Posted on 01/01/2006 3:06:28 PM PST by flixxx
ROFL!!!!
Yup........Happy New Year!
Never forget that all the trouble in the world is caused by only 3 things, according to liberals:
1)George Bush
2)Global warming
3)Walmart !!!!!!
Happy New Year!!
BUMP
That is too funny!!!!!!
But if that cart pusher is there for a couple of years then management is disappointed because he's getting a higher salary than a new hire and isn't a whole lot more productive. In fact any person in the same job for more than a year or two becomes more of a liability because a new person can be hired for less, or so management memos seem to indicate. And that lowly cart pusher you promoted to manager? Upper management is debating how much money can be saved on him by cutting the company matching on is 401K. Yep, really concerned about their employees alright.
I think we need to create a WalMart ping list :)
Well actually it is, when part of that plan involves salary and benefits and treatment of employees.
And you know all of this to be fact?
According to published reports on that Susan Chambers memo, which I don't believe Wal-mart ever denied.
walmart is a company for people either looking for something better, houswifes or old people, or teen agers. I dont know to many career wal-mart cashiers.
And people also dont take into account that target and other stores like wal-mart pay much better and tend to have better customer service, perhaps and I know this will make a liberal scream, there not worth more then what they get (if they are why the hell are they not at target or that fabled small town hardware store that pays $20 an hour with benefits thats being crushed by wal-mart that democrats are always talking about?)
Personally I hate wal-marts, there crap sucks and there employees are rude as hell. Im a target man, but wal-mart definitely is a good company and employs a lot of unemployable people.
So the question is - would the American economy be better off if GM imports all of its cars from China?
The cart pusher is most likely going to be part of the classification of Wal-Mart workers I already outlined in post #13. Why would Wal-Mart replace a part-time, teenage cart pusher making slightly higher than the minimum-wage but who goes about his job and waste their time and money replacing him with someone who may say "screw this, I can make more at McDonald's" and quit within days?
In fact any person in the same job for more than a year or two becomes more of a liability because a new person can be hired for less
You are assuming that most Wal-Mart workers see Wal-Mart as a lifetime career choice. I stated that the opportunity for such a choice exists because Wal-Mart has a proud tradition of seeing its employees climb the ladder. Really though, most Wal-Mart workers are content at working the same mundane position for a year or two (because it's their 2nd job or they're in school) and the feeling is mutual with Wal-Mart because they get the qualified associates who plug the scheduling holes around the full-time staff.
How dare you confuse a Wally-basher with "facts"!! You know dang well that if the guy had any command of facts, rather than a knee-jerk negative reaction every time he reads the words "Wal-Mart", he wouldn't have a word to say.
walmart will only get bigger since now they are big enough to bully their vendors, down to things like making them show up with deliveries within a 15 minute time frame, or come back later.
then again if these vendors want to bend over for walmart like that, thats their problem
Please explain to me how Costco's supposed better treatment of its employees affects Wal-Mart's status as America's biggest employer?
So people who work at Target plan to be cashiers all their lives? No wonder they love unions. If I planned on a lifetime of unskilled 8-hour labor, I'd be a union man, too.
Please explain to me how Costco's supposed better treatment of its employees affects Wal-Mart's status as America's biggest employer?
If you have a costco and a wal-mart in the same market and costco pays a buck an hour more than wal-mart, then they are going to get the first pick of employees.
no, for the most part they tend to be under 21 from my experience. But they tend to be more knowledgeable and nicer. But this is just from my experience and opinion.
walmart gets what they pay for. They tend to hire the least employable employees because they will work for less and customers dont shop at walmart for customer service, they shop there for $30 DVD players.
But for me, I would rather pay $39 for a DVD player at target and get someone who knows what they are talking about (and one who wont yell at me.)
Because he's making slightly higher than their entry level wage, that's why. What other reason is necessary? As Susan Chambers pointed out in her memo, "The cost of an associate with seven years of tenure is almost 55% more than the cost of an associate with one year of tenure, yet there is no difference in his or her productivity. Moreover, because we pay an associate more in salary and benefits as his or her tenure increases, we are pricing that associate out of the labor market, increasing the likelihood that he or she will stay with Wal-Mart." The overwhelming majority of employees are replacable at a moment's notice in Wal-Mart corporate thinking. Turnover is to be encouraged because new hires are brought on at the entry level wage and can be made as productive as a longer term, higher paid employee in a short period of time. That's why employee turnover rates approaching 50 percent aren't an issue for concern. More like a matter of corporate pride.
You are assuming that most Wal-Mart workers see Wal-Mart as a lifetime career choice.
Chambers didn't differentiate between career employees and part timers in her memo, though the fact that she pointed out that a 7 year employee costs the company 55% more than a recent hire is a good indication that such employees are not considered assets.
We were talking business plans, which was what the article at the beginning of this thread was about. Costco and Wal-Mart have different business plans where one company, Costco, looks on their employees as assets and the other company, Wal-Mart, looks on them as disposable liabilities.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.