollars to pay for the roof over your family's head. You and I may be able to survive the impact and choose a way out. For many, the wolf is baying at the door, options are nonexistent in their real world and all they can do is try to work better, faster, never be late, never miss a day - a response unrecognized except to encourage it through exploitation at additional profit to the corporation. Can people please realize how scary poverty is and how hard good people work and are willing to work to care for themselves and their families. These corporations exploit them and their situation. We need unions if for no other reason other thant they may support fellow workers in survival while applying "blunt trama" methods. NYT: I'd be grateful for an article as to what anti-union legalities exist which are preventing the organizing of these employees. I don't see our corporate influenced government doing anything meaningful (minimum what wage?). Times change. The universality of a national minimum wage is of value here. But if the government cannot, will not, act in an appropriate way, then what? More working poor in need of public subsidy and painfully limited lives?
1
If it's so hard and scary, why doom one's child to it? That's what many of us keep asking, to no avail.
2
As much as I detest WalMart for their ability to make certain people think it's almost a patriotic duty to shop there (without an irony whatsoever that it's almost impossible to find American-made good on their shelves), I am slightly perplexed by some of the employee attitudes. If I don't receive enough hours at a job, or if the pay is less than desirable, I try to find different employment. Yes, it might be difficult in some areas as they are the largest employers. But I've been there, quite a few times in my life. I was a cashier at a large retail box store when I was in my twenties, and never once did I think that would be my permanent job. It was an entry into something better. I suppose that's how I see most positions at WalMart: these are not jobs meant to support families or designed for long-term employment. Like the store's products, they're meant to cost as little as possible.
My real issue with WalMart and their employment practices is the vast amount of public dollars that are spent funding social programs for their employees. I believe in a strong safety net, but not one that is funded at our expense so that corporations can pay their employees less.
My real issue with WalMart and their employment practices is the vast amount of public dollars that are spent funding social programs for their employees. I believe in a strong safety net, but not one that is funded at our expense so that corporations can pay their employees less.
6
"My real issue with WalMart and their employment practices is the vast amount of public dollars that are spent funding social programs for their employees"
Fatally flawed argument. Consider if Walmart didn't exist and provide jobs. Then that vast amount of public dollars is increased not decreased. By existing and providing jobs Walmart decreases dependency on government services which is a societal benefit.
Fatally flawed argument. Consider if Walmart didn't exist and provide jobs. Then that vast amount of public dollars is increased not decreased. By existing and providing jobs Walmart decreases dependency on government services which is a societal benefit.
3
The 'safety net' today is a joke. Over 50% of adults receive subsidies from the government. Subsidies that mask the real inflation and unemployment. It is not Walmarts responsibility to pay one more than the going rate, or supply more hours because the worker wants it. Our government is not subsidizing corporations, and it is not enabling corporations to pay less. Our government is giving out money based on an ever growing change in the eligibility definition for the purpose of making all dependant on the government; those not dependent on government are evil and greedy and must be robbed.
1
I've wanted to say a good word for Walmart for a long time, and perhaps this is my chance. Walmart is really no different than most large department stores. They all use part time help for most of their hourly paid work and pay them minimum wages. And Walmart hires many elderly and disabled workers. I, like many lower income people have turned to Walmart for every day supplies and needs. Their prices for paper towels, laundry soap, canned goods and pet supplies are just a lot lower. And, you know what? The workers at the Walmart near me seem quite happy and well fed.
Like many others, I could have purchased Walmart stock for a pittance 25 years ago, but I didn't. Those who did have made money just as the Walmart family did. That, to me, is part of the war against Walmart...it's a family affair. Some old geezer in Arkansas founded a company which made him a billionaire...How can that be? Money is not to be made by the likes of him. And, those who shop at the stores are laughed at or vilified for doing so.
And, so, I've said my bit. Walmart is swamped with customers who just can't afford high profile department stores. I'm glad they are going to pay their help more, but giving everyone full time jobs is just not possible....and there are many who only want a part time job. Yes, they can do better, but they are not the horrid slave-driving organization they are often called.
Like many others, I could have purchased Walmart stock for a pittance 25 years ago, but I didn't. Those who did have made money just as the Walmart family did. That, to me, is part of the war against Walmart...it's a family affair. Some old geezer in Arkansas founded a company which made him a billionaire...How can that be? Money is not to be made by the likes of him. And, those who shop at the stores are laughed at or vilified for doing so.
And, so, I've said my bit. Walmart is swamped with customers who just can't afford high profile department stores. I'm glad they are going to pay their help more, but giving everyone full time jobs is just not possible....and there are many who only want a part time job. Yes, they can do better, but they are not the horrid slave-driving organization they are often called.
14
"The workers at the Walmart near me seem quite happy and well fed."
Really? And, how, exactly, do you assess this?
In any event, Walmart isn't being targeted more than department stores because of the origins of its founder. It's being targeted because of its sheer size and market share.
Really? And, how, exactly, do you assess this?
In any event, Walmart isn't being targeted more than department stores because of the origins of its founder. It's being targeted because of its sheer size and market share.
4
Re: "The workers at the Walmart near me seem quite happy and well fed."
When I read how the workers seemed "well fed" my mind immediately imagined a heavy person. Often times those who look so well fed are poorly fed, existing on inexpensive processed and/or high carb cheap food.
When I read how the workers seemed "well fed" my mind immediately imagined a heavy person. Often times those who look so well fed are poorly fed, existing on inexpensive processed and/or high carb cheap food.
2
I rarely shop at Walmart for several reasons-the biggest reason is that I see no need to make the Walton family richer by giving them my money. However, the few times I have been in a Walmart, I am always amazed at the lack of people working in the stores. The lines are long and you are in real trouble if you need an actual human to help you. Their practices of scheduling people for "peak demand" is demeaning and bad business. I do a lot of my shopping online, because its simpler and in many instances easier to get help on a shopping website than it is in a bricks and mortar store.
Years ago, I worked part-time at Macy's. I had a set schedule, and gasp-even benefits. We actually sold things people wanted to buy, and salespeople were expected to actually help people. A few years back I was chatting with a saleswoman at Macy's. She told me she had no set schedule, never knew how many hours she would work per week, and could be told to go home if the store wasn't busy. Shopping in the Macy's today is not an enjoyable experience. Guess Macy's had to buy for all those department store acquisitions somehow.
Years ago, I worked part-time at Macy's. I had a set schedule, and gasp-even benefits. We actually sold things people wanted to buy, and salespeople were expected to actually help people. A few years back I was chatting with a saleswoman at Macy's. She told me she had no set schedule, never knew how many hours she would work per week, and could be told to go home if the store wasn't busy. Shopping in the Macy's today is not an enjoyable experience. Guess Macy's had to buy for all those department store acquisitions somehow.
21
It appears that "progressives" are disconnected from economic reality. The goal of a business like Walmart or any business is not to provide jobs, that is just one societal benefit of capitalism. The primary goal is to efficiently provide the service or product the business offers.
If these workers want more hours how about finding a second job, it appears they have the time?
If these workers want more hours how about finding a second job, it appears they have the time?
3
How do you find a second job when you don't know what your hours are going to be in the first one?
4
A second job is not a possibility due to the constantly changing shift hours that Walmart demands of its employees. If you're not available to take a computer scheduled shift, you lose your job, indentured servitude may be a better term.
13
You're actually incorrect as well. The primary purpose is not to efficiently provide a service or product that the business offers, the primary purpose is to generate profits for the owners. Providing goods or a service is a means to an end, the end (and true purpose) being profit for ownership.
3
Shame on Walmart for treating workers like subhumans. Such pointless greed. Do they also try to stop workers from forming and joining unions?
7
Unfortunately, Walmart has proven itself to be such an untrustworthy employer that I instinctively suspect the increase in pay they are giving their workers next year (and why aren't they giving it right now?) will be offset by something they take away from their employees, like hours or benefits.
6
U.S. taxpayers (Walmart shoppers, if you like) provide about $6.2b in public assistance to Walmart employees who don’t earn enough working there. This allows Walmart to price their products in compelling ways, driving more customers in the doors. It’s the world’s largest income redistribution program. The price of the toilet paper you buy at Walmart is taxpayer subsidized. What a country.
6
"U.S. taxpayers (Walmart shoppers, if you like) provide about $6.2b in public assistance to Walmart employees who don’t earn enough working there."
And taxpayers would pay even more if those Walmart employees lost their jobs and got even more public assistance.
And taxpayers would pay even more if those Walmart employees lost their jobs and got even more public assistance.
3
The working conditions described in this article are a direct result of avariciousness. Walmart withholds livable wages, benefits, and working conditions, so it can make ever more money for its stockholders.
And many of Walmart’s customers are engaging in the same avaricious behavior. I'm not referring to those customers who are so poor that they have to shop at Walmart to make ends meet. I'm talking about Walmart’s customers who have millions of dollars in personal net worth. They shop at Walmart, with its always-the-lowest-cost pricing strategy, in order to retain or hoard as much of their money as possible (more avarice), without regard or concern for the impact of their behavior on the lives of others.
In my dictionary, avarice is a vice, not a virtue. Just ask the Walmart employees.
And many of Walmart’s customers are engaging in the same avaricious behavior. I'm not referring to those customers who are so poor that they have to shop at Walmart to make ends meet. I'm talking about Walmart’s customers who have millions of dollars in personal net worth. They shop at Walmart, with its always-the-lowest-cost pricing strategy, in order to retain or hoard as much of their money as possible (more avarice), without regard or concern for the impact of their behavior on the lives of others.
In my dictionary, avarice is a vice, not a virtue. Just ask the Walmart employees.
2
Why anybody would spend a penny at Walmart is beyond me.
7
Mr. Rodriguez should look to O, for it was O care that provides a disincentive to let anyone go beyond 29 hours. Nothing is provided about Mr. R's immigration status, or that of his fiancee. Are they not on food stamps and other government assistance? Are they getting their health care free under Medicaid? If you cannot support a child you have no business having children, it is called personal responsibility. Some may think it is a 'corporate responsibility' to cover someone who has made poor personal decisions. With every intervention of government into the workplace economic opportunity will be diminished. The laws of economics govern, at least in a capitalistic system, and lat least for now.
6
Wrong
Walmart only has to offer health insurance to its low wage workers. It does NOT have to pay the full cost.
It can set the premiums at over $1300 a year for an INDIVUAL plan (30 hours a week x $9 x 9.49%) ANd can charge the full cost for adding kids (like $7200 or more)
The take up rate by low wage employees for such a costly plan is around 2-5%.
And most low wage workers with a household of more than 2, end up on Medicaid still.
Walmart only has to offer health insurance to its low wage workers. It does NOT have to pay the full cost.
It can set the premiums at over $1300 a year for an INDIVUAL plan (30 hours a week x $9 x 9.49%) ANd can charge the full cost for adding kids (like $7200 or more)
The take up rate by low wage employees for such a costly plan is around 2-5%.
And most low wage workers with a household of more than 2, end up on Medicaid still.
2
Poor people don't lack moral fiber. If I lost my job tomorrow - and had no money in the bank - I would still be me. Money is a tangible good - having more or less of it - doesn't necessarily make someone morally corrupt. The lack of compassion in some of these comments is quite disheartening.
4
I work in retail, and the company I work for would like it's employees to be available for 100+ hours a week, and then throw them 10-15 hours, differing every single week. While I realize there is a need to staff differently based on time of month and time of year, it would not be too difficult for the employer to stabilize the hours so while there may be a variation week to week, there could be some sameness, that would allow a person to either have a life outside of work, or to obtain a second income.
5
About 10 years ago a neighbor in my area, teller at the local credit union, and her husband both were fairly low-wage, uneducated and not the brightest bulbs. And they knew it. They were clean, decent, friendly and hardworking people who wanted a family -- but they deliberately waited till mid-30s to produce children; they saved for more than 10 years of marriage before that so they could embark on parenthood debt-free and with a nice cushion. The husband in particular was a low-wage warehouse worker and that was about his intellectual limit.
When the kids were born, she went back to work after six weeks and he requested an afternoon shift. She got home at 5:30 from the credit union and he had to be at work, 15 minutes away, by 6 p.m. They didn't see much of one another during the week for a couple of years but enjoyed their weekends, didn't incur daycare costs, the father had a great bond with his two little boys and as their work history grew their prosperity inched up. I ran into her recently in town; all are well and she is now a training supervisor for her whole credit union system, and her husband is still employed, back on the day shift. If one or the other had dropped out of the workforce due to "daycare costs" they'd not have been upwardly mobile. I've always been impressed by their determination.
You do what you gotta do -- or you do what you "want" to do when you're too young and too broke, and then stand around expecting people to feel sorry for you.
When the kids were born, she went back to work after six weeks and he requested an afternoon shift. She got home at 5:30 from the credit union and he had to be at work, 15 minutes away, by 6 p.m. They didn't see much of one another during the week for a couple of years but enjoyed their weekends, didn't incur daycare costs, the father had a great bond with his two little boys and as their work history grew their prosperity inched up. I ran into her recently in town; all are well and she is now a training supervisor for her whole credit union system, and her husband is still employed, back on the day shift. If one or the other had dropped out of the workforce due to "daycare costs" they'd not have been upwardly mobile. I've always been impressed by their determination.
You do what you gotta do -- or you do what you "want" to do when you're too young and too broke, and then stand around expecting people to feel sorry for you.
26
One of the main points in this article is that such choices are not possible now at many work places. You cannot request a shift tailored to your family needs. You must take the number of hours and the scheduling times that your employer demands of you, however erratic and unpredictable. It's not that today's workers are unwilling to organize their work lives as you describe. The option is denied them. Makes quite a difference, dosn't it?
4
Exactly! Why should poorer people who are not as business savvy as some of us get a life as good as yours or mine? I got to spend evenings with my husband. I did not have to choose between quality of marriage and motherhood. But, why should everyone expect that, or even hope for that? My parents sent me to the best college they could afford and that I was smart enough to handle. If some people do not get these lucky breaks, too bad. They can always use the ole bootstrap method, right? The Walton family deserves to stand, with immense wealth in hand, on the backs of anyone stupid enough to be born less fortunate than you or I.
2
I guess pride, dignity, work ethic, personal responsibility, not taking handouts and other values were more important to my friends than sitting around together watching TV at night, Robin. Some of us still prize self-respect. And are mature enough to realize that few of us can make costly choices without sacrifice or trade-off in other areas.
And it was only for a few years till the kids were in school, from what I was told. This couple is proud of what they have accomplished by dint of planning, working hard, saving, being careful not to have kids before they could afford them and being resourceful in terms of how they managed their lives. Their life is as good as yours or mine and they're not complaining about what they had to do to get there.
As to "just can't go in and ask for a shift" -- well, many workers still can. If you can't, don't get yourself into a situation -- like parenthood -- where doing so is a necessity. Pretty simple.
And it was only for a few years till the kids were in school, from what I was told. This couple is proud of what they have accomplished by dint of planning, working hard, saving, being careful not to have kids before they could afford them and being resourceful in terms of how they managed their lives. Their life is as good as yours or mine and they're not complaining about what they had to do to get there.
As to "just can't go in and ask for a shift" -- well, many workers still can. If you can't, don't get yourself into a situation -- like parenthood -- where doing so is a necessity. Pretty simple.
3
This is pure socialism at work. I need more, so you must provide it for me. Take the Walmart heirs money to pay for food stamps for their workers one comment suggests.
Walmart is a business, not a charitable institution. They are managing to revenue and sales goals, which their shareholders demand.
Since when is working at Walmart a career path? These are the types of jobs that should be done by high school and college kids who need a few dollars.
Let's be realistic, these people are stocking shelves and ringing up purchases, this is not rocket science or curing cancer. Even the few extra dollars from the wage increases are not going to make much of a difference. What these people need is education! Sadly, for most of them it is probably too late, but you should hold this example up to your children as to why they need to do well in school and take it seriously or they will end up working at Walmart.
Walmart is a business, not a charitable institution. They are managing to revenue and sales goals, which their shareholders demand.
Since when is working at Walmart a career path? These are the types of jobs that should be done by high school and college kids who need a few dollars.
Let's be realistic, these people are stocking shelves and ringing up purchases, this is not rocket science or curing cancer. Even the few extra dollars from the wage increases are not going to make much of a difference. What these people need is education! Sadly, for most of them it is probably too late, but you should hold this example up to your children as to why they need to do well in school and take it seriously or they will end up working at Walmart.
4
Actually it WAS a career path for my step-niece's husband. He started at Walmart in his late teens. In their rural Florida community, it is really the only large employer.
He started off as a shelf stocker, but was promoted several times. Today he's in his early 30s and he is the grocery manager at the Walmart SuperCenter in town -- BTW folks, that's a $42,000 year job with health insurance and a retirement plan.
Now, this isn't the typical part time clerk job -- but that's how he started out. Promotions are common at Walmart for the really good workers. Not all their jobs are "part time cashier". They have managers and department specialists, truck drivers and so forth.
He started off as a shelf stocker, but was promoted several times. Today he's in his early 30s and he is the grocery manager at the Walmart SuperCenter in town -- BTW folks, that's a $42,000 year job with health insurance and a retirement plan.
Now, this isn't the typical part time clerk job -- but that's how he started out. Promotions are common at Walmart for the really good workers. Not all their jobs are "part time cashier". They have managers and department specialists, truck drivers and so forth.
1
What a noble enterprise that actively arranges for it's workers to live in penury.
Scatter Wallmart to the winds; tax it's sleazy Republican owners 90% of the profits they make off the backs of their workers; fund small business and mom and pop local business.
Scatter Wallmart to the winds; tax it's sleazy Republican owners 90% of the profits they make off the backs of their workers; fund small business and mom and pop local business.
4
The six Waltons on Forbes’ list of world billionaires have a net worth of $148.8 billion. Allowing the Minimum wage to $10 an hour will cost $1 Billion a year.
3
You do realize that Walmart is a CORPORATION with a CEO and stockholders and a Board of Directors (hello Hillary Clinton!)?
They are not a family run company -- not for decades. The Walton's inherited their father's billions. They do not pay employee salaries directly out of their own personal money. I doubt any company is run that way, even a small mom and pop business.
They are not a family run company -- not for decades. The Walton's inherited their father's billions. They do not pay employee salaries directly out of their own personal money. I doubt any company is run that way, even a small mom and pop business.
2
The American consumer, with her/his incessant demand of more for less remains at the heart of Walmart's bad behavior. When Walmart first moved into our neighborhood, we abandoned the mom and pop stores that had been with us for generations in favor of lower priced items from China. None of us cared much that those jobs went away, unless they were people we knew or members of our family. All we are seeing now is our antisocial choices come home to roost in our own homes and families as globalization takes ever firmer hold on our culture and way of life. Don't blame Walmart for doing what we encouraged them to do with our own choices. Legislation won't work either because we really are a representative democratic republic. As long as the majority of us don't care about the consequences of our choices on the neighbors we don't know the cancer of our consumption will continue to metastasize until it hits home in our own lives and by then it will be too late.
5
Wal-Mart has no obligation to provide jobs with any particular work hour requirement. If it wanted to offer only 10 hours per week for all of its positions or 60 hours per week, that's its choice. In fact, Wal-Mart has no obligation to offer jobs at all.
Employees can choose whether or not they like the hours offered by Wal-Mart. If they do, then they can make the decision to work for Wal-Mart. If they don't, they can make the decision to look for work elsewhere.
If you're looking for socialism, you're in the wrong country.
Employees can choose whether or not they like the hours offered by Wal-Mart. If they do, then they can make the decision to work for Wal-Mart. If they don't, they can make the decision to look for work elsewhere.
If you're looking for socialism, you're in the wrong country.
5
A good friend's grandson was hired by Sam's Club. He is in his late 20's, single, living with his parents, and had been unemployed for over a year. Initially he was excited at the opportunity to get back on his feet and be on his own. He's only been there a few months and has been transferred to his third store-- now over an hour's drive from home each way. He does not have a regular schedule and has never been allowed to work a 40 hour week. He receives praise from his managers, has never missed an hour of work but his attitude is changing and his morale is sinking. This is the new normal for millions of people.
56
But Obama has changed full time from 40 hours per week to 30 so maybe your friends grandson actually does work a full workweek.
Many Walmart workers need food stamps and government housing assistance. In other words, the taxpayers are funding the Walton family. It's time we get them off welfare.
15
"And while many people prefer to work part time — for instance, college students eager for extra spending money —"
Really? "extra spending money"? College students who work part time are not doing so for "extra spending money." They are working in order to afford college. And consistent schedules would enable them attend the classes they need and pay for.
Really? "extra spending money"? College students who work part time are not doing so for "extra spending money." They are working in order to afford college. And consistent schedules would enable them attend the classes they need and pay for.
15
This is fascinating. In the 2st century (!), American workers - citizens of the most powerful country in the world -- fighting to get more working hours to make ends meet.
What is next? Walmart workers begging management to overnight living quarters to stay close to their jobs? has the American Dream turned into the American Nightmare?
What is next? Walmart workers begging management to overnight living quarters to stay close to their jobs? has the American Dream turned into the American Nightmare?
7
I think Americans are learning what it's like for their standard of living to find equilibrium, in a no-turning-back global economy, with what most of the rest of the planet experiences -- survival and not much more.
But let's not address population growth, just damn the torpedoes and full steam ahead to 10 billion.
But let's not address population growth, just damn the torpedoes and full steam ahead to 10 billion.
3
Full time workers will build our economy. Walmart should employ its' workers 40 hours a week. Even at minimum wage it would be a living wage. The crime is not really hourly pay--although it is pitiful. The crime is not giving enough hours to make a living. Everyone's expenses are the same whether part time or full time.
2
Given the liberal mantra that the United States is not exceptional and merely just like other countries, I wonder if Mr. Rodriguez went to Mexico to find work. I wonder if his living conditions and wage would be better or worse?
Just thinking.
Just thinking.
4
Walmart continues to abuse its workers to avoid paying them a decent wage with enough hours to support themselves, let alone any dependents they may have. They also scheme to avoid benefits by using as much part-time emplyment as they can. Until this changes, they will never see a penny of my money. They exhibit the greed and selfishness of a disgusting class that lacks any compassion for those they employ. This is akin to modern-day slavery. Walmart workers need to look for work elsewhere until this repulsive corporation has to beg to staff its stores, and has to pay MORE than other employers.
9
What am I missing? If the Walmart job sucks, why don't you go next door and work for someone else who'll pay more of offer more hours? If everyone else is offering the same pay, then it's not Walmart's fault.
Since when does having any entry level job mean that you should be able to afford raising a family on the pay they offer?
“A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both.”
― Milton Friedman
Since when does having any entry level job mean that you should be able to afford raising a family on the pay they offer?
“A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both.”
― Milton Friedman
7
What job next door? Oh, you mean the store Walmart put out of business because they had the decency to pay their employees a living wage? It's Walmart who has gotten fat off the public dole. Not its employees.
5
Milton Friedman was wrong. Just look at the growing inequality in this country. Shockingly, there is now more social mobility in the EU than in the US. This was unthinkable only a generation ago.
What we need is a better balance between the goals of freedom and equality. If Walmart pays so poorly that the government has to step in to supports its workers, then Walmart must forfeit some of its freedom to hoard money.
What we need is a better balance between the goals of freedom and equality. If Walmart pays so poorly that the government has to step in to supports its workers, then Walmart must forfeit some of its freedom to hoard money.
1
People have the right to work and earn a living wage. That means a wage that can support themselves and their families. This will not be "given" to working people, they must organize and fight for it. The labor unions that are now under attack at every level have the power to take the lead in this struggle by organizing the unemployed and marginally employed, then carry out an independent labor struggle in defense of workers' rights to a decent life. This struggle can't be "in partnership" with either the Democratic or Republican parties or any other ruling party. It must be on our own terms and under our own democratically elected leadership.
6
So you mean a person should make enough money as an entry level employee to support one child? Two kids, maybe 3 , 4, or. 5? Should a single person with no children, who lives with their parents be paid the same as a person with 6 dependents? Please explain.
I challenge anyone to try to make ends meet at $10 an hour even with a regular full-time schedule. Wal Mart will not go broke paying a living wage, the Waltons just might be a little less rich
9
If workers don't like the flexible hours that Walmart needs to run its business, then I suggest they look elsewhere for employment. Walmart doesn't owe its workers a penny more than they are willing to work for. And the amount they are willing to work for is based on their other options (i.e. the market for labor). Enough with this entitled nonsense already. You are not owed anything by anybody.
19
They are not feeling entitled. They are feeling trapped. These are hard working people who are prepared and willing to work more than one job and work extra hours. They are in a catch 22 situation. Working a second job might jeopardize the first job because they do not know when they will be called.
NOWHERE in this article it says that these hardworking people and UNWILLING to work.
Entitlement is when these huge profit making corporations believe they are entitled to corporate welfare via reduced taxes.
NOWHERE in this article it says that these hardworking people and UNWILLING to work.
Entitlement is when these huge profit making corporations believe they are entitled to corporate welfare via reduced taxes.
6
And here we see before us the attitude that is destroying our once-great nation: the wealthy may do what they wish, and they don't owe their fellow citizens or their country anything, and if the rest of us don't like it we can lump it. The greediest bully in the sandbox can do whatever he wants. Disgusting.
6
Oh, drop the Fox news entitlement nonsense. It's not like there's a wealth of employers out there in other parts of the states and that has everything to do with Walmart swooping in, buying huge tracts of land, offering goods that are artificially cheap, undermining other competitors, and sustaining all that by paying their staff next to nothing and constantly manipulating their schedules (I believe 'flexible' was your euphemism for that). And you know what? If states end picking up the tab by this brand of irresponsible employment, and have to offer food stamps and additional support to help provide basic needs to people who have little option but to work at Walmart, then, yes, the company does owe something and that has nothing to do with entitlement, and everything to do with just being human.
3
I find it Ironic that President Bill Clinton, a former Arkansas native, put forth free trade that exported our wealth while another Arkansas native, Walmart, grew exponentially as a result of Chinese manufacturing.
The most logical thing for Walmart to do at this point is to go 24-7. I have often wanted to go shopping late night instead of watching TV or other endeavors. Walmart might make more money and the employees could have more hours, a win-win.
The most logical thing for Walmart to do at this point is to go 24-7. I have often wanted to go shopping late night instead of watching TV or other endeavors. Walmart might make more money and the employees could have more hours, a win-win.
2
There are 24 hour Walmarts.
3
The schools in Bentonville - Walmart's home office town - do not have 2 hour delays for inclement weather. If roads are bad, you get limited bus route and all others need to drive their kids in (traffic gridlock is common). Perhaps that is to ensure that the thousands of Walmart head office employees in town do not get in to work 2 hours late?! Plus, they have Saturday morning meetings and get to work most holidays. Salaried employees seem to get the other end of the stick. Maybe Mr. Rodriguez should apply for a HO job!
2
The Wal-Mart business model doesn't just affect the Wal-Mart workers, it affects our economy in general. The buy it cheap from China philosophy to maximize profits is the real problem. They can blame Obama Care for the reason in limiting their workers hours, but the real reason is maximizing profits.
The American public needs to understand that they are buying cheaper Wal-Mart products at the expense of this country’s current and future economy as many more companies are following the Wal-Mart business when they see the profits that Wal-Mart is making. It’s also a proof that Supply Side Economics does not work as the profits are not trickling down to the workers.
The American public needs to understand that they are buying cheaper Wal-Mart products at the expense of this country’s current and future economy as many more companies are following the Wal-Mart business when they see the profits that Wal-Mart is making. It’s also a proof that Supply Side Economics does not work as the profits are not trickling down to the workers.
6
Yes, because before the ACA, Walmart was giving them all full-time hours. Walmart has been operating this way for years; the ACA had nothing to do with it.
2
Entry level jobs are just that - entry level. Expecting to make a living wage at an entry level is misguided at best. Best advice I ever heard was finish high school and don't have children out of wedlock.
6
Henry Ford (no patron saint of the workers) at least felt his workers should be able to afford the products they made. Wal Mart's policy seems to be to pay employees so little that they have no choice but to shop at Wal Mart. I have not shopped at Wal Mart for 15 years because of their attitude and actions toward employees, such as scheduling workers just under 30 hours per week. They have done this for years in order to avoid offering many employees health care or any other benefits. That we subsidize the wealth of the Walton's is absurd. Shop locally whenever possible folks.
9
This is why I never have, and never will, shop at Walmart. It is a bit more expensive to visit the local drug store, but I will pay a few cents more for shampoo and support a local small business rather than go to Walmart. Food drives for employees? Good lord. FOOD!
50
If you have the time,shop around a little. I have found, for example,that the lowest priced prescription drugs are to be had at a local pharmacy that has been in business for about 65 years. The locals are much more affordable than most people want to believe.
I'm surprised they aren't targeting an even bigger issue: Stable scheduling.
In a lot of low-wage service jobs, especially retail, it is common for employees to not know when they will be required to be at work until at most the week before, and for that schedule to change significantly from week-to-week. The effect of this is that it is near-impossible for those employees to do plan to do anything else when they aren't working. If they try to get a second job (like many are suggesting), they will lose one of their two jobs sooner or later because of a schedule conflict between the two bosses. They can't plan to take care of relatives or friends, go to a parent-teacher conference, or get involved in a church or other organization, because they can't credibly promise to ever be anywhere other than work at any particular time.
It's interesting to me how many are blaming workers for not working more, when they are working as hard as they can as long as they can.
In a lot of low-wage service jobs, especially retail, it is common for employees to not know when they will be required to be at work until at most the week before, and for that schedule to change significantly from week-to-week. The effect of this is that it is near-impossible for those employees to do plan to do anything else when they aren't working. If they try to get a second job (like many are suggesting), they will lose one of their two jobs sooner or later because of a schedule conflict between the two bosses. They can't plan to take care of relatives or friends, go to a parent-teacher conference, or get involved in a church or other organization, because they can't credibly promise to ever be anywhere other than work at any particular time.
It's interesting to me how many are blaming workers for not working more, when they are working as hard as they can as long as they can.
35
Nobody can live on a minimum wage job, much less raise a family.
The problems is that, thanks to globalization and our coalition of the bribed in Congress, it's Wal-Mart style minimum wage type jobs that are being created across America - not jobs pay a living wage.
We can change this tendency relatively easily and quickly, but not without first compelling Congressmen and Senators to bite the hand that feeds them.
Cheap products produced by serf labor in China and other emerging market nations is of little help when American jobs pay so little that ordinary workers are having trouble keeping up with their rents, mortgages, and health insurance premiums.
The problems is that, thanks to globalization and our coalition of the bribed in Congress, it's Wal-Mart style minimum wage type jobs that are being created across America - not jobs pay a living wage.
We can change this tendency relatively easily and quickly, but not without first compelling Congressmen and Senators to bite the hand that feeds them.
Cheap products produced by serf labor in China and other emerging market nations is of little help when American jobs pay so little that ordinary workers are having trouble keeping up with their rents, mortgages, and health insurance premiums.
7
and don't forget the Republicans will do their very best to crush unions.
3
Could Walmart survive paying EVERY employee a living wage with full benefits, including maternity leave? If not, it should be closed down. If so, it is a crime that so many hundreds of billions have been made off the backs of the poor.
Boycott Walmart and shop Costco if you need a big box store.
Boycott Walmart and shop Costco if you need a big box store.
17
Yes, they could do that and the owners would still have more money than they could live long enough to spend.
3
Not a fan of Walmart and do not shop there, but are they any worse than other big box stores or fast food chains? When's the last time you read an expose on Target?
24
May be true...but Walmart is the biggest and the meanest, and what they do ripples through the rest of the companies. Just like Mickey D's is targeted in fast food, even though the food and working conditions at Burger King, Wendy's, and (ugh) White Castle are just as bad--if not worse.
2
I bring this up often. I don't care for Walmart, even though one is a mile from my house. But it's because I think it is a dirty, disorganized store with no bargains or good sales, and the cash register lines are long. It's not a political statement.
A lot of lefty liberals prefer Target, because they sell trendier more upscale merchandise -- but their business model is nearly identical to Walmart. They pay the same low wages and part time hours. Only they have such attractive merchandise! so lefties give them a pass. Nobody ever suggests boycotting Target or unionizing their workers.
That makes it clear this is NOT about wages or fairness or even unions. It's about CLASS DISTINCTIONS. Walmart is tacky. Walmart is "southern" (headquartered in Arkansas). Walmart is red state and redneck. Unattractive low class people shop there, and the merchandise is unstylish and drab. There are whole websites about "Walmartians" -- homely, poor and mostly obese shoppers secretly photographed at Walmart to look as ridiculous as possible. There are no sights about ugly Target shoppers.
A lot of lefty liberals prefer Target, because they sell trendier more upscale merchandise -- but their business model is nearly identical to Walmart. They pay the same low wages and part time hours. Only they have such attractive merchandise! so lefties give them a pass. Nobody ever suggests boycotting Target or unionizing their workers.
That makes it clear this is NOT about wages or fairness or even unions. It's about CLASS DISTINCTIONS. Walmart is tacky. Walmart is "southern" (headquartered in Arkansas). Walmart is red state and redneck. Unattractive low class people shop there, and the merchandise is unstylish and drab. There are whole websites about "Walmartians" -- homely, poor and mostly obese shoppers secretly photographed at Walmart to look as ridiculous as possible. There are no sights about ugly Target shoppers.
5
Yes, leftists are such elitists, unlike the Republicans... Good down home people like Daddy Bush come to mind, pretending that he likes pork rinds and buys his own socks at the store...and G.W. Bush with his "have a beer with him" personna (even though he is an alcoholic).... What a joke some of you folks are.
1
A living wage - higher minimum wage x more hours. With more disposable income the better-paid will also put more money into circulation by shopping for more necessities (at Walmart).
5
That would be great for workers, BUT what's in it for Walmart? do you think the largest most profitable company in the world has not worked the numbers on how much more business they would get if they paid their own workers more?
What you and others seem to think is that Walmart (or the heirs of Sam Walton) will suddenly "feel sorry" for workers and just give them lux benefits and pay -- sorta like public union employees. But that seems highly unlikely.
If Walmart workers WANT better pay and conditions, they will need to organize and bargain collectively, including strikes. That takes WILLPOWER. That takes PATIENCE and willingness to stick it out. It takes ORGANIZATION and DETERMINATION.
Nothing prevents them from doing this, except their own unwillingness to tackle the job.
What you and others seem to think is that Walmart (or the heirs of Sam Walton) will suddenly "feel sorry" for workers and just give them lux benefits and pay -- sorta like public union employees. But that seems highly unlikely.
If Walmart workers WANT better pay and conditions, they will need to organize and bargain collectively, including strikes. That takes WILLPOWER. That takes PATIENCE and willingness to stick it out. It takes ORGANIZATION and DETERMINATION.
Nothing prevents them from doing this, except their own unwillingness to tackle the job.
2
On a typical situation they have 20 checkout stations and only 5 are open with long lines waiting. I think their computer has figured out how long a customer is willing to wait to checkout before walking out. If one has driven to the store and spent 1/2 hour shopping one is willing to wait in line 10 minutes.
8
I do not shop at Walmart usually -- because of just this. They never have enough cashiers or open lanes. If it was only 10 minutes in line, I wouldn't mind. It's more like 30 minutes! They clearly wish to push customers to "self-checkout" but that's a misery too.
I am sure they have bean counters who have figured this out to a nanosecond and know exactly what they are doing. But I don't have to play along, and so I do not shop there.
I am sure they have bean counters who have figured this out to a nanosecond and know exactly what they are doing. But I don't have to play along, and so I do not shop there.
2
I'd love to know what is Mr. Rodriguez's level of education. I sincerely doubt he has much more beyond a high school education. He has no training and no education yet he expects his employers to "help him". Why is he getting married (and already with a kid) if he can't even afford diapers?
17
The kid might well have been unexpected. Under those circumstances, would you rather he did the responsible thing - get a job, marry the mother, take care of the child to the best of his ability - or would you rather he abandon his girlfriend and child and become a deadbeat dad?
Also, are you saying that those without a college education don't deserve to live a decent life? That doesn't seem fair to all those who don't go to college, many of whom can't afford it.
Also, are you saying that those without a college education don't deserve to live a decent life? That doesn't seem fair to all those who don't go to college, many of whom can't afford it.
5
Yes, an employer is supposed to "help" the people who keep their business running by paying them a living wage.
Perhaps you need to take the express elevator down from your ivory tower and consider the reality of this family's situation.
Requesting full-time hours from your employer, whether or not you have dependents, is a very reasonable and normal thing to do! Perhaps their child was unplanned, or Mr. Rodriguez had had a more stable full-time job in the past. Further, going back to school when you're not earning much money already and trying to support a family can be a challenging and difficult choice.
The judgment, lack of awareness, and lack of sympathy in these comments is disheartening.
Requesting full-time hours from your employer, whether or not you have dependents, is a very reasonable and normal thing to do! Perhaps their child was unplanned, or Mr. Rodriguez had had a more stable full-time job in the past. Further, going back to school when you're not earning much money already and trying to support a family can be a challenging and difficult choice.
The judgment, lack of awareness, and lack of sympathy in these comments is disheartening.
1
I wish all the Republicans who wallow in their fantasies about lazy people who enjoy living off public assistance would read this article and think about it very carefully.
But they won't.
But they won't.
16
Maybe you should think about the consequences of voting for Democrats. Did you know Hillary! was on the Board of Walmart?
They are busy collecting their taxpayer-funded paychecks and big checks from the lobbyists.
Do you think that an unmarried woman with a 2 year old child is NOT on TANF, SNAP, WIC and living in a Section 8 apartment?
Peruse the Rosemead, CA newspapers online -- do you see any normal apartments renting for $550 a month? That's almost certainly a Section 8 apartment. She would never get this if she acknowledged she has a working boyfriend.
If she's pulling in $400 a month in SNAP and/or WIC, plus maybe $500 in TANF, Obamaphone plus the EITC every spring (thousands of dollars), she is self-supporting. Her boyfriend only has to earn enough for his cigarettes, beer, Lotto tickets and cellphone. It's a pretty sweet deal if you work it just right.
Why else is this young woman not employed?
Peruse the Rosemead, CA newspapers online -- do you see any normal apartments renting for $550 a month? That's almost certainly a Section 8 apartment. She would never get this if she acknowledged she has a working boyfriend.
If she's pulling in $400 a month in SNAP and/or WIC, plus maybe $500 in TANF, Obamaphone plus the EITC every spring (thousands of dollars), she is self-supporting. Her boyfriend only has to earn enough for his cigarettes, beer, Lotto tickets and cellphone. It's a pretty sweet deal if you work it just right.
Why else is this young woman not employed?
2
Government regulation has helped create the Walmart we know today, subdue and defeat any potential competition. In 2005, Walmart's CEO came out in favor of increasing the minimum wage -- did he all of a sudden develop a heart? Of course not, he's just a shrewd businessman who knows that government regulation can be used as a weapon, imposing higher costs on their competition who can't afford it.
I don't understand how people can't understand that Big Business and Big Government are in bed together. Just keep it up; the more regulation, the more ubiquitous Walmart gets. It's sort of like a Chinese finger trap, the more you think you're fighting against it, the more constricting it gets.
I don't understand how people can't understand that Big Business and Big Government are in bed together. Just keep it up; the more regulation, the more ubiquitous Walmart gets. It's sort of like a Chinese finger trap, the more you think you're fighting against it, the more constricting it gets.
3
I believe at 30 hours of work a week or more you need to be offered health care? Smells like corporate cost containment to me?
9
Poor people shopping at Walmart pay Walmart's costs.
http://kaiserhealthnews.org/morning-breakout/walmart-cuts-benefits/
Walmart offers health care benefits starting at 30 hours of work a week. They used to offer benefits to workers working fewer hours than that, but with the advent of ACA, they have stopped.
Walmart offers health care benefits starting at 30 hours of work a week. They used to offer benefits to workers working fewer hours than that, but with the advent of ACA, they have stopped.
2
The reality of retail workers. Benevolent Walmart raising the min wage to $10-no mention that it is the law in California that that part of the story was about. No mention that the reason the workers are not getting more hours is because Walmart is avoiding providing Healthcare. Shame on you NYT, so sympathetic, so sorry for the workers, but Walmart is doing all they can. ..selective reporting. ..is Walmart getting ready to place an ad?
11
Well said!
On this topic, I think these labor activists are focusing their energy on the wrong thing. While the plight of the individual worker is sympathetic, it should be obvious that a demand for "more hours" is a zero sum game (better scheduling practices may be a reasonable request).
There is clearly something more that is the matter in the economy, when, looking at the household that was profiled, healthy adults are these severely constrained in the employment market. Essentially, the household is operating at 25% of employable capacity and the skill level of the household appears to be around the bottom decile (for example blue collar welders or nursing assistants, prototypical male or female blue collar jobs that require 2 years or less training could bring in >$50k annually at 75% employment capacity, leaving half time for the secondary breadwinner to take care of home and kid).
Focusing on the quickest ways to improve these two big problems would enormously benefit the household, forcing walmart to give some of its hours to take this household to 50% employment capacity and drop the next similarly situated household to zero % won't solve any societal problems.
There is clearly something more that is the matter in the economy, when, looking at the household that was profiled, healthy adults are these severely constrained in the employment market. Essentially, the household is operating at 25% of employable capacity and the skill level of the household appears to be around the bottom decile (for example blue collar welders or nursing assistants, prototypical male or female blue collar jobs that require 2 years or less training could bring in >$50k annually at 75% employment capacity, leaving half time for the secondary breadwinner to take care of home and kid).
Focusing on the quickest ways to improve these two big problems would enormously benefit the household, forcing walmart to give some of its hours to take this household to 50% employment capacity and drop the next similarly situated household to zero % won't solve any societal problems.
3
Why people think its Walmart's fault? It is not walmart's fault that he just being 26 yrs old started working at minimum wage job thinking its going to be enough for entire life and his family. Get a better education and change your job and stop blaming others. I used to be a pizza maker at minimum wage at the same time studying and the moment i finished my degree , I moved forward and got a good job making 5 times more. Its all about priorities and desire to do something more and better with your life.
14
Your profile of the typical Walmart worker is out of date. Many people seeking these jobs are under-employed because their jobs have been shipped overseas. You don't specify what you do, but unless you are doing something that absolutely requires your presence - e.g., medical technician - the chances are pretty good you will be singing a different song in a few years when your job is shipped to China, India, or whichever nation is desperate enough to underbid them.
6
Mr. Rodriguez and his girlfriend appear to be healthy normal people in their mid-20s. Nothing prevented them from using birth control. Nobody told them "have a baby when you have no money!"
Birth control is inexpensive -- condoms are less than 50 cents each (and yes, they sell them at Walmart along with $9 birth control pills).
Marriage is also inexpensive -- maybe $75 for a license. A judge can marry you or a JP. You don't need a Kim Kardashian-size wedding to be married. Why bring a child into the world with a person you are not committed to marrying? Clearly they love each other enough to be together and to have a child together!
Mr. Rodriguez is out of high school for EIGHT years. What did he do in those 8 years besides work part-time at Walmart? GED? community college? vocational training? military? Looks like....nothing. What about his girlfriend? The child is two years old, not two weeks old! Millions of working women have children younger than this in day care, so they can WORK and SUPPORT THEIR FAMILIES...why is she exempt? on her boyfriends PART TIME Walmart job?
Maybe HE should stay home, and she should go out to work full time? What are her job skills? education? training? Did this reporter even ask her this?
Birth control is inexpensive -- condoms are less than 50 cents each (and yes, they sell them at Walmart along with $9 birth control pills).
Marriage is also inexpensive -- maybe $75 for a license. A judge can marry you or a JP. You don't need a Kim Kardashian-size wedding to be married. Why bring a child into the world with a person you are not committed to marrying? Clearly they love each other enough to be together and to have a child together!
Mr. Rodriguez is out of high school for EIGHT years. What did he do in those 8 years besides work part-time at Walmart? GED? community college? vocational training? military? Looks like....nothing. What about his girlfriend? The child is two years old, not two weeks old! Millions of working women have children younger than this in day care, so they can WORK and SUPPORT THEIR FAMILIES...why is she exempt? on her boyfriends PART TIME Walmart job?
Maybe HE should stay home, and she should go out to work full time? What are her job skills? education? training? Did this reporter even ask her this?
11
only if you have the intellectual gifts to make higher education work for you. Lots of people don't fit into your mold.
2
Walmart should be a stepping stone to a better job not a be-all-and-end-all. Anthony Rodriguez should apply at Costco or somewhere else that pays more. Sticking in one spot is giving up and becoming a victim not a victor.
23
Walmart is not stepping stone for many and here's why: the economy is terrible. The other reason is that our educational system from K-12 is failing to equip students with marketable skills or trades. And there's one more reason people are stuck in minimum wage jobs or have no jobs at all: they can't get anything better because no business will hire them (think age discrimination) or the only jobs in the area are minimum wage but these same people have college degrees.
In other words in America you are truly out of luck if you lose your job unless you have some very specialized skill that an employer wants. Even then the employer will, if possible, hire the cheapest person and you may not be that person. I know because I've lived through several bouts of extended unemployment. I applied for minimum wage jobs, jobs in my field, out of my field, where I live and outside of it. Blaming the unemployed or underemployed and underpaid doesn't address the real issue: jobs with decent living wages instead of wages that are at poverty level. If European countries can pay decent wages we can too.
In other words in America you are truly out of luck if you lose your job unless you have some very specialized skill that an employer wants. Even then the employer will, if possible, hire the cheapest person and you may not be that person. I know because I've lived through several bouts of extended unemployment. I applied for minimum wage jobs, jobs in my field, out of my field, where I live and outside of it. Blaming the unemployed or underemployed and underpaid doesn't address the real issue: jobs with decent living wages instead of wages that are at poverty level. If European countries can pay decent wages we can too.
9
Good jobs are scarce commodities. If Walmart added hours to individual work schedules to raise their income levels, the result would be fewer total people employed. Your notion that the whole problem amounts to a lack of personal initiative does nothing more than blame the victim. Initiative is essential but it can only take some people as far as a job at Walmart. The underlying notion that some people aren't of sufficient value to America to rate healthcare or a house or a car is at the very root of the problem. It says that we are only worth as human beings what we are paid. If you want to see the limit condition of your worldview, take a tour of a barrio the next time you are in Tijuana or in India or whatever 3rd world country is most convenient for you, and see what it's like to live in a cardboard box. That's where Republican policies are taking us.
2
Susanna, and if there are a limited number of stepping stones, then what? And if the nearest Costco is two hundred miles away, then what? And are you stating that Walmart victimizes its employees?
1
Maybe its time for every other pension fund in the country (including the New York Times Pension, if applicable) to start divesting from the companies that do not beileve in treating there workers with a reasonable amount of dignity.
8
Hard to blame Walmart for the sorry shape of the US economy. We had a devastating debt bubble that impacted local, state and Federal government balance sheets along with most US families. We have had a slow improvement that is finally starting to tighten up the labor market. Walmart has the same issues as other retailers. Wages and hours will go up when competition demands it.
Walmart pays over 30% in taxes on it's earnings, roughly 7 Billion dollars. After taxes on net income it can invest in new stores, store improvements sending out dividends to shareholders that are also taxed. It has also bought back a ton of stock that helps shareholders many of them middle or lower middle class people with self directed pensions.
Higher wages is a good thing but if the economy isn't improving and pushing sales with it profits and tax receipts, along with dividends that sustain people in retirement will be reduced.
The Government has squandered an awful lot of our tax dollars with unending war and targeted tax rebates to home owners, Churches, Oil companies and others. We need to spend our tax dollars better and have a policy that adds grease to the wheels of our economy instead of constantly adding friction. The wars drums are beating which might be good for Boeing not so good for Walmart or their employees.
Walmart pays over 30% in taxes on it's earnings, roughly 7 Billion dollars. After taxes on net income it can invest in new stores, store improvements sending out dividends to shareholders that are also taxed. It has also bought back a ton of stock that helps shareholders many of them middle or lower middle class people with self directed pensions.
Higher wages is a good thing but if the economy isn't improving and pushing sales with it profits and tax receipts, along with dividends that sustain people in retirement will be reduced.
The Government has squandered an awful lot of our tax dollars with unending war and targeted tax rebates to home owners, Churches, Oil companies and others. We need to spend our tax dollars better and have a policy that adds grease to the wheels of our economy instead of constantly adding friction. The wars drums are beating which might be good for Boeing not so good for Walmart or their employees.
2
No one who works in big business should be surprised. Large corporations that have publicly traded stocks operate under the following priorities: Shareholders are number one, the customer is a distant second (and only gets treated well where it can have a positive impact on the value of the stock - i.e. company growth), and the employees are a far distant third, with those at the bottom getting the worst treatment. Large corporations will do what they can to minimize the number of employees, and employee wages and benefits, as a means to cut costs against revenues in order to raise the value of the stock. Publicly traded corporations' boards operate with the concern that any threat to the stock price is a threat to the existence of the company. If the general public wants to change this dynamic, then the way Wall Street operates needs to be significantly changed. Good luck with that ever happening.
8
One word, that strikes fear in the heart of a Walton: Costco.
Boycott this sleazy family stores until they change their egregious slave-like policies. The Waltons are the worst of our society, and they should be pariahs in our country.
Boycott this sleazy family stores until they change their egregious slave-like policies. The Waltons are the worst of our society, and they should be pariahs in our country.
13
A Costco is opening near me in CT in the fall of 2015 and I can't wait. It's the ONLY store I'll purchase from then on.
2
Costco is a competitor of SAM'S CLUB -- not Walmart. Costco and Sam's Club are membership warehouse clubs, that charge $55 a year and then sell you a highly edited number of items in very large quantities.
They are most suited to large families, business, people who hoard and stockpile -- not average people. They sell toilet paper in 36 roll packs, which is only OK if you can STORE that much toilet paper AND you can afford $24 to buy it in the first place. Most people buy 4-12 rolls at a time, for $5-$8. They don't have $24 cash to buy a jumbo pack bigger than the trunk of their car will hold.
When people say things like this, Victor, it makes it clear to me that they do NOT do the shopping for their own household, because they don't know how utterly different those stores are.
They are most suited to large families, business, people who hoard and stockpile -- not average people. They sell toilet paper in 36 roll packs, which is only OK if you can STORE that much toilet paper AND you can afford $24 to buy it in the first place. Most people buy 4-12 rolls at a time, for $5-$8. They don't have $24 cash to buy a jumbo pack bigger than the trunk of their car will hold.
When people say things like this, Victor, it makes it clear to me that they do NOT do the shopping for their own household, because they don't know how utterly different those stores are.
3
Real help would come in the form of immigration laws that are enforced. Instead, Obama proposes mass amnesty that makes life harder for many people by increasing the competition for jobs. Not nice, Mr. President. Put the working class ahead of the Latino lobby for once.
7
Your solution actually makes the problem worse. Walmart doesn't directly employ undocumented Latinos. It is highly likely that many undocumented migrant farmworkers are exploited in getting you the low cost produce you buy there, and it is certain that child labor laws and environmental protections and worker safety laws are completely thrown out and disregarded in the 3rd world sweat shops that make the clothes you buy there. Keeping undocumented workers undocumented only allows the exploiters free reign to pay them slave wages under the table since none of it is reported, and that undermines everybody else's wages more than free competition for documented jobs.
3
Excellent point that illustrates the inconsistency in "progressive" positions.
This is the most egregious, ignored and under-reported aspect of 'under-employment': The conscious, careful and computer-aided strategy of ensuring workers never work enough hours to qualify for legally or other "full-time" benefits, ranging from health insurance to pensions, from sick days to vacation time. Whatever the magic number -- 35 hours a week or 30 hours a week -- large scale employers assiduously ensure as few workers as possible can be deemed "full-time." The Gap and The Limited have been doing this since the mid-1980s with the help of computer programs that juggle hundreds of associates. You would list your "availability" and the computer assigns the hours -- but never enough to qualify for full-tile employment. Unless you are a manager, in which case you could be expected to work well in excess of 40 hours with no overtime pay because -- wait for it! --"management" doesn't get paid overtime. These stores will argue that they are offering their workers "flexibility." This is a canard. It's an ugly, cynical practice to get around paying workers an honest wage.
26
Exactly. I worked for Gap Inc for 11 years, almost 4 of them as a manager in the stores (BR) and I was responsible for making the schedule. The schedule for the week (which starts on Sunday) would come out Wednesday or Thursday and most part-time employees would get 1-2 on call shifts per week. This meant that they would have to call 2 hours before the start of their shift to find out if they would be working. For the employees who worked in my store, this was a HUGE inconvenience because most relied on public transportation and for some of them it took over an hour to get to work. Some of them had kids and their child care situation wasn't stable. But, I had no choice but to schedule these shifts. Had to make sure we had coverage lined up in case it got busy.
I eventually got disillusioned with how they treat store level employees--which is WAY different than how they treat corporate employees. I was treated much better during my seven years in corporate than the 4 I worked in stores.
I eventually got disillusioned with how they treat store level employees--which is WAY different than how they treat corporate employees. I was treated much better during my seven years in corporate than the 4 I worked in stores.
10
Also, the "flexibility" is for the corporation only. I have a friend who after many years of working in the accounts payable department of a travel agency chain, was "downsized" and after over a year of being unemployed, reduced to working at a retail place at a lavish outlet center (Woodbury Common). This was back in November. I have not seen her since she got the job, because her schedule changes wildly at the whim of the employer. My friend is 60, and her modest retirement nest egg is gone. We're looking at a new version of slavery.
19
But the article clearly says that HALF of Walmart workers ARE full-time. So they may indeed do this, but they don't do it for every worker or every position.
2
If things like food stamps and some other social services weren't so easily available, concerns such as Walmart wouldn't be able to pay so little to their employees. It's a similar situation to the college debt crisis. Increase financial aid and the price of a college education goes up and you're left worsr off than you were! You can't say that some economists haven't warned us about these realities.
8
It's why Walmart sometimes is met with pushback when they ask for tax breaks when they move into a new area. Their argument is that they are bringing jobs, but the jobs are going to leave people still on food stamps and so forth; and so if they get tax breaks, it is as if they are double-dipping.
2
Here's what I know about economics:
In 1968, the minimum wage was about $18.50 an hour in today's dollars (or about 36K/year for a full-time job.) The marginal taxes on the rich were close to 50%. We had a strong middle class and a strong economy. We were a world leader in education.
We spent 30 years cutting the minimum wage and shipping jobs overseas, and we ended up with a billionaire management class, a broke middle class, and billions a year being sent to China instead of to our own economy.
There is one group who likes this system: the billionaires who run companies at a profit and use the money to buy elections.
Saying that the problem is that we help the poor too much has no basis in history or economics. The problem is that the minimum wage is too low and we ship too many jobs overseas -- and we don't punish companies, like Walmart, that shift their workers' costs to the taxpayer.
In 1968, the minimum wage was about $18.50 an hour in today's dollars (or about 36K/year for a full-time job.) The marginal taxes on the rich were close to 50%. We had a strong middle class and a strong economy. We were a world leader in education.
We spent 30 years cutting the minimum wage and shipping jobs overseas, and we ended up with a billionaire management class, a broke middle class, and billions a year being sent to China instead of to our own economy.
There is one group who likes this system: the billionaires who run companies at a profit and use the money to buy elections.
Saying that the problem is that we help the poor too much has no basis in history or economics. The problem is that the minimum wage is too low and we ship too many jobs overseas -- and we don't punish companies, like Walmart, that shift their workers' costs to the taxpayer.
5
Rachel, in 1968 the minimum was wage $1.60 an hour. Per the BLS inflation calendar that is $10.75 in today's dollars, not $18.50.
So Mr. Rodriguez is making within $12 a week (at 18 hours per week) of what his 1968 counterpart was making -- yet we have far more labor available now than we did in 1968 when the global population was about half of what it is today. I'd say that's actually pretty good wage stability given technological advances, population growth and the rise of international trade.
What do you expect when an increasing number of low-skill people are fighting for a decreasing number of jobs?? If you want to start a charity and pay people more, feel free to do so.
So Mr. Rodriguez is making within $12 a week (at 18 hours per week) of what his 1968 counterpart was making -- yet we have far more labor available now than we did in 1968 when the global population was about half of what it is today. I'd say that's actually pretty good wage stability given technological advances, population growth and the rise of international trade.
What do you expect when an increasing number of low-skill people are fighting for a decreasing number of jobs?? If you want to start a charity and pay people more, feel free to do so.
2
If you have ever worked as a supplier for Walmart, you will know that they are incredibly ruthless in their business model - getting the lowest possible cost for products they sell. Even so far as to sometimes expect the suppliers to sell at a loss! Sure it makes for cheaper pricing, (and cheaper quality goods) but it also negatively affects the bottom line, and hence, wages for EVERY company involved in their supply chain. Why would we expect their model to change with regard to their own employee wages and the bottom line?!
13
THIS is why I refuse to shop at Wal-Mart.
To me, the issue isn't how WM treats its own employees. It's the contribution it made to destroying American manufacturing by forcing suppliers to cut prices, which they could do only by reducing quality and dramatically lowering labor costs by shipping most jobs overseas.
To me, the issue isn't how WM treats its own employees. It's the contribution it made to destroying American manufacturing by forcing suppliers to cut prices, which they could do only by reducing quality and dramatically lowering labor costs by shipping most jobs overseas.
1
But don't we really have only ourselves to blame? As long as we consumers keep demanding low prices, we'll get what we want. So the quality of products will continue to generally decline, and a hard day's work won't always make ends meet. Sadly, in the end, we really do get what we're willing to pay for.
6
Yep.
Go to YouTube and look at some early 1970s episodes of "Let's Make a Deal" and plug those erstwhile 'manufacturer's suggested retail prices" into the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator to learn what an American-made recliner chair, home entertainment system, stove, fridge, dishwasher etc. would cost these days.
Are today's consumers willing to pay $6,000 for a refrigerator, $800 for a camera, $5000 for a computer and $3,000 or more for a smartphone? As long as they flock for the $29 DVD player, $400 laptops, $300 dishwashers, those good old factory jobs you could support a family on are never coming back. Well, they never are anyway, but you get what I mean. The greedy consumer drove them offshore; talk about hoist by your own petard.
And too bad we didn't have any high-school economics lessons over the past 40 years about the trade-offs involved in low consumer prices and the increasing consumability of what used to be considered durable goods. I recall my dad coming home with the first Texas Instruments hand-held personal calculator in the 1970s -- at about $100 in 1970s dollars that must've been a gigantic splurge for him, the only one I can remember as our family was frugal. Everyone oohed and ahhed, neighbors were beckoned in to see it. Same with new cars, appliances, cameras -- prized and taken care off because of the vast cost.
Now everything is disposable -- and workers are too, apparently. Supply and demand, baby.
Go to YouTube and look at some early 1970s episodes of "Let's Make a Deal" and plug those erstwhile 'manufacturer's suggested retail prices" into the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator to learn what an American-made recliner chair, home entertainment system, stove, fridge, dishwasher etc. would cost these days.
Are today's consumers willing to pay $6,000 for a refrigerator, $800 for a camera, $5000 for a computer and $3,000 or more for a smartphone? As long as they flock for the $29 DVD player, $400 laptops, $300 dishwashers, those good old factory jobs you could support a family on are never coming back. Well, they never are anyway, but you get what I mean. The greedy consumer drove them offshore; talk about hoist by your own petard.
And too bad we didn't have any high-school economics lessons over the past 40 years about the trade-offs involved in low consumer prices and the increasing consumability of what used to be considered durable goods. I recall my dad coming home with the first Texas Instruments hand-held personal calculator in the 1970s -- at about $100 in 1970s dollars that must've been a gigantic splurge for him, the only one I can remember as our family was frugal. Everyone oohed and ahhed, neighbors were beckoned in to see it. Same with new cars, appliances, cameras -- prized and taken care off because of the vast cost.
Now everything is disposable -- and workers are too, apparently. Supply and demand, baby.
3
Boy, that's true. I remember in 1972, how I desperately longed for a small portable color TV set for my bedroom (I was in high school) and that it cost $400 -- an incredible sum in those days. I had a part time job after school, and it paid $1.25 an hour -- I think there was a lower minimum wage then for young people under age 18. I would have had to have worked 400 hours (20 hours a week, times 20 weeks) to earn enough for that little TV! I think I tried for a few months and got discouraged, and ended up not buying it.
About 20 years later, much more established and middle-aged, I finally bought my 11" portable color TV -- for $59 at a discount chain. DO THE MATH.
About 20 years later, much more established and middle-aged, I finally bought my 11" portable color TV -- for $59 at a discount chain. DO THE MATH.
2
At the end of the day, the total number of hours Wal-Mart (and other companies) offer is not going to change. So giving some workers more hours means that other workers will get fewer -- or no -- hours.
This is the conundrum. Is a part-time job better than no job? While "more hours" might be the solution for some workers, it would cause more problems for those who are let go because they are no longer needed.
At a minimum, however, what these companies need to do is offer workers consistent work schedules, instead of the nonsense of week-to-week/day-to-day schedules changes (although even a schedule with different hours on different days can be dealt with, as long as it's consistent). There's absolutely no reason that this couldn't be done. At least it would allow those who are not getting enough hours at job A to get job B to increase the total number that they are available.
And -- as much as I know others will jump on me for pointing this out -- here's another couple that has essentially guaranteed itself a harder road to getting out of poverty by having a child they can't afford. Yes, I know that even people who can support themselves consistently can run into financial trouble, but, to me, it is irresponsible to have a child you KNOW you can't support at the time he is born.
This is the conundrum. Is a part-time job better than no job? While "more hours" might be the solution for some workers, it would cause more problems for those who are let go because they are no longer needed.
At a minimum, however, what these companies need to do is offer workers consistent work schedules, instead of the nonsense of week-to-week/day-to-day schedules changes (although even a schedule with different hours on different days can be dealt with, as long as it's consistent). There's absolutely no reason that this couldn't be done. At least it would allow those who are not getting enough hours at job A to get job B to increase the total number that they are available.
And -- as much as I know others will jump on me for pointing this out -- here's another couple that has essentially guaranteed itself a harder road to getting out of poverty by having a child they can't afford. Yes, I know that even people who can support themselves consistently can run into financial trouble, but, to me, it is irresponsible to have a child you KNOW you can't support at the time he is born.
8
With due lack of respect towards extremely wealthy mega employers who really could improve working conditions, this is not Walmarts fault. Walmart is doing nothing illegal. It is the citizens of this country through their duly elected representatives who make the laws that Walmart and others are REQUIRED to follow. You will NEVER change the profit motive of a board of directors required to make every penny they can by those they are required to answer to. You mention the real problem only in passing. The GOOD HIGH PAYING full time jobs the USA used to have for these hard working folks were manufacturing jobs. The extra hours used to be time and a half OVERTIME. You will NEVER replace $20 plus benefit factory work with stock clerks or cashiers at Walmart. With due lack of respect, Its not their fault. You want to fix this? Get those factories back here, THE PEOPLE THROUGH THE CONGRESS WRITE THE LAWS!
10
"Get those factories back here,"
Why would any company move factories back to the US where wages are at least five times as high as overseas?
Why would any company move factories back to the US where wages are at least five times as high as overseas?
1
In other words Walmart has no obligation to its employees at all. It doesn't matter that they are the ones who make or break the store. It doesn't matter that their wages and hours are not sufficient to keep them from using government programs. All that matters to Walmart is making money for the shareholders. And this is all that matters to every other corporation: not the employees, not the communities that the corporations "reside" in and whose infrastructure they use, etc. The only other thing that matters more is avoiding taxes.
What are these companies going to do when they've eliminated the middle and working classes ability to buy anything? And what will the politicians, who are so nicely insulated from seeing all of this, do about the downward spiral of our standard of living? Exhorting us to work harder, get more education, save more, or any other of the old adages won't work. I'm waiting to see how the Democrats and the GOP are going to react when most of the United States population is too impoverished to own a house, get a college education, get medical care, or buy anything to keep the consumer economy going. My bet is that they will continue to worship their very rich donors.
What are these companies going to do when they've eliminated the middle and working classes ability to buy anything? And what will the politicians, who are so nicely insulated from seeing all of this, do about the downward spiral of our standard of living? Exhorting us to work harder, get more education, save more, or any other of the old adages won't work. I'm waiting to see how the Democrats and the GOP are going to react when most of the United States population is too impoverished to own a house, get a college education, get medical care, or buy anything to keep the consumer economy going. My bet is that they will continue to worship their very rich donors.
30
Since when does any company owe anyone a job? Based on your logic, anyone that starts a company has a mandatory obligation to give people jobs based on the specific lifestyle requirements of the people, not based on the business requirements or desires of the company and its owners.
In other words, what you're saying is that those willing to take the risk to start a business have an obligation to take care of the rest of society because the rest of society is incapable of taking care of itself.
In other words, what you're saying is that those willing to take the risk to start a business have an obligation to take care of the rest of society because the rest of society is incapable of taking care of itself.
2
The definition of the purpose of a stock company has changed since the concept was introduced - and remember, it's only about the same age as the USA itself. It is an experiment, which by definition is not guaranteed to work. However, in its original form, it was workable.
The purpose of issuing stock is to raise funds to begin and conduct useful enterprises, producing goods and services, on a scale generally not available to individuals, by aggregating capital. As an incentive to put your wealth at the service of the corporation, you are issued a share in its profits. But the purpose, if the system is working properly, is the company, not the stock. My grandparents bought stock in a company because they figured it would be a going concern, making or doing something that consumers would want. It didn't work perfectly - Google 'John Law' and check out the founding of Louisiana, the South Sea bubble, etc. But at least it could be made to work for the general good.
The system has been turned on its head; the stockholder tail is wagging the company dog. Which is why we have the destructive mess we have today, in which only the stock price, not the company behind it, matters, and stockholders not only have no stake in seeing the company prosper, in the short term it may be preferable to trash it.
The purpose of issuing stock is to raise funds to begin and conduct useful enterprises, producing goods and services, on a scale generally not available to individuals, by aggregating capital. As an incentive to put your wealth at the service of the corporation, you are issued a share in its profits. But the purpose, if the system is working properly, is the company, not the stock. My grandparents bought stock in a company because they figured it would be a going concern, making or doing something that consumers would want. It didn't work perfectly - Google 'John Law' and check out the founding of Louisiana, the South Sea bubble, etc. But at least it could be made to work for the general good.
The system has been turned on its head; the stockholder tail is wagging the company dog. Which is why we have the destructive mess we have today, in which only the stock price, not the company behind it, matters, and stockholders not only have no stake in seeing the company prosper, in the short term it may be preferable to trash it.
1
They don't care about the middle class in the U.S. They just market their garbage to the emerging middle class in Asia. Unfortunately with globalization the U.S. middleclass has become irrelevant.
3
As a republican, I believe that it is the right for Walmart to pay their workers what they want.
But as a liberal republican, it is MY right not to go to any store which treats their workers with such distain.
BOYCOTT WALMART
But as a liberal republican, it is MY right not to go to any store which treats their workers with such distain.
BOYCOTT WALMART
62
I enjoy shopping at places like Costco and Whole Foods which treat their employees well.
3
Yes, go to Costco instead, where they treat their employees like they matter.
3
Walmart, as vast majority of retail chains, use same computer model, which automatically cuts part-timers' hours even if "excused" by manager under corporate policy. Also, don't know if Walmart does, but most others definitely do, have mandatory show up on less than full days notice, making a regular p-t job impossible. Reason for p-t is motivated to cut not pay benefits, which p-t employees working 30 hours or less, not entitled to. Most importantly, applies to health-care and retirement benefits, otherwise mandated by federal law if have plans covering regular ees. Invidious, especially in lowest paying paying industries, aka nursing home, where, in addition to p-t, use manpower companies that supply labor, also at minimum wage, thus escaping even union contracts. Then people wonder why state mandated standards for minimum levels of care not met, and ees so discontent that don't give a damn about quality, making all but very high-cost nursing homes hell holes. Even Adam Smith himself would roll over in grave at all these practices.
1
"Associates"?
noun
Pronunciation: /əˈsōSHēət/
1A partner or colleague in business or at work: he arranged for a close associate to take control of the institute. OXFORD DICTIONARY
This euphemism is a travesty. Let's just call a slave a slave.
Without collective bargaining this is the reality for the majority of America's work force.
noun
Pronunciation: /əˈsōSHēət/
1A partner or colleague in business or at work: he arranged for a close associate to take control of the institute. OXFORD DICTIONARY
This euphemism is a travesty. Let's just call a slave a slave.
Without collective bargaining this is the reality for the majority of America's work force.
63
I believe, after speaking with quite a few people who are Walmart employees, that Walmart keeps employees at part-time in order to avoid any possibility of having to pay them benefits and to keep them so eager to work that they will agree to any hours or conditions offered to them. It is the same tactic that has been used by large employers throughout history. The only thing that improved the situation was the Union movement. Now that the Unions have been broken, it is up to legislation to control these amoral companies. I am boycotting Walmart and will continue to do so until they improvetheir workers' conditions.
126
I only very rarely shop at Walmart because they are a Chinese pipeline. I shop at K-Mart. They have "Finer" Chinese stuff. Sheesh, this is ridiculous, isn't it?
1
Before ACA, Walmart did offer benefits to its part-timers. It was recently reported that they planned to stop doing that.
http://kaiserhealthnews.org/morning-breakout/walmart-cuts-benefits/
http://kaiserhealthnews.org/morning-breakout/walmart-cuts-benefits/
1
Catherine, you heard right. Many employers are mean spirited. I am retired now. But when I worked for a hospital, I accumulated 6 weeks of sick time and an additional 6 weeks of vacation time. However, I was strongly discouraged from using them. Many of us worked sick. I had a 101.3 F fever once. Also, I was personally assaulted by another employee , immediately reported the incident, and the conflict was addressed 3 years later. My experience and observation is that employers just do enough to look good and keep the rewards to themselves. Any social contracts a business has with its workers and community is for the benefit of the corporation. How else do you explain granting only 30 hours work and petitioning Congress to define fulltime work as 40 hours. There is a mean spirit in the American workplace.
5
Here is the bottom line. Taxpayers -- that means you and me -- spend almost a billion dollars a year on food stamps for Walmart employees. Meanwhile, each of the Walmart heirs (who didn't even build the company, they inherited it) are worth about 35 billion dollars each.
If we took even 20% of the Walmart heirs' net worth in taxes, we could use it to pay for the food stamps for their employees for the next 30 years. I'm not even talking about paying for other government services, like the roads, police, and services that Walmart uses. I'm just talking about paying for the food stamps that Walmart costs the U.S. taxpayer because they don't pay their workers properly.
This is madness. The Walmart owners are the worst kind of government welfare cheats, shifting the cost of a living wage from themselves to the taxpayer. One art museum in Arkansas does not redeem them. They are sucking the life out of this country. How can we let them continue to do so?
If we took even 20% of the Walmart heirs' net worth in taxes, we could use it to pay for the food stamps for their employees for the next 30 years. I'm not even talking about paying for other government services, like the roads, police, and services that Walmart uses. I'm just talking about paying for the food stamps that Walmart costs the U.S. taxpayer because they don't pay their workers properly.
This is madness. The Walmart owners are the worst kind of government welfare cheats, shifting the cost of a living wage from themselves to the taxpayer. One art museum in Arkansas does not redeem them. They are sucking the life out of this country. How can we let them continue to do so?
143
Or the employees at WalMart that aren't happy with their wages could strive to better themselves through education and work hard to eventually lift themselves out of poverty instead of being handed everything that will perpetuate this sort of acceptance of their role folding shirts. Give it a rest, Rachel - stop with the class warfare garbage. People accepting a job that basically takes zero brain cells to do comes with a likewise salary. And by the way, if people are having kids on this kind of salary, it means they're making poor choices. Why should we support these poor choices?
2
"Here is the bottom line. Taxpayers -- that means you and me -- spend almost a billion dollars a year on food stamps for Walmart employees."
That is such an obviously flawed argument it surprises me that folk even attempt to float it. Consider if Walmart didn't exist and provide jobs - then based on your argument taxpayers would be on the hook for even more food stamps for those who would be otherwise working. Therefore Walmart by existing and providing jobs provides a benefit to taxpayers and society by reducing the food stamp requirement of its employees.
That is such an obviously flawed argument it surprises me that folk even attempt to float it. Consider if Walmart didn't exist and provide jobs - then based on your argument taxpayers would be on the hook for even more food stamps for those who would be otherwise working. Therefore Walmart by existing and providing jobs provides a benefit to taxpayers and society by reducing the food stamp requirement of its employees.
1
Until the "American People" as Boehner calls us comes to their senses and stops supporting the Republican Party that's financed by backers such as the Walmart clan and the Koch Bros. gangsters we will continue to suffer financially as workers. We exist now simply as slaves to make these people rich and there is never enough money to make them happy.
Americans have no one to blame but themselves for putting us where we are today.
Americans have no one to blame but themselves for putting us where we are today.
4
Obamacare hard at work.
13
What does this even mean? I fail to see the correlation.
5
Yeah. American workers don't deserve health care.
6
Please explain how this is the fault of the Affordable Care Act.
1
When you have two kids on a Wal Mart salary what do you expect out of life? And why should others who don't care about your poor life choices?
25
Oh, I don't know. Maybe others should care because it could easily happen to them. People don't wake up and plan to be poor. They don't plan to go bankrupt. They also don't pick their parents. But, if you want to go through life condemning others for their bad choices how do you think others feel about your own bad choices? We all have a few in our lives. It's just that most of us are lucky enough not to have them put on public display.
27
Exactly. It's not up to employers to finance our lifestyle choices, be that parenting, taking an annual Viking River Cruise, time off for volunteerism or a Cadillac Escalade.
Living within one's means -- Spartanly if need be, most of us did -- and working to gain additional knowledge, credentials and work experience throughout one's teens, 20s and 30s if necessary will likely lead to a comfortable middle-class life in one's 40s, 50s and 60s. Which is more than most people have had throughout human history. Expecting to do what you want, when you want it, before you are marketable or self-supporting is a recipe for disaster.
Living within one's means -- Spartanly if need be, most of us did -- and working to gain additional knowledge, credentials and work experience throughout one's teens, 20s and 30s if necessary will likely lead to a comfortable middle-class life in one's 40s, 50s and 60s. Which is more than most people have had throughout human history. Expecting to do what you want, when you want it, before you are marketable or self-supporting is a recipe for disaster.
2
Mr Rodriguez doesn't seem to be asking for much - a roof over his head, food on his plate, a place for his kids to sleep, a vehicle to get to work, clothes on his back. He isn't asking for a handout, he's asking for his work to be rewarded enough so he can afford the basics in life. In my city, that would be take-home earnings of about $30,000 a year for the household, and that doesn't seem like too much to ask.
And it's not like we couldn't afford to pay him enough so he could get that. For comparison's sake, if we divided the $16 trillion GDP equally among all of the 120 million households in the US, each household would have an income of $130,000. Now, I'm not advocating doing that redistribution, but that gives you some idea of how unbalanced our society is.
And it's not like we couldn't afford to pay him enough so he could get that. For comparison's sake, if we divided the $16 trillion GDP equally among all of the 120 million households in the US, each household would have an income of $130,000. Now, I'm not advocating doing that redistribution, but that gives you some idea of how unbalanced our society is.
6
How much would it cost Walmart to give every worker 40 hours a week at $10 per hour? Assume that a certain percentage will not want 40 hours - perhaps 25 percent - and assume that a certain percentage already has 40 hours - perhaps another 25 percent. Could each Walmart heir forego millions less per year to help half a million working families out of poverty?
The government will save millions in welfare subsidies. Walmart stores may actually be a place where people like to shop. And all those working employees will have more money to spend at Walmart. Sales will go up and so will the stock.
The government will save millions in welfare subsidies. Walmart stores may actually be a place where people like to shop. And all those working employees will have more money to spend at Walmart. Sales will go up and so will the stock.
25
And in one fell swoop the company would become unprofitable and the stock price would dive.
In addition to impoverishing the Waltons, it would dent pension funds which invest heavily in Wal-Mart.
In addition to impoverishing the Waltons, it would dent pension funds which invest heavily in Wal-Mart.
2
For those that say "get a second job!", you have no idea what you are saying. I used to schedule PT staff for shifts. Staff only got their schedule 3-4 days before the next week started. The shifts were not consistent time slots. Most of the staff worked a second job that treated them the same way. Try balancing two different employers giving random shifts each week while trying to maximize the amount of hours you work. It's horrible and disgusting. People cannot live like this.
80
It's even worse if you work a full time job and need more money. That's why one job should pay a living wage as per the area where the job is located.
16
Notoriously, George W. Bush's response at just about the last of his open "Town Halls" to a woman who asserted that she had a hard time making ends meet with three part-time jobs was "When do you sleep?"
And THAT was about the last of the Town Halls that was open to the public at large.
And THAT was about the last of the Town Halls that was open to the public at large.
6
This has been true for decades. When I was in high school, almost 30 years ago, this was true for any company with part-time workers. This is nothing new, but people are reacting as if Wal-Mart is the only company that does this.
2
Walmart’s ruling family, the Waltons, has more wealth than 42% of American families combined.
The Walton family is the richest family in the United States, with more wealth than Bill Gates and Warren Buffett combined.
The Waltons’ wealth comes from their inherited, controlling stake in Walmart.
While Walmart workers live in poverty, the Waltons rake in billions every year from the company.
Since 2007, while millions of Americans were having their homes confiscated and jobs eliminated, the fortune of the six Waltons on the Forbes 400 list has more than doubled to $149 billion.
The Waltons have these riches thanks to the hard work of their own employees and all of us taxpayers.
Based on recent estimates, taxpayers subsidize Walmart as much as $3 billion per year.
Instead of paying workers enough to survive, the Waltons take billions from Walmart every year, while driving their workers on to food stamps and other public assistance.
Three Waltons—Rob, Jim, and Alice (all children of Walmart founder Sam Walton)—own over 50% of outstanding Walmart shares. This fiscal year, Rob, Jim, and Alice (and the various entities that they control) will receive an estimated $3.16 billion in Walmart dividends on those shares.
Meanwhile, Walmart workers get an average of $8.81 per hour and are routinely denied full-time work.
Nice people....and devout supporters of trickle-down poverty policies of America's Randian right-wing.
http://walmart1percent.org/how-rich-are-the-waltons/
The Walton family is the richest family in the United States, with more wealth than Bill Gates and Warren Buffett combined.
The Waltons’ wealth comes from their inherited, controlling stake in Walmart.
While Walmart workers live in poverty, the Waltons rake in billions every year from the company.
Since 2007, while millions of Americans were having their homes confiscated and jobs eliminated, the fortune of the six Waltons on the Forbes 400 list has more than doubled to $149 billion.
The Waltons have these riches thanks to the hard work of their own employees and all of us taxpayers.
Based on recent estimates, taxpayers subsidize Walmart as much as $3 billion per year.
Instead of paying workers enough to survive, the Waltons take billions from Walmart every year, while driving their workers on to food stamps and other public assistance.
Three Waltons—Rob, Jim, and Alice (all children of Walmart founder Sam Walton)—own over 50% of outstanding Walmart shares. This fiscal year, Rob, Jim, and Alice (and the various entities that they control) will receive an estimated $3.16 billion in Walmart dividends on those shares.
Meanwhile, Walmart workers get an average of $8.81 per hour and are routinely denied full-time work.
Nice people....and devout supporters of trickle-down poverty policies of America's Randian right-wing.
http://walmart1percent.org/how-rich-are-the-waltons/
172
But to make up for this, the Walton family also gets to pay taxes to the Federal government at rates lower than most of their serfs
5
Yes, Wal Mart is maximizing profit at the expense of employees. This particular couple is a terrible example to use to make this point. Why doesn't he have another job when he works 18-28 hours/week? Why doesn't she have a job? Did someone force them to have a child that they can't afford? This couple demonstrates a complete lack of self control and responsibility. He complains about the cost of diapers? Just a few decades back, people used cloth diapers and washed them. I would love to see their cable bill. Ms Sallee complains, at 22, that she must wait to have a wedding she can't afford because the venue seems more important than her relationship. Again for her and her fiancé: how about another job with all the hours you're not working? This is a problem, but these examples are awful. They seem like a bunch of immature whiners who can't live in their financial truth.
Unfortunately this story does not make a good argument against Wal Mart. It needs a broader focus and not the two examples used. Wal Mart needs to be changed, but this was a flimsy piece.
Unfortunately this story does not make a good argument against Wal Mart. It needs a broader focus and not the two examples used. Wal Mart needs to be changed, but this was a flimsy piece.
31
So two uneducated, unmarketable people in their 20s decide to have a child they cannot in any way, shape or form afford, and that is Walmart's fault???
If the Rodriquez-Prothero family had bought a $400,000 McMansion or sports car, we'd be rightfully disdaining them. The USDA says it costs between $200,000 and $400,000 to raise a single child these days. Why on earth do we make people who produce actual live human beings at this cost basis into victims, when the car-buyer would be vilified. I guess it's OK to let a human infant fester and get skin burns in a dirty diaper?
If low-income people in their 20s would focus on improving themselves and their marketability and gaining a work history instead of on reproducing, they would not be at the mercy of corporations like Walmart. I detest that retailer as much as the next person but they are not responsible for the horrendous choices of the low-income workforce.
Second, speaking of poor choices, is Ms. Prothero is not working she has plenty of time to wash diapers -- in the bathtub or a pail if necessary -- that's how my grandmothers did it. There is no need to be wasting dollars on disposable diapers when a couple dozen cloth versions (about $25 at Walmart) can be re-used over and over. A $14 drying rack and they're all set for $40 for at least a year.
It's these sorts of economic decisions, far more than the prevailing wage climate, corporate policies, etc. that ensure permanent poverty for a large swath.
If the Rodriquez-Prothero family had bought a $400,000 McMansion or sports car, we'd be rightfully disdaining them. The USDA says it costs between $200,000 and $400,000 to raise a single child these days. Why on earth do we make people who produce actual live human beings at this cost basis into victims, when the car-buyer would be vilified. I guess it's OK to let a human infant fester and get skin burns in a dirty diaper?
If low-income people in their 20s would focus on improving themselves and their marketability and gaining a work history instead of on reproducing, they would not be at the mercy of corporations like Walmart. I detest that retailer as much as the next person but they are not responsible for the horrendous choices of the low-income workforce.
Second, speaking of poor choices, is Ms. Prothero is not working she has plenty of time to wash diapers -- in the bathtub or a pail if necessary -- that's how my grandmothers did it. There is no need to be wasting dollars on disposable diapers when a couple dozen cloth versions (about $25 at Walmart) can be re-used over and over. A $14 drying rack and they're all set for $40 for at least a year.
It's these sorts of economic decisions, far more than the prevailing wage climate, corporate policies, etc. that ensure permanent poverty for a large swath.
57
Bingo.. Best comment by far.
8
Could not agree more with this comment - yes, this is a very sad situation to be in but the reality is that these two people acted irresponsibly...unless they were unaware of the costs involved in a raising a child or had unrealistic dreams - people need to face reality and make rationale life decisions.
I am all for a social society net when the unexpected happens (e.g. loss of job, tragic event, etc)...but to create a situation like this and then expect help is just absurd and incredibly selfish.
I am all for a social society net when the unexpected happens (e.g. loss of job, tragic event, etc)...but to create a situation like this and then expect help is just absurd and incredibly selfish.
5
Living wage jobs for all Americans. Anything else is wage slavery. Are we all ok with slavery?
2
The frightening thing is that so many of these stories are best-case scenarios. One gentleman mentioned owns a car, but what happens when the gaskets blow? Do he (and those without cars) have access to public transportation? Regarding unpaid medical bills, what happens when (like so many others), collection agencies begin filing suit, adding thousands of dollars in fees and interest? Could they even afford to miss work and go to court to respond to a lawsuit? Noticeably absent are any narratives about those who have been sucked into our legal system, who struggle with skyrocketing court fees, costs, probation and monitoring reimbursement, and the like.
For many born into situations much worse than described here, the most rational economic situation, given options such as limited transportation & legitimate jobs, is to deal drugs. The people who turn to this are often viewed as lazy, immoral, etc, when much of the time (given how few Walmart's or the like exist on the south side of Chicago) they are enterprising people - just in a profession society has deemed unacceptable.
For many born into situations much worse than described here, the most rational economic situation, given options such as limited transportation & legitimate jobs, is to deal drugs. The people who turn to this are often viewed as lazy, immoral, etc, when much of the time (given how few Walmart's or the like exist on the south side of Chicago) they are enterprising people - just in a profession society has deemed unacceptable.
3
One solution would be to let Walmart's billionaire owners see what it is like to live a meager salary for a couple months, without their ill gotten inheritance. Let's see what they can do with a part time $10 an hour salary. Would they lose their minds from the stress? Resort to stealing to make ends meet? Or learn how to deal with it through non stop sacrifice like their employees. Only then they can understand what it is like to have to live off the crumbs thrown to them by immoral greedy thieves.
15
Anyone can do almost anything for a short time, knowing that "this too shall pass." It is the unrelently grind of poverty that kills the spirit. Therefore I don't believe the Walton heirs would learn much from a month of deprivation.
2
When pundits (especially on the right) discuss the bad economy for working people, the business model Walmart perfected by having a part time workforce is given short shrift. Then these companies reinforce their model by pointing to the aca as a reason to keep their employees under 30 hours so as to not provide health insurance. recent announcements form these "employers" that they are going to raise their wage scales would never have happened had their not been a push to raise the national minimum wage.
5
Limited hours is a direct consequence of our new health care laws. When companies have a perverse incentive to limit the weekly hours of employees in order to avoid paying for health care, they will do just that. There is no mystery here. We need to eliminate laws which discourage full employment. Health care should not be a burden placed on employers. It's time for a single payer system in this country. It's time for employers to have an incentive to hire workers full time.
12
Sorry, Mike. Limited hours to swindle serfs out of benefits is a practice that LONG predated Obama. In fact, notoriously in various states Walmart held workshops for its serfs to guide them in how to apply for welfare -- health care, food stamps, etc. -- which means that everyone else subsidized one of the richest families in the country for their sociopathic behaviors.
3
I think the American working class has to join in unions to raise as a negotiaton power. The decline of unions as such started with president Reagan. But this president had also to increase taxes. The only republican presidents who had a surplus budgets were Ike and Nixon.
4
If an employee's skills have limited necessity to an employer, or if his or her skills only demand a limited rate in the market, that is not necessarily the fault of the employer. Also, I realize that Walmart dominates the employment opportunities in many communities, but with only 18 to 28 hours of work, that should leave plenty of time for a second job. Or, when he is not working, he could take care of his child and his fiancee could work -- is it really not an option for her to pull some weight? It seems like a difficult situation, but I can't find too much pity for them. There are opportunities to make a better life for yourself in this country. Take some responsibility!
11
Actually, the majority of all jobs in the USA are now part time temporary jobs. It's not always possible to arrange a second part time jobs - -because work shifts are not regular. Living wage jobs for all workers -- anything else is wage slavery.
3
Even with crazy shift hours, Walmart is closed at night.
So while Mr. Rodriguez and the baby are sleeping -- why isn't the fiancee out at work? cleaning offices? doing elder care? in a nursing home? working the graveyard shift at a factory or late night eatery?
Why can't she watch other children in an informal day care? or do telemarketing?
She's apparently doing NOTHING but staying home to care for ONE toddler -- something that tens of millions of WORKING MOMS do not have the luxury of doing! WHY? how could the reporter here be so incurious as to not even ASK why she is not working?
Is the answer that "she's on welfare and doesn't want to admit she's shacking up with a boyfriend, against welfare rules"?
So while Mr. Rodriguez and the baby are sleeping -- why isn't the fiancee out at work? cleaning offices? doing elder care? in a nursing home? working the graveyard shift at a factory or late night eatery?
Why can't she watch other children in an informal day care? or do telemarketing?
She's apparently doing NOTHING but staying home to care for ONE toddler -- something that tens of millions of WORKING MOMS do not have the luxury of doing! WHY? how could the reporter here be so incurious as to not even ASK why she is not working?
Is the answer that "she's on welfare and doesn't want to admit she's shacking up with a boyfriend, against welfare rules"?
2
I firmly believe that anyone working a 40 hour week should be able to support themselves financially, and I believe the minimum wage is ridiculously low and needs to be raised.
That being said, Mr. Rodriguez obviously had a child he can't afford. His fiance doesn't work but they can't make ends meet. This is not Walmart's problem and Walmart shouldn't just start paying people more money or giving people more hours to work because they made a very irresponsible financial decision in their personal life. These two need to call their parents, aunts, uncles, cousins, other relatives, friends, neighbors, and find someone who can take care of the kid so that the fiance can work and help make ends meet.
That being said, Mr. Rodriguez obviously had a child he can't afford. His fiance doesn't work but they can't make ends meet. This is not Walmart's problem and Walmart shouldn't just start paying people more money or giving people more hours to work because they made a very irresponsible financial decision in their personal life. These two need to call their parents, aunts, uncles, cousins, other relatives, friends, neighbors, and find someone who can take care of the kid so that the fiance can work and help make ends meet.
14
Employers hire people who are profitable for them. It is basic common sense to realize that not everybody can be profitable to a company at the "living wage". Those people will be terminated, and then taxpayers can pick up 100% of the person's costs. But hey, we are no longer subsidizing Wal-Mart!
1
And find family to move in with, to save money.
Today's media likes to hand-wring over "millenials living at home" but that's how all of my parents and grandparents on both sides got ahead. Three generations under one roof, pooling resources, pooling childcare responsibilities, every adult with a job (including both of my grandmothers), young couples living with parents even after marriage if need be.
it is absurd to think that every low-skill entry-level job can support a separate dwelling, utilities, food, health care, telecom and gadgets, clothing and sundries, education, leisure and savings for any one individual, let alone multiple dependents. That's just not the way the world has ever worked and as we breed ourselves into a massive labor overcapacity, it sure ain't going to start being so any time soon. Wages are going down in a global economy, not up, no matter what the 'world should be this way' people want to dream about.
Multi-generational households are how some recent immigrants achieve upward mobility that is leaps and bounds ahead of people who were born in the US with all of the attendant advantages. You'd think we'd take a clue.
Today's media likes to hand-wring over "millenials living at home" but that's how all of my parents and grandparents on both sides got ahead. Three generations under one roof, pooling resources, pooling childcare responsibilities, every adult with a job (including both of my grandmothers), young couples living with parents even after marriage if need be.
it is absurd to think that every low-skill entry-level job can support a separate dwelling, utilities, food, health care, telecom and gadgets, clothing and sundries, education, leisure and savings for any one individual, let alone multiple dependents. That's just not the way the world has ever worked and as we breed ourselves into a massive labor overcapacity, it sure ain't going to start being so any time soon. Wages are going down in a global economy, not up, no matter what the 'world should be this way' people want to dream about.
Multi-generational households are how some recent immigrants achieve upward mobility that is leaps and bounds ahead of people who were born in the US with all of the attendant advantages. You'd think we'd take a clue.
2
Start charging corporations for the government benefits their employees receive. The taxpayers should not have to pick up the slack and contribute to the profits of these large companies.
139
And then the corporations say 'bag it, we can get robots to stock shelves and add more self-checkouts" and we suddenly are providing 100 percent of the support for their ex-employees.
Be careful what you wish for.
It is the responsibility of the worker to educate himself/herself out of Walmart's clutches, moving away if options are limited near "home," and to live within his or her means at all times. Why would we want to enact policies that shove people deeper into the clutches of such employers?
Be careful what you wish for.
It is the responsibility of the worker to educate himself/herself out of Walmart's clutches, moving away if options are limited near "home," and to live within his or her means at all times. Why would we want to enact policies that shove people deeper into the clutches of such employers?
2
They already do. Wal-Mart pays 7.65% on most of its wages. It also pays local, state, and federal taxes for a variety of things (property taxes, inventory taxes, income taxes, etc.).
1
Cayce wins the thread. Absolutely spot on.
1
We live under corporate tyranny. How long until we throw off the yoke of oppression?
7
Don't think it can't happen here. It can and it will, once people get fed up enough.
This article doen't mention the biggest problem and that is keeping employees on part time status means that labor laws protecting the employee do not kick in - - like breaks, and other small benefits. That's the main reason they don't give employees enough hours to go over the threshold into full time.
The way part time workers ( even highly educated adjunct instructors at colleges) is the modern 1st world version of slavery.
The way part time workers ( even highly educated adjunct instructors at colleges) is the modern 1st world version of slavery.
11
That is not necessarily true. In California, labor laws protect all workers, part and full time.
The quickest way to higher wages is FALLING unemployment. Before you
demonize Walmart, whose business model is driven by consumers who
want low prices delivered in warehouses without regard to how much
it s workers earn, maybe consumers should think twice about who is
making and delivering the goods and services we consume.
demonize Walmart, whose business model is driven by consumers who
want low prices delivered in warehouses without regard to how much
it s workers earn, maybe consumers should think twice about who is
making and delivering the goods and services we consume.
5
After the Triangle Shirtwaist fire the unionization of workers in the garment and textile industry began to increase substantially. One of the reasons that unions flourished at the beginning of the 20th century was the abuse and lack of safety for workers. Steelworkers, truckers, dockworkers, apparel and textile workers were all the the mercy and whim of employers. Workers had no rights. None. Minimum wages were unheard of. Home work was demanded. There was no right to file a grievance. Workers complained at risk of dismissal. One of the major union accomplishments was guaranteed minimum work hours when workers were called to work. Our family owned 9 apparel factories in N.Y. and PA. When we called workers in we were required to have at least 5 hours work for them. If not we paid them to do something else. The unions also created health and welfare funds, retirement and paid holidays. The fact is that the unions benefited both employers and employees. Both knew what to expect.
Walmart and other non-union employers have destroyed the American middle class. The relentless pursuit of right-to-work laws by Republicans have further eroded the hard earned rights of employees. The effect of the lack of unions especially in large monopolies like Wal Mart is devastating not only to the workers but to the local economy. Why these giant monopolies are allowed to exist is another issue. Give workers rights and decent pay or give them unions and the right to organize. Unions!
Walmart and other non-union employers have destroyed the American middle class. The relentless pursuit of right-to-work laws by Republicans have further eroded the hard earned rights of employees. The effect of the lack of unions especially in large monopolies like Wal Mart is devastating not only to the workers but to the local economy. Why these giant monopolies are allowed to exist is another issue. Give workers rights and decent pay or give them unions and the right to organize. Unions!
28
Walmart didn't "end unions". They have nothing whatsoever to do with unions. Retail and discount stores NEVER had unions. They were for factory workers and public employees!
Right to work laws about the RIGHT of a UNIONIZED worker not to pay union dues. It has nothing whatsoever to do with entirely un-unionized places of employment.
Nothing on earth can prevent Walmart workers from organizing and striking...except they lack the will to do so.
Right to work laws about the RIGHT of a UNIONIZED worker not to pay union dues. It has nothing whatsoever to do with entirely un-unionized places of employment.
Nothing on earth can prevent Walmart workers from organizing and striking...except they lack the will to do so.
1
If Anthony is not happy at Walmart, he must find another job. Demanding that a company change it's policies and operating plans is just unrealistic. Walmart will change only if enough of it's workers leave for other jobs and even then, will change just enough to get more applicants. Gigantic companies like Walmart exist to make money for the owners, not to provide a secure, happy life for it's workers. Some companies provide those types of benefits. Walmart is not one of them. Go find something else, Anthony.
7
I think maybe a mirror is in order ... take a look. Walmart has become the largest retailer on the planet because they are supported by the people of the USA. Stop shopping at Walmart .... I have a moral problem with the retailer and do not shop at Walmart.
Large and small retailers have always had a mix of full and part time people .. and Walmart does have higher paid staff at the stores ... but how many studies do we need showing that as a company Walmart pays lower wages and plays games with what they call part time workers?
Walmart is a huge driver of off-shore production. We export manufacturing jobs so we can dress in $5 tee shirts made in asia .. buying them from $8 hr workers.
The problem is us -- stop shopping at Walmart.
Large and small retailers have always had a mix of full and part time people .. and Walmart does have higher paid staff at the stores ... but how many studies do we need showing that as a company Walmart pays lower wages and plays games with what they call part time workers?
Walmart is a huge driver of off-shore production. We export manufacturing jobs so we can dress in $5 tee shirts made in asia .. buying them from $8 hr workers.
The problem is us -- stop shopping at Walmart.
32
And, of course, Bill Clinton pushing for and signing NAFTA, into law had nothing to do with so many jobs going overseas, did it?
4
OK -- fine. Don't shop at Walmart.
So where DO you shop? because dude, Target is the same. K-mart is the same. EVERY major retailer does exactly what Walmart does.
Are you going to stop shopping, and weave all your own clothing on a loom?
Are you going to stop eating out? because ALL fast food places do this -- all takeout joints -- pizza parlors and Chinese and Thai -- EVERY PLACE.
Even your local hardware store is paying minimum wage, few hours and no benefits.
So I would love to know WHERE you think it is OK to shop.
So where DO you shop? because dude, Target is the same. K-mart is the same. EVERY major retailer does exactly what Walmart does.
Are you going to stop shopping, and weave all your own clothing on a loom?
Are you going to stop eating out? because ALL fast food places do this -- all takeout joints -- pizza parlors and Chinese and Thai -- EVERY PLACE.
Even your local hardware store is paying minimum wage, few hours and no benefits.
So I would love to know WHERE you think it is OK to shop.
1
I assume Walmart wants some people to work fewer than 30 hours so they don't need to provide insurance to the employees. From a purely financial perspective that makes sense. And given that the labor market is saturated, it's easy for them to find and hire two workers at 20 hours each, rather than one at 40 hours.
Given that reality, Walmart is nothing but a way station on the path to a real job.
I do find it a bit cruel, however, that the employees are not extended the courtesy of a firm schedule so that they can secure a second job. This is almost gratuitous punishment for people trying to make a decent living.
Given that reality, Walmart is nothing but a way station on the path to a real job.
I do find it a bit cruel, however, that the employees are not extended the courtesy of a firm schedule so that they can secure a second job. This is almost gratuitous punishment for people trying to make a decent living.
9
They ought to stop complaining and unionize period. Shut the stores down across the country. The only thing that will get the attention of management and owners is the prospect of losing MONEY.
45
This will not work because shoppers who go to WalMart don't care about the workers, which is by itself very selfish. If we united and boycott WallMart, then Management will get the message.
Walmart's disregard is not just for their employees. It is also for their customers. They don't care about long checkout lines. And the emerging prevalence of self check outs continues to grow, I never want to use those monsters, for two reasons. Using the self checkouts takes away someones job. And I don't get a discount for doing their job. I try to only shop where customer service is a priority and where employees are regarded as a valuable asset as reflective of pay and benefits.
48
I agree, but Walmart intentionally appeals to the shopper with less discretionary funds. It is fundamental and core to their business model.
Walmart knows this well -- in other words, they arent ever trying to attract customers who will pay for better service and better staffing. When you walk into a Walmart, you can see this corporate strategy at work in everything they show to the consumer, including the long checkout lines.
8
Stick to Costco - yes they have self checkout and long lines too - but they treat their workers fairly and it shows in the customer experience. Ever seen a Walmart employee hustle? Why should they if it results in even less hours? At Costco, every worker I've interacted with is always hustling.
Also based on your stance against self checkout taking away jobs - I'd recommend that you use physical bank branches and always deal with the teller - book your airline travel through a travel agency not the web.
Also based on your stance against self checkout taking away jobs - I'd recommend that you use physical bank branches and always deal with the teller - book your airline travel through a travel agency not the web.
1
And their practices are insuring that their employees and customers have fewer and fewer discretionary funds. Too bad they don't want to take in the lesson of Henry Ford. When wanting to attract the best of workers for his assembly line, he determined to pay the best wages in the country. He then began to experience the most profitable of years. A rising tide floats all boats.
1
Al, the problem with a second job is that Walmart workers do not have consistent hours or days.
39
We all subsidize Walmart and other such companies by our taxes (food stamps etc) and by donations to food pantries. Volunteering at a food pantry I've seen people come in wearing fast-food uniforms.
49
Government has to step in and get involved. That is to request from WalMart and other "starving wage" companies to compensate for the Food Stamps and other "subsidies," the various local and Federal government provides.
1
You confuse a person's productivity with a living wage. They are not related.
Companies hire employees only when they expect to make a profit from the employee. Some people, such as Wal-Mart greeters, could be profitable at $10 per hour but completely unprofitable at $15 per hour. At a $15 minimum wage, that job would disappear. Is that better for the now unemployed worker? Is that better for society, which now has to pick up 100% of the person's living costs?
Companies hire employees only when they expect to make a profit from the employee. Some people, such as Wal-Mart greeters, could be profitable at $10 per hour but completely unprofitable at $15 per hour. At a $15 minimum wage, that job would disappear. Is that better for the now unemployed worker? Is that better for society, which now has to pick up 100% of the person's living costs?
4
OK, if pay's going to be according to individual productivity, what do you say about the CEO getting his $1.5 million bonus even though he missed his target net sales increase requirement?
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/05/12/3436808/walmart-executive-pay/
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/05/12/3436808/walmart-executive-pay/
2
I thinks its ridiculous how people go straight to social media abot there wants and needs. Its not Walmart's fault that hes in debt or that he gets this many hours. Im a Manager at a Arbys and Im making $9.25 as a Manager. Like I said before its not Walmart fault you can barely afford any of this. Mr. Rodriguez Chose to Have a kid and choose to move out. If I was Walmart I would not let this phase me.
17
If you own stock in a company that produces huge profits by firing thousands and getting rid of any division that doesn't produce double-digit profits every quarter, you're part of the problem.
36
Would you rather own stock in a badly managed company that goes down in value and eventually goes bankrupt?
4
The difference between double digit profits and bankruptcy is vast.
6
Exactly. Pull your investments, if you have any, from this rogue family business.
2
When government officials and employees plead for business to expand hours and pay a fairer wage, they have already conceded the game. In effect what they are saying is, "We have no power to change your business model, but we hope you can find it in your heart to support the American people."
But there is no heart at the center of capitalism; there is only the callous law of the balance-sheet. That's why workers need to be heartless in return: organize en masse and walk off the job. And any politician who truly cares about the citizens of this country will have their back: they will advocate for a basic minimum income for all citizens, and detach survival from employment.
But there is no heart at the center of capitalism; there is only the callous law of the balance-sheet. That's why workers need to be heartless in return: organize en masse and walk off the job. And any politician who truly cares about the citizens of this country will have their back: they will advocate for a basic minimum income for all citizens, and detach survival from employment.
18
What will raising the wage to $10 per hour do for the first time worker on the bottom rung of the skill ladder? With a $10 wage, I expect a better cut of workers will apply who would not have applied for a minimum wage job, and those who are truly on the bottom of the skill ladder won't be able to compete at Walmart anymore. They will likely have to complete for jobs outside of Walmart that still pay minimum wage.
11
Well, then Walmart will benefit by not having the worst employees possible.
3
This is the law of supply and demand. The demand for labor is low. For a variety of reasons. Mostly automation and the internet. In order to increase the demand, the price of labor has to go down. But we are actually doing the opposite by looking to raise the minimum wage. If i am offending anyone's sense of justice or fairness, I apologize. But this is the reality.
20
Demand for consumer goods is low because too many people have no disposable income due to their wages being too low. When those at the top keep too much for themselves and pay too little in wages, which is currently the case, the economy tanks. Raising taxes to a punitive level on very high incomes encourages them to pay better wages, donate more to charity, etc. Cutting their taxes only rewards their greed and ensues that those work for them will remain in poverty as they increase their share of total income. The welfare programs for poor workers are, in reality, a taxpayer subsidy of the Walmart's profits, as is every dime of SNAP spent by minimum wage workers who shop at Walmart.
3
Whose law of supply and demand? You mean like the oil market, where there are bigger reserves than the world has ever seen in 80 years but the prices are going up? Your "law" is a sham, and you don't know what you are talking about. Your thinking is medieval and cruel. Walmart owners are the richest on earth, but you are begging us to let them keep oppressing the poor and as the Scriptures call it, "grinding the face of the poor."
5
The function, or a function, of justice is to ameliorate reality. The laws of capitalism benefit capital and power, and the reality of that is that they are accumulated by only the very few. In reading this morning about Wisconsin, net neutrality, and Walmart the theme is power and control for the benefit of those who have them and how selfishly and shortsightedly they are used. For capitalism to work, there have to be consumers, repeat 'have to be.' If I can't purchase your product why should you make it? So, the capitalist is responsible for both parts: the producer and the consumer - whether that is agreeable or not. The theme is that workers should work at the 'whim' of employers, that users of the net should enjoy it at the 'whim' of providers. And, capitalists love and want more of power and control and will do whatever needed to retain it for themselves.
My generation of workers understood the need to unite; we worked in an expanding, manufacturing economy but we needed to fight with bodies and blood for justice. Now, in an economy adjusting to service jobs the fight needs to be undertaken again. "BARGAIN Together or BEG Alone."
My generation of workers understood the need to unite; we worked in an expanding, manufacturing economy but we needed to fight with bodies and blood for justice. Now, in an economy adjusting to service jobs the fight needs to be undertaken again. "BARGAIN Together or BEG Alone."
5
Gee, I don't suppose Obamacare would have anything to do with employers not wanting full time workers? Nah, it would be off message to mention that. Or how about the surplus of unskilled labor in the US, due to the Democrat policy of granting functional amnesty to illegal aliens. Ooops, even more off message.
If Mr. Rodriguez can't afford to support a "fiancee" and child on his WalMart salary, maybe he shouldn't have acquired a fiancee and child. Maybe he should have gotten a better job first and then taken on a fiancee and had a child? Or maybe the fiancee could get a job? The liberal solution, as always, is to pay people much more than they are worth (by government or union fiat) or give them additional welfare -- anything that avoids any sort of personal responsibility for choices.
While I critique the NYT and liberals generally, I mean no disrespect to Mr. Rodriquez -- he is not whining about the cruelty of life and his need for welfare, but is looking for a second job to pay for his choices, exactly what a responsible person does. Best wishes to him.
If Mr. Rodriguez can't afford to support a "fiancee" and child on his WalMart salary, maybe he shouldn't have acquired a fiancee and child. Maybe he should have gotten a better job first and then taken on a fiancee and had a child? Or maybe the fiancee could get a job? The liberal solution, as always, is to pay people much more than they are worth (by government or union fiat) or give them additional welfare -- anything that avoids any sort of personal responsibility for choices.
While I critique the NYT and liberals generally, I mean no disrespect to Mr. Rodriquez -- he is not whining about the cruelty of life and his need for welfare, but is looking for a second job to pay for his choices, exactly what a responsible person does. Best wishes to him.
34
Walmart corporation thanks your for your comment because it plays into their strategy to amke sure that we "judge the workers" and not the global corporation that can legally (cough) pay everyone 9 bucks an hour, with random work hours.
19
James, you said it perfectly. Thanks.
2
No, it didn't. This was going on long before the ACA, which has now become a convenient excuse.
6
Stores and restaurants are much busier at some times than others. If the minimum wage is low, employers will keep workers around during quiet times, but if the minimum wage is raised too high, employers will cut hours, and workers' total pay will not rise much if at all. It is better for the government not to set wages.
8
Part of the purpose of government is to prevent oppression of slaves by those who are willing to enslave. In fact, this situation is a perfect example of the justification for governmental intervention.
I would say the same about the huge, near trillion dollar corporate giveaways that pass under the radar as "tax expenditures." I am sure that a goodly portion of the profits of Walmart are those very tax expenditures, which amount to a tax subsidy to the Walton family.
This must cease, and NOW!!
I would say the same about the huge, near trillion dollar corporate giveaways that pass under the radar as "tax expenditures." I am sure that a goodly portion of the profits of Walmart are those very tax expenditures, which amount to a tax subsidy to the Walton family.
This must cease, and NOW!!
3
When there is an illegal work force who can and must work for less than the safety net provides (or starve and be homeless), wages tend to go to a level where many citizens who can chose the safety net will.
We have a surplus of cheap labor in this country, especially unskilled labor. Reduce this surplus and wages will naturally rise. You won't need an act of corporate "good will" because the market will require it.
We have a surplus of cheap labor in this country, especially unskilled labor. Reduce this surplus and wages will naturally rise. You won't need an act of corporate "good will" because the market will require it.
9
Right on John!
BTW Wall Mart is not on my radar. Their staffing/wage problems - from their beginning - has always been a problem. To me they do not exist. I go to Target.
Rhona
BTW Wall Mart is not on my radar. Their staffing/wage problems - from their beginning - has always been a problem. To me they do not exist. I go to Target.
Rhona
1
I am not a fan of Walmart based not on their internal labor policies, but on my shopping experience. I like help when I visit a store and people who know their department products in detail.
Jon
Jon
Dear Walmart owners,
you are living proof that you can have money without having class. Your morally depraved approach to labor relations is also bad for your business. Your workers could also be your customers if they had more money to spend. I wonder how it must feel knowing that you will go down in history as being, well, sort of reprehensible people.
you are living proof that you can have money without having class. Your morally depraved approach to labor relations is also bad for your business. Your workers could also be your customers if they had more money to spend. I wonder how it must feel knowing that you will go down in history as being, well, sort of reprehensible people.
67
Put your money where your mouth is and hire the same kinds of workers at better wages. People work for Walmart because it is better than the alternatives. It's easier to be a critic than an employer.
8
Wal-Mart has reduced spending costs for a large section of the US population, and does so in part by having a profit margin of about 3%. I guess that is what passes for evil among NY Times readers.
3
Isn't the "right to work" just great? I hope the good people of Wisconsin and all those newly minted "right to work" states in the Midwest are reading this piece.
34
What this article does not make clear, is that, because these worker's schedules change from week to week (and even from day to day), they are not able to get a regular second job, the traditional way for people to get ahead. So Walmart pays them for 20 hours, but actually owns them for the entire work day. Posting the schedule two weeks ahead will not change this. It's almost a form of slavery.
229
Exactly!!!! All the other employers expect wide open availability also! What is a worker in this trap to do? And to all those haters on the low wage workers in this country: YOU just go on and try climbing your way out of this hole. Recognize the privilege you have had that made so much of your success and opportunity possible.
12
Not "almost." The Waltons are the modern slave owners. This is bald-faced slavery. Boycott these social slugs.
6
Walmart doesn't keep them on call. If you know you're not working today, then today you go out and look for a job.
2
In the 1990's I worked a bunch of parttime retail jobs while going to grad school. There were fulltime workers in those chain stores and their work really mattered in part because they were there full time, taking care of little and big things that needing attention every day. They offered continuity in the work flow. Part-timers like myself worked evenings and weekends. We knew we were not indispensable but most of us had reasons for working partime and not fulltime. Kinda makes sense doesnt it for all concerned, including the customers?
Now when I walk into retail chain stores (Target, Home Depot, you name it) I see 18 years old "managers" who are part-time and they are seemingly replaced every year with somebody else.
You cannot run a large retail chain store with nothing but a bunch of part-timers and a select few full time "managers." It will "work" but really really poorly for every single person working in those jobs.
Now when I walk into retail chain stores (Target, Home Depot, you name it) I see 18 years old "managers" who are part-time and they are seemingly replaced every year with somebody else.
You cannot run a large retail chain store with nothing but a bunch of part-timers and a select few full time "managers." It will "work" but really really poorly for every single person working in those jobs.
33
Randomly changing schedules ultimately means employees work 12, 15 or 18 hours per day, but they get paid for the four they ultimately are scheduled for - it's unpaid "on call" time.
It is very much an abuse, because an employee can't reasonably work another job if their primary one can force them to show up at literally anytime. It abrupts the ability to schedule childcare drop-offs, and pick-ups, visits to the Doctor, meetings with teachers. The time has literally been "taken" from the employee without compensation.
In the Obamacare economy where employers schedule less than 30 hours per week, these hours need to be constant, so we can get jobs at another place. Like the 8-5 schedule of old, or three-shifts per day, we need socially, even legally, defined times for 6 shifts a day, so people can get two or even three jobs and still have a reasonable life.
It is very much an abuse, because an employee can't reasonably work another job if their primary one can force them to show up at literally anytime. It abrupts the ability to schedule childcare drop-offs, and pick-ups, visits to the Doctor, meetings with teachers. The time has literally been "taken" from the employee without compensation.
In the Obamacare economy where employers schedule less than 30 hours per week, these hours need to be constant, so we can get jobs at another place. Like the 8-5 schedule of old, or three-shifts per day, we need socially, even legally, defined times for 6 shifts a day, so people can get two or even three jobs and still have a reasonable life.
136
No I dont entirely agree, the retail marketplace should return to more fulltime jobs. Essentially you are asking there to be laws that make sure parttime workers have regular set hours == while that sounds reasonable at first glance, it is not logistically practical in retail. You may not realize it but you are sorta playing into Walmart's hands when you say "partime is OK for everyone."
12
"In the Obamacare economy where employers schedule less than 30 hours per week..." It NOT the "Obamacare economy" as these tactics where workers are given part-time hours, are essentially on-call all the time & never have regular schedules allowing them to have a second job, or arrange child care, have been in place for years before Obama was even elected. Let's blame the money-hungry corporations & the officers who run them for this abuse of those in American society who have the least, and little chance of improving their lives.
7
I don't know how much of this you can blame on Obamacare. This problem of on-call scheduling has been going on longer than there's been an ACA.
5
The question that comes to mind when I read articles like this in the NYT is what about the vocations like electrical work, plumbing, appliance repair, HVAC, cable tv technician, home repair, auto repair, etc? These technicians often charge $50-$100 just for a site visit to make a diagnosis and then charge about the same for hourly labor. There will always be a need for this type of work in communities of all sizes. It would be nice to know the barriers of entry to these professions. I would imagine the earning potential and quality of life for the people profiled in the article would be better learning a trade vs. trying to making a living on retail jobs that aren't just designed to provide a living wage.
18
A fully-qualified electrician has at minimum about 4 years of vocational training, including both classroom and practical apprenticeship. It is absolutely true that the skilled trades are a great way for capable high school graduates to improve their lot in life.
But the fact is that if everyone enters the skilled trades, then we have nobody available to work retail. What's smart for one person can be really dumb if everybody does it. And I'm having a real hard time figuring out why we're questioning whether somebody who is willing and able to work full time deserves to be able to eat on a regular basis.
But the fact is that if everyone enters the skilled trades, then we have nobody available to work retail. What's smart for one person can be really dumb if everybody does it. And I'm having a real hard time figuring out why we're questioning whether somebody who is willing and able to work full time deserves to be able to eat on a regular basis.
4
Stop contributing to America's race to the bottom, shop where workers get somewhat fare wages and benefits. Poor people shopping at Walmart sign their own death warrant.
That municipalities give tax breaks to attract these blood suckers defies all logic. Walmart has never done anything but drag down every community stupid enough to let them in.
That municipalities give tax breaks to attract these blood suckers defies all logic. Walmart has never done anything but drag down every community stupid enough to let them in.
23
We have become a noblesse oblige economy, in which basic aspects of work (and consequently, life) depend on the generosity of the big bosses: a decent wage, stable number of hours, stable schedule, paid time off, paid sick leave, overtime hours, even (in the wake of Obamacare) access to reproductive health care. The vision of these captains of capitalism is really a feudal economy where they control their workers lives, and either receive outsized public accolades for just doing the humane thing (witness Costco for actually paying a living wage) or else divest themselves of these responsibilities with all kinds of moralistic protestations (Wal-Mart, McDonalds) about how much they value their "associates" but have to balance their needs with the "necessity of remaining competitive in a global market," all the while, banking obscene fortunes. We need widespread social revolution. In no other rich country (or even many less rich countries) are workers completely dependent on the conscience of their boss for paid vacation, paid sick leave, paid maternity leave, a living wage, etc. etc. This model is obviously not working, yet the powerful are trying to push it even further. It is time for widespread social revolution, and I hope it will not be violent.
15
Yes, a 3% profit margin is just so obscene.
2
When I worked (I'm now retired), I remembered having slow and busy days. But not once in all those many years of working did my employer ever say, "We don't have any work today. Stay home (of course, without pay)." It was important then, as it should be now that workers have reliable hours and income. My son, who supposedly has a steady, full-time jjob, is often called the night before and told, "Stay home." How is someone who is trying to support him/herself or worse yet, a family when there is no consistency in hours? How does one manage at a part-time job? And some wonder (i.e. banks, credit card companies etc.) why clients don't pay their bills. I guess it's easier to label these people as deadbeats.
72
You are correct; many people don't realize how many jobs now are part-time, casual, temporary and/or minimum wage, and that the people holding them are not all just lazy, undereducated losers who don't have the ability or inclination to do skilled work. Even university graduates have to take what they can get nowadays. "Casual" usually means on-call for a certain number of hours, so it is not so simple to just get another part-time job (or go to school, arrange for day care etc). In some cities, public transit schedules are a big concern for low-wage randomly scheduled workers.
4
What a company. I mean, to have such disdain for your employees. It seems like Wal-Mart has done everything possible and continues to think of news ways to mistreat their workers and make their lives miserable. It's a pathetic company that should be pushed out town.
15
Those of us who still read history may be reminded of two rough parallels.
In ancient Rome, Cato the Elder earned that name as a mark of esteem for prudence and wise management. Plutarch tells us 'he never paid more than fifteen hundred drachmas for a slave, since he did not want them to be delicately beautiful, but sturdy workers, such as grooms and herdsmen, and these he thought it his duty to sell when they got oldish, instead of feeding them when they were useless' and calls his practice of, 'using [slaves] to the uttermost, and then, when they were old, driving them off and selling them, as the mark of a very mean nature, which recognizes no tie between man and man but that of necessity.'
In the post-bellum South, the practice of sharecropping relieved the former slaveholders of providing sufficient food and shelter. They got all the work out of the ex-slave with none of the responsibility. Sharecropping turned emancipation into a cruel joke in which the ex-slave was only technically free.
Walmart et al. are the Catos and sharecroppers of today.
In ancient Rome, Cato the Elder earned that name as a mark of esteem for prudence and wise management. Plutarch tells us 'he never paid more than fifteen hundred drachmas for a slave, since he did not want them to be delicately beautiful, but sturdy workers, such as grooms and herdsmen, and these he thought it his duty to sell when they got oldish, instead of feeding them when they were useless' and calls his practice of, 'using [slaves] to the uttermost, and then, when they were old, driving them off and selling them, as the mark of a very mean nature, which recognizes no tie between man and man but that of necessity.'
In the post-bellum South, the practice of sharecropping relieved the former slaveholders of providing sufficient food and shelter. They got all the work out of the ex-slave with none of the responsibility. Sharecropping turned emancipation into a cruel joke in which the ex-slave was only technically free.
Walmart et al. are the Catos and sharecroppers of today.
43
Such a great comment ACW. I was thinking of the USA mining towns with the company owned grocery store from the 19th century, but your sharecropper example is far more apt.
7
K Henderson, thanks for reminding me of 'the company store'! The trick of that was to pay the workers in scrip that could be used only at that store - and moreover, to pay them too little to cover their necessities, so that they always had to run a tab, much like payday loans, that they could never pay off, thus keeping them chained to that employer.
As Tennessee Ernie Ford said:
You load 16 tons, what do you get?/Another day older and deeper in debt./St Peter, don't you call me, 'cause I can't go;/I owe my soul to the company store.
We haven't come all that far from the days of Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, when poor worker Jurgus Rudkus couldn't get out of the hole no matter how he tried. Everyone remembers the disgusting parts about the food processing; few recall how, in a scam depressingly like the subprime loans, he gets cheated out of a flimsy house, or how unpredictable shift work breaks up his family.
As Tennessee Ernie Ford said:
You load 16 tons, what do you get?/Another day older and deeper in debt./St Peter, don't you call me, 'cause I can't go;/I owe my soul to the company store.
We haven't come all that far from the days of Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, when poor worker Jurgus Rudkus couldn't get out of the hole no matter how he tried. Everyone remembers the disgusting parts about the food processing; few recall how, in a scam depressingly like the subprime loans, he gets cheated out of a flimsy house, or how unpredictable shift work breaks up his family.
4
Well, I am the granddaughter of a landowner who had sharecroppers. His last name was actually Cato.
I doubt you ever read about him. He was a WWI vet (shot in the head while in the trenches in France). He had to work in a department store for someone else in addition to run a farm to make ends meet. My grandmother worked as a the bookkeeper. The sharecroppers had a house that he built that was as large as the one he raised his family in. They lived in rural SC along with other farmers who were in the same situation.
Not quite the "former slave-owner" type you were thinking of, was it?
I doubt you ever read about him. He was a WWI vet (shot in the head while in the trenches in France). He had to work in a department store for someone else in addition to run a farm to make ends meet. My grandmother worked as a the bookkeeper. The sharecroppers had a house that he built that was as large as the one he raised his family in. They lived in rural SC along with other farmers who were in the same situation.
Not quite the "former slave-owner" type you were thinking of, was it?
The real problem here seems to be that people think that it's ok to start a family with a household income of $9 an hour. Where's the responsibility?
35
David, against all evidence, you wrongly assume that there are jobs out there for everyone that are better than the partime cruddy ones that corporations gleefully offer to USA working classes.
13
How can you support even one person (yourself) on $9 per hour?
10
But they also can't have access to comprehensive sex ed or contraception, right? The lack of intersectionality in the discourse of poverty in America is a disservice to people who want to get out of poverty. We must recognize that all of these problems are woven together. More conservative leaning folks are always ready to criticize the choices of poor people, without recognizing that some of THEIR own staunchly held beliefs help propagate the situation they are criticizing.
4
A Google search found that the "six Waltons on Forbes' list of wealthiest Americans have a net worth of $144.7 billion".
Maybe they could buy the Rodriguez family a few thousand diapers...
Maybe they could buy the Rodriguez family a few thousand diapers...
20
Maybe these folks should have waited to have a child until they could have afforded it. Nobody owes anyone anything.
8
We were in the Thousand Islands region last year checking back into the U.S. after a day trip to Canada. An immense yacht was docked. Border patrol told us it had been owned by a niece of the Waltons and recently sold to a guy in "finance" for $59 million. That's a lot of diapers.
4
Or, perhaps, they shouldn't have had a child given their limited income.
3
The problem of low wages and unpredictable hours is not unique to just Walmart. CVS, Walgreens, Target, and many other "big box stores" use the same tactics to reward their shareholders at the expense of their employees. Please tell me why the media is so focused on only Walmart??
7
Because they represent the worst of the worst. They are international and corrupt. The NYtimes published a series on Walmart not that long ago about how they went about setting up shop in Mexico..how they circumvented laws by bribing local politicians. I'm sure that is not the only example and that that is part and parcel of their corporate culture. The sad truth is that while they engage in abusive and immoral policies, especially with regard to their employees (and I use the term loosely), they benefit from a generous helping of government sponsored corporate welfare.
6
I wonder the same thing. Do you suppose the media focuses on Walmart because their system may not be so much worse than other stores, but they are by far the most successful at what they do?
This works in with the GOP vogue for antonyms: "religious freedom" for entrenched hate, "free speech" for unlimited corporate funds polluting our political process, and "right to work" for wage slavery.
Is this the "final solution" to American democracy and opportunity?
Is this the "final solution" to American democracy and opportunity?
11
More hours for Walmart workers? Simply throw these workers back onto safety net (what safety net?) that the owners of Walmart have been so happy to see defunded. Gut the rights of workers across the country to organize and even collect the pensions that they've earned over the course of working a lifetime and we'll all celebrate the economic/political/social blessings of an oligarchy/plutocracy.
9
When, during driver education drives, we pass through our nearest super-walmart parking lot, we rarely see smiles on the faces of customers entering and leaving the building; when I talk with people about why they shop at walmart, few if any are enthusiastic about their choice. Those old enough to remember shopping on maine street long for the past. Maine street is now supported by art galleries, museums, and coffe houses many walmart shoppers can't afford to patronize. So, they resort to one-stop shopping and "lower prices" at the biggest box in town.
Programmed employment schemes are numbers games that lack the human element of sense of community. When owners and managers replace a basic sense of shared responsibility with pre-packaged decision making, they sacrifice something elemental and essential to humanity. How do we refuse to support that without then refusing to support our friends who need us to shop at the big box? How do we break the circle?
Programmed employment schemes are numbers games that lack the human element of sense of community. When owners and managers replace a basic sense of shared responsibility with pre-packaged decision making, they sacrifice something elemental and essential to humanity. How do we refuse to support that without then refusing to support our friends who need us to shop at the big box? How do we break the circle?
71
Shop somewhere else. It's a sure bet your money (and mine for the last 15 years) would not be missed and no one is going without a job because of it. Wal Mart raised their wages but all of this means nothing if workers' hours are kept to a minimum -- to avoid having to provide benefits due full-time workers. My sister works at Las Vegas WM three days a week -- and was given two unpaid days off to bury her husband (how nice of WM). And for that she was to be thankful. The WM business model is what is crippling America. Until the public at large forces them to make changes -- their only concern will forever be profit. WM = a perfect example of capitalism unchecked & ungoverned --- "Greed is Good"
9
Maine is a state. The major business street in many towns is called Main Street. Because it's the main street. You probably want to break the cycle, not the circle.
The business of business is business. It's about maximizing profit, not being nice to anyone unless that in turn maximizes profits. Businesses will exploit workers to whatever degree they can get away with. What is needed is regulation, either from facilitating unions who negotiate work rules, or work rules passed and enforced by the government. We don't do either one in this country to any useful degree.
The business of business is business. It's about maximizing profit, not being nice to anyone unless that in turn maximizes profits. Businesses will exploit workers to whatever degree they can get away with. What is needed is regulation, either from facilitating unions who negotiate work rules, or work rules passed and enforced by the government. We don't do either one in this country to any useful degree.
2
By shopping elsewhere, which is the only thing you can do to break the circle, you will create jobs elsewhere, hopefully better than the iindentured servitude of Walmarts and Targets and McDonalds, etc. In the meantime, nothing is pain free. When official slavery ended in the United States it was realistic to wonder how both agriculture and freed slaves would survive. Somehow both did, but new challenges exist for both.
9
I assume Walmart wants to keep workers hours below the number of hours at which benefits kick in. Though the article didn't mention what that number of hours is.
17
"At the same time, Walmart and other retailers, facing stiff competition and shrinking margins, have taken a more severe approach to controlling labor costs, doing more to align staffing to customer traffic."
They think they are aligning staffing to customer traffic. It's more like the traffic is aligning to the lack of staffing. One of the many reasons I never set foot in a Walmart anymore is that there is never anyone to help you if you need it And I certainly would never ever go on a weekend when they typically had five or fewer open registers for the dozens of people waiting in line.
They think they are aligning staffing to customer traffic. It's more like the traffic is aligning to the lack of staffing. One of the many reasons I never set foot in a Walmart anymore is that there is never anyone to help you if you need it And I certainly would never ever go on a weekend when they typically had five or fewer open registers for the dozens of people waiting in line.
16
Giant Walmart can plenty afford to offer more full time jobs. Practices mentioned in the article are among the reasons unions exist. Unions should get involved and organize the workers. If a employer doesn't choose to do the right thing, the workers need to get organized and require it.
12
Workers are warned NOT to talk to union organizers at places like WM, Target & Lowes. Interesting to note that WM in Germany is unionized and workers are well paid. The last 30 years has witnessed a literal gutting of unions and the impact on collective bargaining.
7
There is no conceivable excuse whatsoever for Walmart, a company with more wealth than many small countries, to treat its workers the way it does. Like so many other ‘value for money’ megastores they care only about their profits and shareholders, not about the people whose hard work creates those dividends. No one can live on $9 an hour, even working a 40 hour week, and the concept of zero hours is obscene. The minimum wage should be scrapped and substituted for a living wage for every American. Owners, management and shareholders everywhere can, I’m sure, make do with a slightly lower yearly income.
144
So what you're saying is that a 16 year old sacking groceries should make $30,000 a year. What should everyone older and more experienced than that 16 year old make?
3
Studies have proven that the minimum wage is a detrimental way to attempt what you seek - to improve the fortunes of the minimum wage employee. Instead, tax credits are the way to do this. What you propose wont work. Sorry. I realize that it makes you feel good to think you are improving this problem, but you arent. You make it worse. Recent studies that have more successfully isolated this issue statistically have shown the more effective policy solution.
A living wage can depend on many things. It’s perfectly reasonable to have an algorithm. Does the worker have a mortgage/pay rent? Own a car? Pay utilities? Pay health insurance? Live in a city with a high cost of living? Have dependents? Sure – let’s put in years of experience too. Let’s get creative – there’s no reason that brilliant minds can’t come up with a better system than currently exists.
Walmart raises the pathetically low minimum wage a paltry amount and is lauded. But by keeping hours below full time for many like Mr Prothero, they can avoid paying benefits.
Privatizing profits, socializing losses. The public, the peons are responsible for helping many Walmart workers to cover costs of food, healthcare, housing.
The Walmart Lords' net worth is more than the net worth of a million of their vassals combined. This is obscene. Walmart tossing a few bones to placate the angry peons isn't enough.
Privatizing profits, socializing losses. The public, the peons are responsible for helping many Walmart workers to cover costs of food, healthcare, housing.
The Walmart Lords' net worth is more than the net worth of a million of their vassals combined. This is obscene. Walmart tossing a few bones to placate the angry peons isn't enough.
16
If the employees were more talented the would have found better paying jobs. And for the record, Wal-Mart's profit margin is about 3%, far lower than the neighborhood florist.
7
The early pioneer gaming casino Bill Harrah started doing head counts of customers in his casinos and then deciding on the number of personal to come into work . Others gaming copied. Retail is not the only industry with preset margins so as to maintain profit with no regard to a wage to live on.
5
This is another example of why obamacare needs to be repealed, or dramatically changed. It is interesting that the article makes no mention of this as the cause of people having work weeks shorter than 30 hours.
11
Nonsense! This started many years ago, way before the Affordable Care Act was enacted. The article makes no mention because it isn't a factor.
19
Could the oligarchs just cut to the chase and tell us how lousy life is supposed to get?
How are we supposed to build a nation and an economy where families are struggling to survive working these crummy jobs? How many more people will try to make full-time employment out of part-time work? How many people will just give up? How many people will have to rely on government assistance to support Walmart profits?
Exactly how low are we supposed to go? What's the ultimate goal--that we're all share croppers of one type or another?
How are we supposed to build a nation and an economy where families are struggling to survive working these crummy jobs? How many more people will try to make full-time employment out of part-time work? How many people will just give up? How many people will have to rely on government assistance to support Walmart profits?
Exactly how low are we supposed to go? What's the ultimate goal--that we're all share croppers of one type or another?
92
If the "oligarchs" are making money hand over fist, why don't you start a company that competes with them and offers a better service at a lower price. You will become very successful.
6
People today have it a lot better than most human beings ever born have had, even the Walmart workers.
What do you expect? That everyone in their 20s, no matter how low-skill, low-intelligence, uneducated, laden with out-of-wedlock children, in debt for new had-to-have cars, etc. is going to have the comfy existence achieved by prudent people in their 40s and 50s? I don't have a problem with people spending a few decades paying dues and reaping the consequences of their life choices. Some choices lead you uphill and some downhill, and the policies at Walmart or McDonald's or Lowe's have nothing to do with those choices.
What do you expect? That everyone in their 20s, no matter how low-skill, low-intelligence, uneducated, laden with out-of-wedlock children, in debt for new had-to-have cars, etc. is going to have the comfy existence achieved by prudent people in their 40s and 50s? I don't have a problem with people spending a few decades paying dues and reaping the consequences of their life choices. Some choices lead you uphill and some downhill, and the policies at Walmart or McDonald's or Lowe's have nothing to do with those choices.
2
More hours wanted by "lazy takers"?
It's so offensive to the "makers",
These pawns of Walmart
Are getting too smart,
It seems they're a bunch of "fair shakers"!
It's so offensive to the "makers",
These pawns of Walmart
Are getting too smart,
It seems they're a bunch of "fair shakers"!
16
There he is.
Often success masks failures. Walmart must not just raise wages but spread it to workers left on the margins.
The great goods of national economies are now commodities. Apple, Monsanto (80% of world corn seed), Walmart, Pepsico, Google are diverse examples of commodity enterprises operating in global markets that increase capital wealth and flatline jobs and wages.
Many advisers and politicians don’t get this paradox: the modern economy is built on essential or desired commodities that transfer wealth without the traditional means of adding value through labor and rarely expand workforces. In fact, work itself is becoming a commodity, priced by industry and region, in the same way as goods and services. But Walmart is assigning hours as a piece rate.
The US economy is deeply entwined with monopolies by companies and by global regions (China’s Pearl River zone, Foxconn; Vietnam, Indonesia, clothing; Brazil, agriculture; the big banks, cell, music and cable services; the US, et al.), and does not want to restructure a system designed to vacuum up cash and maintain rock-bottom wages while the private sector shifts social costs to government to be dismantled.
At the $9 an hour minimum, purchasing power returns to 1979 levels, 20 points lower than France.
For a discussion of successful global models, see: Will Hillary's Economic Policy Follow Global Best Practices? [http://bit.ly/1LLzrWk].
The great goods of national economies are now commodities. Apple, Monsanto (80% of world corn seed), Walmart, Pepsico, Google are diverse examples of commodity enterprises operating in global markets that increase capital wealth and flatline jobs and wages.
Many advisers and politicians don’t get this paradox: the modern economy is built on essential or desired commodities that transfer wealth without the traditional means of adding value through labor and rarely expand workforces. In fact, work itself is becoming a commodity, priced by industry and region, in the same way as goods and services. But Walmart is assigning hours as a piece rate.
The US economy is deeply entwined with monopolies by companies and by global regions (China’s Pearl River zone, Foxconn; Vietnam, Indonesia, clothing; Brazil, agriculture; the big banks, cell, music and cable services; the US, et al.), and does not want to restructure a system designed to vacuum up cash and maintain rock-bottom wages while the private sector shifts social costs to government to be dismantled.
At the $9 an hour minimum, purchasing power returns to 1979 levels, 20 points lower than France.
For a discussion of successful global models, see: Will Hillary's Economic Policy Follow Global Best Practices? [http://bit.ly/1LLzrWk].
34
It amuses me that so many NY Times readers fail to understand how the world works.
Wal-Mart does not exist to provide employment for all. It exists to make a profit (which at 3% is quite meager). As a corporation, its primary responsibility is to its shareholders. After the Waltons, the largest shareholders are union pension plans.
Wal-Mart does not exist to provide employment for all. It exists to make a profit (which at 3% is quite meager). As a corporation, its primary responsibility is to its shareholders. After the Waltons, the largest shareholders are union pension plans.
5
What I fail to understand is why corporations don't understand what Henry Ford articulated so long ago, and that is if one wants to sell ones product one has to pay ones workers so they can afford it.
6
"Concerned," the world only has "worked" that way in the 21st century. Even as recently as the 1970s the rules for corporations were very very different. You should know that.
You mention "3% profit." Oh my goodness. Can we talk about corporate tax incentives of every poassible sort, credits, writeoffs, offshore wealth, etc, when we quote 3% profit? Yikes.
You mention "3% profit." Oh my goodness. Can we talk about corporate tax incentives of every poassible sort, credits, writeoffs, offshore wealth, etc, when we quote 3% profit? Yikes.
6
When I was much younger, with two then four sons, I did not hesitate to seek a second job. I took my role in the family as the resource provider seriously. I still found time for family because that is what one should do. Gentlemen and Ladies, do your job as finance and fun family provider.
17
Re taking a second job, it's doable when both jobs have predictable hours. If one or both jobs have hours that vary unpredictably, it's near impossible to coordinate.
29
Sporadic part-time hours make acquiring a second job more difficult.
11
It's hard to take on a second job when your employers can change up your hours every week. That's a big issue for part-timers these days.
21
Therein lies one of the biggest problem many working class people face, as much as they want to work, the jobs available pay minimum wage or slightly higher, offer no benefits and never provide more than 30 hours a week. Under these circumstances it is almost impossible for the working class to rise to the middle class. And then even the middle class struggles with offshoring, higher health insurance premiums and a cost of living that rises mercilessly. All the while the richest segment of the population become wealthier. Crime rises in the poorer areas of the country where many do not care if they end up in jail or worse. Who in their right many fails to see that the current status quo is a recipe for social unrest?? Let's party on!
105
As Warren Buffett said: "I did not become rich by making someone else poor."
9
Calling all pitchforks and torches: come out tonight!
What heavy metal band was it?:
"You've got to fight
for your right
to PAAAAAAHHHRRRTYY!"
What heavy metal band was it?:
"You've got to fight
for your right
to PAAAAAAHHHRRRTYY!"
2
Someone please explain to me how anyone can build a life making $9.00 per hour, even working full time. What do you bring home after taxes?
85
For someone like Mr. Rodriguez, benefits like food stamps and the Earned Income Tax Credit should come into play, effectively negating his tax burden. To be sure, Walmart giving him more hours would be better, but would mean less hours or even no work (needed to qualify for the EITC) for someone else. Wages should go up, but hours might be a zero-sum scenario.
As the march toward artificial intelligence and automation continues, it seems that we will have to look at income supplements quite differently, no longer assuming that anyone who would like to work can find a job, and with a sufficient number of hours to achieve and to maintain a reasonable standard of living.
Ms. Prothero could get a paying job, but would likely not bring home much after paying for child care, and, were she and Mr. Rodriguez to marry, the Earned Income Credit that he qualifies for as a single parent might disappear. It's time to stop punishing low-income people for being married.
As the march toward artificial intelligence and automation continues, it seems that we will have to look at income supplements quite differently, no longer assuming that anyone who would like to work can find a job, and with a sufficient number of hours to achieve and to maintain a reasonable standard of living.
Ms. Prothero could get a paying job, but would likely not bring home much after paying for child care, and, were she and Mr. Rodriguez to marry, the Earned Income Credit that he qualifies for as a single parent might disappear. It's time to stop punishing low-income people for being married.
30
Probably more, with the earned income credit.
3
Explain to me why an adult is trying to build a life doing the job of a 16 year old.
2
What is wrong with this country? What kind of country with the massive resources that we have here, in the U.S.A. lavishes wages and benefits on the three branches of government, and yet the very recipients of these wages and benefits move against the good citizens who allow them to hold office?
Well, I can say this truth, a country that enjoys betraying its own people. A country that lives to watch its citizens suffer, while enriching the billionaires and millionaires. A country that enjoys pandering to a certain segment of union workers, rather than moving to unionize most places of employment.
I do not shop Walmart, I shop locally, regardless of the increase of cost of those products, despite the fact that my wages are barely above the poverty level. We need a multiplicity of revolutions in this country, both big and small, beginning with the dismantling of Walmart.
Well, I can say this truth, a country that enjoys betraying its own people. A country that lives to watch its citizens suffer, while enriching the billionaires and millionaires. A country that enjoys pandering to a certain segment of union workers, rather than moving to unionize most places of employment.
I do not shop Walmart, I shop locally, regardless of the increase of cost of those products, despite the fact that my wages are barely above the poverty level. We need a multiplicity of revolutions in this country, both big and small, beginning with the dismantling of Walmart.
159
What kind of country is this, you ask? One that has Capitalism as its fundamental religion and worships profit above everything else.
7
Maybe they should unionize and go on strike.
68
When Walmart workers make moves to unionize, Walmart closes the store. The recent increase in pay is really an effort to stave off worker anger and mollify them enough that they won't consider the benefits of unionizing.
9
Let them close the stores Chris.
2
However attractive that would be, it's a very risky strategy - while theoretically nobody is supposed to be fired in the US for attempting to unionize, in practice the NLRB is basically not functioning at all right now so there's nobody to stop them from doing so. Walmart in particular has been very aggressively anti-union.
That's not to say the United Food and Commercial Workers haven't been trying, though.
That's not to say the United Food and Commercial Workers haven't been trying, though.
1
Poverty is not Walmart's fault, nor are the vagaries of the market, nor are the problems of low skills, nor is Mr. Rodriquez's status as a parent...
If we are going to have this discussion let's make it about our shared national disgrace.... the unconscionable level of the minimum wage, and our general dysfunction as a society.
Let's stop using Walmart as a whipping boy.... it's ridiculous!
If we are going to have this discussion let's make it about our shared national disgrace.... the unconscionable level of the minimum wage, and our general dysfunction as a society.
Let's stop using Walmart as a whipping boy.... it's ridiculous!
37
Re: "Let's stop using Walmart as a whipping boy.... it's ridiculous!"
Not so ridiculous when Walmart is the largest employer example of our "national disgrace". I view Walmart as exploitive and like another commenter refuse to shop there.
Not so ridiculous when Walmart is the largest employer example of our "national disgrace". I view Walmart as exploitive and like another commenter refuse to shop there.
75
What are you talking about? Walmart is an ongoing criminal enterprise supported by US tax dollars paying for food stamps and other necessities that ten dollars an hour will not cover.
Maintaining a slave would cost more than Walmart pays. American corporate treatment of it's workers is the modern equivalent of slavery.
Maintaining a slave would cost more than Walmart pays. American corporate treatment of it's workers is the modern equivalent of slavery.
39
If you think for one moment EEE, that Walmart does not have a direct hand in holding down the minimum wage in this country, you are grossly mistaken. Walmart despite that fact of lording over many, many employees does zero to build a strong country.
18
The other issue is that it makes zero sense for any business to pay overtime. You do what you need to keep that from happening. Overtime laws have help create the situation where people can't get 40 hours. I have staff who want to work more hours but it would be downright foolish to pay someone $25 hr when I could pay someone $10-12 to do the same work.
This situation will only get worse as we raise the minimum wage. Lift the overtime limit to 50 hours and watch how many 35-40 hour a week jobs you get.