Wow this is dumb. They pay the ‘most the least’ because they create more entry level positions than other companies.
“Despite this fact, improvements in employee benefits or an increase in pay have not materialized for workers at most of the companies on the list. “
How is this different from the rest of us?
As long as supply of workers (i.e., un or underemployed) exceed the demand for labor, the pay rates will never go up. Yes, the Government could “mandate” higher wages, but that will just drive more into the unemployment lines. All this UNLESS the socialist planners of this country tell employers who they can hire and fire and how much they will pay. A revolution will sure to follow.
These companies not only provide a great deal for all of us as consumers, they are places people can often get honest work quickly when you need a job. Some of these jobs are pretty good, too, some not but people move along to other jobs when they can and want to do it. There’s a lot of gain for all of us with these companies, their products and services, and yes: the millions of jobs they provide us.
The despicable envy promoting left hates the facts of any matter especially things like what some have already posted. Some of those being what each company brings us as a whole and more.
What I would like to point out is that the CEO of Starbucks makes slightly less than the CEO of WalMart and yet as a percentage of the over revenue makes FAR more than the WalMart CEO....but, they’re liberal....THEY get a PASS.
“So far, Penney’s attempts at a turnaround have failed, and it is struggling just to stay afloat... If J.C. Penney cannot get some traction during the holiday season, employees no doubt willface more layoffs.”
Starting the layoffs with Ellen Degeneres might help.
Entry level jobs and part time jobs for most of those employed by these companies. Some included jobs where the servers receive tips. Just more anti-business baloney from the left.
Yes, all retail or fast food, and in both industries the vast majority of the jobs are not intended or expected to be life-time-career-primary breadwinner jobs; they are jobs for teens and in-college students; part-time jobs for full-time moms (extra money for the family); retirees supplementing social security &/or other retirment income; in between jobs for seasonal workers; getting-job-experience jobs for unskilled, inexperienced, low grades high school grads still living with mom & dad; and people in similar statuses in the work force.
Are their others that fall into these not-for-primary-bread-winner jobs. Yes. That is not the fault of the employers who hire them and at least give them some employment where others have none to offer.
I am not saying there are not life-time-career primary-breadwinner jobs in these companies. I am only saying such jobs are, by the job requirements, are only a small portion of the kind of jobs these companies provide, and that is why mere “average” compensation figures, out of conext of the kind of work/jobs and the majority of the types of people filling the jobs, is misleading. It is misleading because the authors expect EVERY job in the world to be a life-time-career-primary-breadwinner job, when in the past or now that has never been a reality.
The “income gap” within these companies’ labor costs are directly related to the “skills gap” between the types of labor being compensated. An executive postition requires a lot of intellectual skill and is therefore compensated accordingly. A fry cook or cashier at the bottom of the labor pool are appreciated daily by the customers, but their skills are very common and easily obtained.
And so it begins. The mass vilification of the Grrrrrreeeedy Eeeeeeeevil Corporations who have been HOARDING PILES OF CASH rather than creating Living Wage Jobs for The People under the magnificent beneficence that is Obama.
And, for a couple of these, also payback for daring to squawk about Obamacare.
Also part of the opening salvo of the full-court press to unionize these companies.
I stopped reading at this point.
One of the biggest problems now is that with the influx of illegal aliens, they're often taking those jobs, and quite frankly, most of those illegal aliens are far more attractive to employers. Even though they might not speak english, they often have incredible work ethics, and are willing to do any work for what ever pay is available.
But back to the topic at hand, minimum wage jobs were never to be used to support a family. And I've heard that one of the reasons that unions are behind increasing minimum wage is because union wages are sometimes indexed to the minimum wage. So that any time the minimum wage is increased, the union wages go up, without having to renegotiate their contracts.
Mark
Hubby and I play in Euchre tournament and the two people of that group work for Walmart. The gal told me tonite she makes 22.00/hr and the guy makes around the same...plus they get Holiday pay tomorrow.
I live in a middle income to low class town. Soo— Walnart is paying pretty good it seems.
Damn greedy Corp.... They can afford to pay their burger flippers / bus boys 40.00 a hour...for an entry level job...
Worked out so well for Hostess....
Correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t most of these companies:
1) Provide many entry level opportunites for unskilled workers?
2) Hire many part-time people?
It appears to me that this is a veiled attempt to:
a) suggest that the minimum wage be raised; and,
b) point out how evil and unfair highly paid people and corporations that pay them are.