Posted on 11/27/2012 9:19:55 AM PST by Vigilanteman
Saying their walkout on 'Black Friday' had shown the world's largest retailer their determination to fight against all odds, Walmart workers hailed their wage protest Saturday.
Hundreds of protesters targeted Walmart stores across the United States on Friday, the busiest shopping day of the year, accusing the bargain superstore of ripping off its own employees.
The protests were designed to disrupt the Black Friday shopping frenzy, after Thursday's Thanksgiving holiday, when deep discounts pull in waves of customers.
"Today's protests at Walmart stores across the country are a reminder of the enormous power of working people uniting to demand a better future with a living wage, affordable healthcare and respect on the job," said Mary Kay Henry, president of the 2.1 million-member Service Employees International Union (SEIU).
Her optimism was shared by Colby Harris, a Walmart sales associate who walked off his job in Lancaster, Texas late Thursday.
(Excerpt) Read more at industryweek.com ...
Wal-mart pays so little that up to 80% of its employees are on some sort of public assistance. Wal-mart employees collect around $2.7 billion in welfare a year.
This is an issue that needs addressing.
They (the real Walmart workers) measure success by the fact that so many people flocked to Walmart to do their shopping (and smirk at the protesters) that their jobs are secure for another year.... No idea how that ties in with the actual story.
Our response to the left should be: "Why are you trying to disenfranchise the poor? Where will the poor shop for inexpensive merchandise if Walmart is forced to unionize?"
nah, WalMart had big sales because people want to buy cheap shit in bulk and they would walk over top of Grandma to load their carts
Now, if the Waltons ever get sick of this crap and move their business to India and Russia, these stores will become govt co-ops aka MoveOn.Mart, the shit won’t be so cheap anymore, and the checkout lines will be like wilderness paths as union slugs paid $20 an hour to punch cash registers and stock shelves take their breaks and holidays
Why? WalMart demands labor at the lowest end of the labor pool. The jobs performed by many WalMart workers are simply not valuable enough to be paid more than that. But the same goes for the kid I pay to rake my leaves. If I had to pay him union wages, I’d eliminate the job altogether and then I’d have leaves and he’d have no money.
If WalMart were forced to pay union wages and be subject to union stupidity, there would be fewer WalMart jobs and the welfare payments to employees who also happen to work at WalMart would increase to $4 billion per year or more. WalMart is providing a public service by creating jobs that non- or low-skilled workers can fill and thus relieve some of the burden those workers place on the public dole.
Finally, receiving public assistance is not just a function of individual income. Cost of living and family size are also factored in. A WalMart wage is fine if you live alone in a small trailer or share an apartment with someone else. It can’t support any luxuries or other family members.
So the issue that needs addressing is why people turn the equation on its head and vilify WalMart for providing jobs to people who might not have them otherwise.
This reminds me of the pro-gay activists who declare a “wear jeans if you support gays” day, then claim victory when millions of people who never heard about their proclaimation wear jeans.
Where is your proof of that statement?
“Wal-mart pays so little that up to 80% of its employees are on some sort of public assistance. Wal-mart employees collect around $2.7 billion in welfare a year. This is an issue that needs addressing.”
No it doesn’t. First, I doubt that 80% of its workers are on some form of welfare. Second, its not Walmart’s job to keep people off public assistance. Third, if it is true that they are on public assistance I would say change the requirements so that fewer people qualify.
“Where is your proof of that statement?”
http://www.goodjobsfirst.org/corporate-subsidy-watch/hidden-taxpayer-costs
You can doubt it all you want. Your doubt doesn't make it untrue.
Let's kick Wal-Mart off welfare
Second, its not Walmart’s job to keep people off public assistance.
It's also not the taxpayer's job to pick up Wal-Mart's slack.
Third, if it is true that they are on public assistance I would say change the requirements so that fewer people qualify.
Enjoy your status as a minority party.
Apparently Wal-Mart workers are valuable enough to bring in over $400 billion in sales a year and a $15 billion profit. And equating a 14-year old raking leaves for his neighbor with grown adults trying to work to feed their families is beyond dumb.
If WalMart were forced to pay union wages and be subject to union stupidity, there would be fewer WalMart jobs and the welfare payments to employees who also happen to work at WalMart would increase to $4 billion per year or more. WalMart is providing a public service by creating jobs that non- or low-skilled workers can fill and thus relieve some of the burden those workers place on the public dole.
Sure, Wal-Mart is a wonderful example of the good corporate citizen. If Wal-Mart treated their workers fairly then us taxpayers wouldn't have to subsidize the Walton family fortune.
Finally, receiving public assistance is not just a function of individual income. Cost of living and family size are also factored in. A WalMart wage is fine if you live alone in a small trailer or share an apartment with someone else. It can’t support any luxuries or other family members.
So the issue that needs addressing is why people turn the equation on its head and vilify WalMart for providing jobs to people who might not have them otherwise.
You sound like a character straight out of a Dickens story.
Don't fall for that crap about 80% of its employees being on "welfare". Does that count the seniors on social security hired to supplemnt rheir incomes? WalMart employs over a million people, about half of them part time because fulltimers are not needed on some of the odd shifts the store offers for the convenience of its customers and because GOVERNMENT has made it too expensive keep full timers in low skilled jobs. Just look at the labor force on the street. It is not WalMart's fault that so many people have low skills, can't write read add or dress well, and choose to have illegitimate children and try to raise them in single parent households. Walmart offers these folks options while they train to better themselves,if they choose to do so. Many seem content to pull down $12 an hour for 5 years and more for no skill jobs and bitch about their lack of opportunity. d.oh. Two Walmart employees married to each other could bring home a combined $20-$25 an hour. Would that be middle class enough for you?
If fewer people applied too work at Walmart maybe wages would go up- so would costs. You want to pay top retail to load up on 15 pound jars of cheetos? How many Target and KMart and McDonald workers are on “welfare”? Since dam near anyone under 50K or more can get on "welfare" (stamps). There are members of the US military on welfare. If WalMart employees are really collecting $2.7 Billlion in welfare how much would they collect without WalMart? Personally I think the Waltons should be talking to Pootie about a company move- man would Russians love to have places like WalMart over there...
“The first audience member to speak was one Girsheila Green, a young mother from Compton, Calif., who has worked at Wal-Mart for three years.”
The 80% claim is entirely based on a comment made by this woman. You offer that as proof? Ridiculous.
“It’s also not the taxpayer’s job to pick up Wal-Mart’s slack.”
What slack? You want to punish them for giving people entry level jobs? If you hire a kid to mow your lawn do you owe him a wage he can raise a family on? This is hippy nonsense that shows you have no idea about business or economics.
Enjoy your life on the street in a bankrupt country living off scraps found in dumpsters.
Sorry - I couldn’t get past the first few lines of insults. Generally that indicates to everyone that the person making the insults has nothing but empty rhetoric upon which to base his or her case. That is definitely the case here.
Your first paragraph alone suggests that you’re not even willing to give WalMart a profit margin of 3.75%. I’m not going to even bother fact checking your numbers. If you think there’s many employers willing to provide services and jobs at a lower profit margin, you’ve clearly never been in business or it’s a good thing you got out when you did. The rest of the post is equally unworthy of attention.
Except for the Dickens remark. That was cute.
But there are a number of WalMart employees who actually make decent wages and benefits.
My neice is one of them. It wasn't always this way. When she was in her late 20's, she found herself abandoned by a cad of a husband with four young childen to raise. WalMart hired her as a low wage entry level associate. She had to supplement those meager wages with WIC, Food Stamps and whatever else was available. Unlike a lot of WalMart associates under similar circumstances, she didn't whine and quit. She stuck with it and got promoted to management a step at a time. She now has a decent enough wage and benefit package that she's sending the oldest of the four kids to college.
WalMart offered her that opportunity even if government helped subsidize her in the beginning. Many of the associates she worked with 15 years ago who gave up and quit are now worse off than where she was back then: section 8 housing and waiting for their next government check.
That was their choice, not WalMart's.
Personally, I don't shop Wal-Mart much anymore because the savings for an empty nest couple is just too meager to walk the quarter mile or so from the back of the parking lot to an additional quarter mile or so in the megastore to stand in line for an extra 20 minutes or so to save a couple of bucks. But they've given a lot of people their first job in the workforce and turned more than a few (like my neice) from government dependence to independence.
I am glad to hear that your niece has done well.
ksen thinks its exploitive that WalMart has a profit of about 3 pennies on every dollar (aka the lib talking point that WalMart makes $15 Billion in profit)
http://ycharts.com/companies/WMT/profit_margin
ksen should brainstorm his own business plan and keep less for all his efforts and of course pay workers what they “need” ... in ksens “MoveOn.mart” his employees can bring in their mortgage and rent stubs, food bills, utility bills, cellphone bills, car payments etc
then he can figure out how much to pay each one
and of course in addition to ksen’s main concern of taking care of employees’ living costs, he’ll want to spend a bityof his time and energy figuring out how to offer a shopping experience that will drive the volume of sales he needs to keep MoveOn.mart in business and growing for customers and stockholders and employees...
because management of these issues at WalMart really is just done by a bunch of bloodsucking exploiters
Aw c'mon, there was maybe one insult in the beginning and it wasn't even directed at you personally. ;)
Your first paragraph alone suggests that you’re not even willing to give WalMart a profit margin of 3.75%. I’m not going to even bother fact checking your numbers. If you think there’s many employers willing to provide services and jobs at a lower profit margin, you’ve clearly never been in business or it’s a good thing you got out when you did. The rest of the post is equally unworthy of attention.
I went and did some more digging and WalMart's EBITDA averages around 8% which is seems to be in line with other retailers like Target. WalMart is still not a business to be glorified, despite stories like Vigilanteman's above which seems to be out of the norm compared to what I've been reading recently. They ruthlessly come into a community and drive out businesses that were able to pay a more livable wage and then drive down wages as much as possible to the point where the government has to subsidize their workforce. Not to mention the many other circumstances of the mistreatment of their workforce, i.e. withholding of overtime pay, etc.
WalMart's best defense against the emergence of a union is to treat their employees better and more equitably. They have the means to do it they just choose not to.
Except for the Dickens remark. That was cute.
:hug:
http://ycharts.com/companies/WMT/profit_margin
The better measure is EBITDA which I talked about above. Here's a link to their EBITDA over the past few years.
ksen should brainstorm his own business plan and keep less for all his efforts and of course pay workers what they “need” ... in ksens “MoveOn.mart” his employees can bring in their mortgage and rent stubs, food bills, utility bills, cellphone bills, car payments etc
then he can figure out how much to pay each one
I never said anything about paying workers what they "need." I have argued that WalMart should be able to pay their workers better and provide better working conditions. What you've done is thrown out a red herring or built a strawman or whatever.
It's simple economics that paying their workers more will also result in higher sales for them since their workers seem to also do a lot of shopping at WalMart if they have more disposable income they will have more to buy additional WalMart products. But the modern generation of management doesn't think that way anymore. They've tossed old Henry Ford to the curb.
More people with more disposable income equals a win for everyone.
and of course in addition to ksen’s main concern of taking care of employees’ living costs, he’ll want to spend a bityof his time and energy figuring out how to offer a shopping experience that will drive the volume of sales he needs to keep MoveOn.mart in business and growing for customers and stockholders and employees...
Do you know how much goodwill WalMart could accrue if they worked toward helping to better their employees? That goodwill would translate into more sales and probably into less expense trying to open new stores since communities wouldn't be so adamant about fighting them every step of the way.
because management of these issues at WalMart really is just done by a bunch of bloodsucking exploiters
Well that part's true. ;D
Strange as it may sound they did contribute millions to his campaign.
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.