If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Crooks & Liars)   Wal-mart workers are planning the company's first ever walk-out. On Black Friday   (occupyamerica.crooksandliars.com) divider line 709
    More: Followup, unfair labor practice, Center for Independent Media  
•       •       •

20628 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Nov 2012 at 8:59 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



709 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-16 12:53:44 AM

Fade2black: Sergeant Grumbles: Fade2black: Have you heard of entry level jobs to get your skills in order, so you can actually take some initiative to move on to a better paying job through school, training, or perseverance? Not everything is handed out on a silver platter (yet, the dems have 4 more years). If that was the case, high school kids would be basking in riches from Mcdonald's.

Retail and Fast Food is tradionally entry level jobs. They are used for job experience and training so you can move on to bigger and better. They are not jobs built around you deciding you're entitled to a pension and a petty cash fund.

Is there some reason working for Wal-Mart need not be gainful employment besides your opinion of what counts as work?

I just explained why. You're just looping it around so that you don't have to counter the argument. If this were the politics tab you would've called me Hitler or used Correlation/Causation to shut me up because you couldn't come up with a retort.

Entry level is entry level for a reason. Not everybody needs an economics class to understand that if you jump up every single "no training required" job to "gainfully employed" that it would collapse the economy.

...or are you just angry and frustrated because divorced with 3 kids working at 34 1/2 hours in retail isn't paying the bills you brought on?


So...your idea here is that all the jobs in retail are entry level? And that once a person has enough experience, they should leave the company and move on? That would give a company like Walmart or McDonalds a 100% turnover rate every six months or so. Is that good for a company, to lose everyone every six or 8 months? Does that sound like a good business model to you?

Because if so, you're thinking like the douchebags at Walmart, and it explains why you don't understand why the employees are upset. Yeah, retail jobs like stocking and cashiering are entry level, for a while. Nobody thinks they're going to be stockboy their entire life and retire after 20 years. But they MIGHT think that after a year or two at stocking, they might be moving on to night warehouse clerk, or something like that. They might expect that after a year as part-time cashier, they have a shot at shift manager. They DON'T think that after five years they'll still have 30 hours stocking shelves in the underwear department and be told they should be glad to have that you worthless piece of replaceable garbage.

That's what's got Walmart and other retail employees upset, you see. Not that they have crappy jobs that don't pay much; but that after years of service they STILL have crappy jobs that don't pay much. Entry-level jobs is one thing, but Walmart is a huge corporation with (allegedly) lots of opportunity. Is it too much to expect that one should be able to move up within the company? Why should they have to quit to find a better job? Why can't Walmart be expected to take care of them by giving them some opportunity (assuming they're worth it)? But Walmart apparently feels like you do: What did you expect? Retail is for crappy entry level jobs, not for someone who wanted a chance to move up. (Never mind that there are lots of middle- and upper-management positions within Walmart itself) We don't move people up, we hire from outside!

But that's not a good way to keep employees around, wouldn't you agree?
 
2012-11-16 12:54:08 AM

sethen320: Mikey1969: Sergeant Grumbles: Mikey1969: In short, "gainfully employed" means having a paying job.

Being paid so little as to have to go on public assistance is not gainfully employed by any definition.

Well, except by every definition available outside of this board.

Ok, I never thought I would have to say this to anyone...

A dictionary is not a human being.

You have this thing encased within your skull. It's called a brain. Please consider using it during arguments such as the one you're currently engaged in.


No it isn't, but a definition is a definition. It tells you exactly what a word or phrase means. Having a brain means that you use words and phrases correctly, not that you make shiat up as you go along and then expect everyone else to know what YOUR special definition means.
 
2012-11-16 12:54:48 AM

Zebulon: HotIgneous Intruder: I'm sure walmart is really struggling in this economy.
What's that you say? No way. Really?
Ok.
I'll just leave this here:
Bernie Sanders says Walmart heirs own more wealth than bottom 40 percent of Americans
Well, goodness, it's true.
snip:
No. 9: Jim Walton, $23.7 billion
No. 10: Alice Walton, $23.3 billion
No. 11: S. Robson Walton, oldest son of Sam Walton, $23.1 billion
No. 103: Ann Walton Kroenke, $3.9 billion
No. 139: Nancy Walton Laurie, $3.4 billion

That's a grand total of $102.7 billion for the whole family.

Sylvia Allegretto, a labor economist at the Center on Wage and Employment Dynamics at the University of California-Berkeley, compared the Waltons' cumulative net worth with that of the overall population, as cited in the Survey of Consumer Finances. (She used the Waltons' wealth from 2010, which was valued at $89.5 billion.)

Allegretto found that in 2007, the wealth held by the six Waltons was equal to that of the bottom 30.5 percent of families in the U.S. In 2010, the Waltons' share equaled the entire bottom 41.5 percent of families.

Walmart can afford raises for everyone.

Those people who you are talking about have all their money from SHARES of STOCK in the company. They do not, in any way, impact how much money Walmart spends on payroll. You cannot take money away from them and somehow give it to the employees.


A stock's value is basically tied to the profits the company generates and the stock dividends that will be paid as a result of those profits. Lowering payroll increases profits in the short term. In the long term, it can be argued that low wages will eventually impact profits due to high turnover. The stockholders do have a say in this with their vote. The Walton family owns enough of the company stock to be heard should they wish a change in policy. So the shiatty wages and poor treatment invariable rests on their shoulders.
 
2012-11-16 12:55:02 AM

Great Janitor: sethen320: Great Janitor: ox45tallboy: Great Janitor: There are jobs out there. No one has to settle for Walmart unless they want to.

Jeez, dude, that's not exactly a realistic attitude. Do you know how much upheaval a family (with one car!) goes through when Mom has to rearrange her schedule around a new job?

Quitting and taking another job is just not as easy as you seem to believe it is. And what about the next poor asshole that takes the Wal-Mart job? Are you okay with them being treated like sh*t?

Read my longer post about my sister about 50 posts upthread. Wal-Mart broke their promises to her. They treat her like sh*t. And there is not a whole lot that she can really do about it.

So, they treated her like shiat and she stayed. I've had employers do the same shiat to me. I found a new job each time. What's going to cause a bigger headache, the wife finding a new job, one that would pay and treat her better or her staying in a job that she hates and bringing home all that negativity.

My mom works a job she biatches about constantly. After five years of complaining about her job, her low pay, the people she works for to my dad. My dad would say "Quit and find another job!" She never did. My dad eventually left and divorced my mom for that reason. He couldn't take it anymore. He was tired of my mom coming home each day biatching at him for a job she refused to leave.

Now, now I get to take a weekly phone call from my mom who is biatching about the job she hates and has had for fifteen years now.

So what you're saying is that if the workers aren't happy with the pay they should do something?

Yes actually. Me, I started out in retail, unskilled and working a job that I hated that only paid minimum wage. I gained skills to change that fact. The business owners also have the right to listen to what the workers want and either agree or disagree with what they say. If the business owners say no to higher pay or better working conditions, then the wo ...


You and I share similar backgrounds. I do pretty well for myself at this point in my life, but I've seen mistreatment of others in the name of profits. I don't have a dog in this fight at the moment, but I do believe that something needs to change. There's too much greed and I can see tension building. If the workers think something is wrong and it's a huge majority then there is probably something wrong. If 100 out of 1 million do something then obviously it isn't a problem for them and they will all be as happy next week as they were last week. I believe that there's a problem and so I speak out. In the end it doesn't really matter what I think, but I hope everyone else does.
 
2012-11-16 12:55:15 AM

Bucky Katt: daRog: Kittypie070: F*ck Wally World.

Kitty angry. KITTY SMASH!

i just finished watching an episode of the Incredible Hulk. Lou never says Hulk smash, though.


And I doubt Kittiepie070 is actually a large green mutant. But I could be wrong.
 
2012-11-16 12:55:19 AM

ciberido: You can read up on it, but it basically boils down to "I don't want to live in a world where bad things happen to good people, so I'll refuse to believe that I do, in fact, live in such a world."


That's a very good post. Thank you for that.

I'm not quite sure why you attached me to the quote in your post, because I never said that, but it did bring your post to my attention. So it was a good thing.
 
2012-11-16 12:55:44 AM

Thigvald the Big-Balled: FuryOfFirestorm: djkutch: Silly Jesus: LULZ. I hope they are all fired. Plenty more people out there who would love their job.

This. I don't understand why employees shouldn't just be forced to live and work at the job. A little room with a hotplate, if you will. Share a shiater down the hall. I believe the president who should have been explored such policies in China.

Employees should have absolutely no voice. In return, said employees get no pay.

Share a shiatter? What, is a bucket too good for those worthless plebes? Toilets cost money, dammit!

And a hot plate? What is this - The Waldorf Astoria? Next they'll be expecting food that isn't made from old newspapers and ground up apple cores!

[images.huffingtonpost.com image 850x572]


Old newspapers and ground up apple cores? Luxury. We used to have to get out of the lake at six o'clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of hot gravel, work twenty hour day at mill for tuppence a month, come home, and Dad would thrash us to sleep with a broken bottle, if we were lucky!
 
2012-11-16 12:56:51 AM

sethen320: Nutsac_Jim: sethen320: So are you saying that it's OK for an employer to ask for ALL of your timewhich is not occupied by eating, sleeping, or travelling to/from work and not pay you enough to actually live on? Even if we eliminate insurance? You're part of the problem if your answer is yes. This isn't a right vs. left or Obama vs Romney thing. It's not even about Wal-Mart specifically. This is about doing the right thing.

Odd indeed. I used to work at Wal-mart. I seemed to have enough to live on and stick money in the stock plan where the company matched part of my contributions.

Maybe the people you are talking about eat too much or something? I don't recall them asking for too much of my time.

Ok, I'm intrigued. You were an employee which received pay that you were able to live on and still had free time? I'm not being contrarian, I'm actually open to learning more. If I'm wrong I would definitely like to know about it. What kind of position did you hold? Were you ever forced to work holidays? Locked in?


I started out working nights so I could have some free time. My supervisor made a recommendation
to the store manager for a department manager job that was open, and that I was a hard worker.
I took that job and the pay bump, because I wasn't enjoying working with the tards on the night shift.

I regularly came in late to the manager meeting but it was never mentioned to me. Apparently, my doing the job well was appreciated by the manager more. It never was brought up at any review nor stopped me from getting raises that I know of.

I never had any issues working holidays, because our store was closed on those days. Nobody ever locked anyone in the warehouse. Maybe my store manager was different.

I would not say it was my dream job. I basically thought all day about how I could make things work better. I went from there to making a wad of cash in some other companies.

My girlfriend's brother, he decided that if I can do it, he can do it. He was fired from Walmart, because instead of thinking about how to make things better, he thought about how he could hide in various locations of the store so he wouldn't have to do any work.

With the stock plan, Walmart made you withhold it from your check for 2 months. I ate peanut butter sandwiches and ramen until they matched my contributions. I then simply cashed out my contributions and my 20% bonus. Other guys at the store.. they wanted their beer money now, dammit.

Some of the workers would be worth the 25,000 that is being passed around on this thread. Most of them, they would be grossly overpaid at 25k, and I would almost consider it stealing from the company to require they be paid the same.
 
2012-11-16 12:58:18 AM
Silly Jesus (farkied: Jesus must indeed seem silly to this guy): Maybe it will shape up like the Hostess strike. Hostess told the workers that if they went on strike they would shutter the factories and fire them all. They went on strike...Hostess closed the factories...the workers went all WHARGARBLLL "yall took are jerbs!" It was beeeautiful.

YEEEEEE-HAW! That'll larn them uppity peasants! Score one more for the zillionaires!

Gold und Silber über alles,
Über alles in die Welt....

/Citation needed; here's mine.
 
2012-11-16 12:58:55 AM

ox45tallboy: Do you understand that my sister signed up for 4 days a week, not 5?

Did she make it clear that her availability was only 4 days a week? Why does she show up for 5 days, if she's only available for 4?

Do you understand that if she works 40 hours a week, she is supposed to get insurance?

Has she asked for it?

Do you understand that she is required to come in on time on Friday nights, and then sit off the clock to cover any overtime?

I've never heard of such nonsense as punching in late to avoid overtime. Punching out early, sure. Has she suggested she punch in on time, and leave early instead?

 
2012-11-16 12:59:01 AM

Great Janitor: Sergeant Grumbles: Zebulon: Lets make it so everyone in America gets $12 an hour, minimum.

Okay, let's do it.

Zebulon: Oh, that would cause the economy to collapse? Whoops, my bad.

Wouldn't even come close. We'd see an economic boom as the people most likely to spend money, the poor, suddenly have more of it.

Right now minimum wage is $7.25. So, if a person is making $11/hour, that person is making $3.75/hour more than minimum wage. Pretty good if they started out at minimum wage and worked their way to $11/hour. Now, if minimum wage is jacked up to $12/hour, that person who was making $11/hour is now making a dollar more an hour, but is back to making minimum wage. It doesn't matter what the minimum wage is, if you're making minimum wage you're still making the lowest amount that your employer is allowed to pay you.

If you want more money, find a better job, gain more marketable skills, start your own business. Don't expect the government to increase minimum wage or protest your employer into paying you more.


There is no way you are serious. You've been at it all night. Are you really that excited about sucking the corporate cock, or is it just really important to you that someone be there on Thanksgiving to sell you that piece of shiat you're wanting? Please tell me it's the latter, because the former means that you're lost already, and frankly, humanity needs you.
 
2012-11-16 01:01:58 AM

Great Janitor: If you want more money, find a better job, gain more marketable skills, start your own business. Don't expect the government to increase minimum wage or protest your employer into paying you more.


Pull themselves up by their bootstraps, eh?

But someone still has to stock the groceries. If EVERYONE did as you suggested, who would stock the groceries?
 
2012-11-16 01:02:05 AM

sethen320: Nutsac_Jim: ox45tallboy: Great Janitor: If they want a better paying job, a better working environment no one is forcing them to work at Walmart, they are free to find new jobs.

And you're free to make sweet, sweet love to Christina Hendricks. However, that means getting her to cooperate, just like it means getting another employer to hire you.

Fact is, Wal-Mart runs the other businesses out when they put in a location. You either work there, or you don't work.

Hey, kind of like a union. You either join the union, or you don't work.

Yeah, I used to think that was true too. That's not actually how unions work, well not all of them anyway. I don't know everything.


I worked for UPS in MD while I was going to UMd. You HAD to join the union if you wanted to work there. No ifs, ands or buts.

I later worked at UPS in Va. You could join the union if you wanted to do so. I think unions are great. I don't like being forced to join in order to work.
 
2012-11-16 01:02:21 AM

Nerdhurter: Watching "progressives" swallow their puke trying to defend Wal Mart workers is worth the price of admission. "Do you know someone who'll do that job?" "It will take time for Wal Mart to train another mouth breather to do the job." Disdain and self congratulatory pity forming a superstorm of liberal smugness, guess what pukes this is the real little man you purport to defend. Not alot of locally sourced craft beers being sipped amongst the dudes who stock shelves at 2 in the morning.


*pats the little man on the head*

You really are precious.

/smugness off
 
2012-11-16 01:03:03 AM

jayphat: Mikey1969: jayphat: Any retail store where the door locks on the inside require a key to unlock them is a fire marshals wet farking dream!

And any store where nothing is required to unlock the doors but pushing a handle is a burglar's farking wet dream.

Besides, the fire doors can still be opened. If you'd read TFA, you would have found out that the workers were threatened with their jobs if they went out the fire door, and there wasn't a fire, even if that person was seriously injured.

I don't think you understand. You see, if a key is required for the main entrance ON BOTH SIDES, that's a usually a pretty serious violation of the fire code. It's not like you have the thumb lock on the outside FFS. Reason being, most entrances/exits in retail also double as the emergency exit in the planning, hence, they need to be able to be unlocked at a moments notice, without special tools like a key. As I said, a fire marshals wet dream.


A: If it doesn't require a key from the inside, it only requires a burglar to hang out until everyone has left.

B: Entry doors are required to be unlocked during business hours, period, so your little fantasy of the manager having to dig out a key while people are burning to death doesn't work. The door is open while the business is open.

C: It obviously doesn't matter that I post this, because you're part of the 'WalMart is a worker's paradise because people work there' crowd, so I'm done. Besides, you've missed the point so many times now that it's not worth pursuing at this point. Good night.
 
2012-11-16 01:03:49 AM
Ok since we're big on democracy lets make sure the public knows about this, let people vote with their dollars. Or we can appoint an official to set wages, make sure everything's fair. Wait lets set minimum wage at 12 dollars an hour. Will alot of small businesses get farked while big business soaks it up, well yeah but...
 
2012-11-16 01:04:06 AM

Mikey1969: sethen320: Mikey1969: Sergeant Grumbles: Mikey1969: In short, "gainfully employed" means having a paying job.

Being paid so little as to have to go on public assistance is not gainfully employed by any definition.

Well, except by every definition available outside of this board.

Ok, I never thought I would have to say this to anyone...

A dictionary is not a human being.

You have this thing encased within your skull. It's called a brain. Please consider using it during arguments such as the one you're currently engaged in.

No it isn't, but a definition is a definition. It tells you exactly what a word or phrase means. Having a brain means that you use words and phrases correctly, not that you make shiat up as you go along and then expect everyone else to know what YOUR special definition means.


Ok, let's try again. Do you look in the dictionary for guidance on how to treat people?

Let's just pretend that nobody said" living wage". What they meant to say is being paid enough to live on without public assistance. There. You got the kindergarten terms. If you need any more help I'm going to have to call a short bus for you. We cool now?
 
2012-11-16 01:05:08 AM

Mikey1969: Of course you still cherry picked my post, including the part about how they said 'emergency, like the place going up in fire.'.


An emergency LIKE the place going up in fire.

e·mer·gen·cy/i'm?rj?nse/
Noun:
A serious, unexpected, and often dangerous situation requiring immediate action.

like/lik/
Preposition:
Having the same characteristics or qualities as; similar to: "they were like brothers".

So, substituting in the original sentence:

''They gave us a big lecture that if we go out that door, you better make sure it's 'A serious, unexpected, and often dangerous situation requiring immediate action' 'similar to' the place going up on fire.''

Sheesh.
 
2012-11-16 01:06:02 AM

fredklein: I've never heard of such nonsense as punching in late to avoid overtime. Punching out early, sure. Has she suggested she punch in on time, and leave early instead?


Yes, it was absoltely clear, punched in by the General Manager herself, that she would work Monday thru Thursday nights. Period.

And as for leaving early, the problem is that payroll ends on Friday night at midnight, so the overtime has to come off before then. But don't you dare come in late!
 
2012-11-16 01:07:16 AM

EVERYBODY PANIC: I am not a Wal*Mart employee, or particularly a huge fan, and I am not a conservative if that matters to you. I am just a person who understand that if you agree to a contract, you should have the honor and dignity to live by it or to cancel it and walk away from it. It is a contract, just a contract, and even when you enter into a bad contract, it was your choice, just as leaving and voiding a contract is a choice.

Note: Lawful marriage is a shiatty contract by design, but folks enter into that one all the time, and the people with integrity make the best of it.


Is it your assertion that Wal*Mart has never, ever gone back on their word or done anything that their contract or other official documents said they would not do, nor broken any laws? Despite the examples given in this thread and in the linked articles?

Because I think your argument kinda depends on the premise that Wal*Mart kept their end of the bargain.
 
2012-11-16 01:07:31 AM

Great Janitor: Sliding Carp: $5.00 says the party of small government, individual freedom, and free market will find a way to claim the government should force them back to work.

Why should they? Just fire the ones who walk out and replace them. Odds are they won't be missed.

Or, here's how I look at it, if I were working at Walmart, I would, first of all, know that like it or not, working Black Friday was going to happen. All things considered, I'd rather work at the start of the sale on Thanksgiving than on Friday because at least on Thursday I'd get holiday pay. Secondly, knowing the kind of customers and the numbers of customers that show on Black Friday, I'd be a bit pissed that my coworkers decided to skip out on a major day at work instead of doing the job that they were hired to do.

In short, Walmart workers, you knew what you were getting into when you filled out the job application. If you don't like the situation of having to work Black Friday, quit your job and find a different one.


They aren't striking on Black Friday because they expect to not work Black Friday, they are striking on that day because Walmart might actually suffer because of it. It's a leverage thing. And no, you don't get holiday pay for working on holidays. There are a few holidays where everyone gets holiday pay depending on their average hours per week, regardless of whether or not they actually work the holiday.
 
2012-11-16 01:09:41 AM

ILoveBurritos: I get that this is mainly a workers vs employers thread at this point, but I can't help but think that the real problem is the consumers (and excessive consumerism). No one wants to pay for decently made products anymore because the only thing consumers look at is the price tag. I'm not good at explaining myself, but it feels like we all assume we've given up on even thinking we can rehabilitate the public on shopping effectively. Like consumers are compelled to shop at Walmart, just open one and people will flock there unable to control themselves.
On a tangent though, I've read that companies that want to sell with Walmart have to meet certain price guidelines otherwise Walmart won't carry their products and since Walmart is such an important chain to sell through. Companies are basically forced to make cheaper products for these dumbass consumers.
What this really all comes down to is that I hadn't had to buy denim jeans for a decade, and now that I'm looking, all I can find anywhere is paper thin garbage that doesn't feel sturdy at all, anywhere. When I compare it to my old ones, the newer ones are obviously inferior. Why would I want to spend $30 on a cheap pair of jeans I'll end up replacing 5 times in the span that a $60 pair would have lasted me once?



[mews urgently]

Go here!! Go here!!

http://www.allamericanclothing.com/
 
2012-11-16 01:09:48 AM

Mikey1969: Sergeant Grumbles: Mikey1969: In short, "gainfully employed" means having a paying job.

Being paid so little as to have to go on public assistance is not gainfully employed by any definition.

Well, except by every definition available outside of this board.


O RLY?
 
2012-11-16 01:10:58 AM

Nutsac_Jim: sethen320: Nutsac_Jim: sethen320: So are you saying that it's OK for an employer to ask for ALL of your timewhich is not occupied by eating, sleeping, or travelling to/from work and not pay you enough to actually live on? Even if we eliminate insurance? You're part of the problem if your answer is yes. This isn't a right vs. left or Obama vs Romney thing. It's not even about Wal-Mart specifically. This is about doing the right thing.

Odd indeed. I used to work at Wal-mart. I seemed to have enough to live on and stick money in the stock plan where the company matched part of my contributions.

Maybe the people you are talking about eat too much or something? I don't recall them asking for too much of my time.

Ok, I'm intrigued. You were an employee which received pay that you were able to live on and still had free time? I'm not being contrarian, I'm actually open to learning more. If I'm wrong I would definitely like to know about it. What kind of position did you hold? Were you ever forced to work holidays? Locked in?

I started out working nights so I could have some free time. My supervisor made a recommendation
to the store manager for a department manager job that was open, and that I was a hard worker.
I took that job and the pay bump, because I wasn't enjoying working with the tards on the night shift.

I regularly came in late to the manager meeting but it was never mentioned to me. Apparently, my doing the job well was appreciated by the manager more. It never was brought up at any review nor stopped me from getting raises that I know of.

I never had any issues working holidays, because our store was closed on those days. Nobody ever locked anyone in the warehouse. Maybe my store manager was different.

I would not say it was my dream job. I basically thought all day about how I could make things work better. I went from there to making a wad of cash in some other companies.

My girlfriend's brother, he decided that if I can do it, h ...


You originally signed up for part-time because you wanted free time, fast-tracked to management over the tards, you never worked holidays because your store was closed...I don't think your experience was typical, for retail in general. I'm glad you moved up and are happy with where you are though. Good work.
 
2012-11-16 01:11:06 AM

ciberido: ox45tallboy: I guess that's what it comes down to, some people, including myself, would still have sympathy for our common man, even if he was dumb enough to hit himself with the hammer. Some people would lock them in a warehouse. You sir, are unsympathetic.

Great Janitor: There are things that I do sympathize with. Someone gets rear ended in a car wreck by a drunk driver, yes I'm going to feel sympathy for the victims of that wreck. Someone does something of their own freewill and suffers, I'm not going to feel bad. My sister's mother in law died from emphysema and when my sister's husband told me, my response was to say "Pity she made the choice to smoke all those cigarettes."


Ah, yes. The dreaded just-world fallacy.

Lerner's inquiry was influenced by repeatedly witnessing the tendency of observers to blame victims for their suffering. During his clinical training as a psychologist, he observed treatment of mentally ill persons by the health care practitioners with whom he worked. Though he knew them to be kindhearted, educated people, they blamed patients for their own suffering. He also describes his surprise at hearing his students derogate the poor, seemingly oblivious to the structural forces that contribute to poverty. In a study he was doing on rewards, he observed that when one of two men was chosen at random to receive a reward for a task, observers' evaluations were more positive for the man who had been randomly rewarded than for the man who did not receive a reward. Existing social psychological theories, including cognitive dissonance, could not fully explain these phenomena. The desire to understand the processes that caused these observed phenomena led Lerner to conduct his first experiments on what is now called the just world hypothesis.

You can read up on it, but it basically boils down to "I don't want to live in a world where bad things happen to good people, so I'll refuse to believe that I do, in fact, live in such a world."


I don't blame victims. Two years ago I was rear ended in a car wreck. The freeway was shut down for construction. My car was at a complete stand still because when you are forcing three lanes of freeway traffic onto a single lane access road with a stop light that doesn't favor the access road, there is not much forward movement. The car that came up behind me, the driver was texting while driving, hit me from the rear at (according the police report) approximately 50mph. I was the first of five cars in what instantly became a multicar crash. I broke seven ribs on my left side, my left shoulder blade was broken, my right shoulder was shattered and required surgery and I have lost both use and feeling in my right shoulder. I also had head and neck injuries. I was out of work for three months while I recovered from my injuries. So I know that blaming the victim of another person's actions is pointless. Though the only person who tried to blame me for the wreck was the woman who rear ended me. Or that's the story that lying biatch gave her insurance company.

Now, I have another friend who upon getting a bad review from his boss, punched a wall and broke his hand. First question I asked him when he told me the story was "Was the review false?" He said no, he admitted that everything mentioned was true, he just didn't realize that they knew about everything or that he was really that bad at his job. Do I blame him for his broken hand? Yeah, he was the dumbass who broke it. No one put a gun to his head and told him to do it.

And I have the same feelings towards my sister. Her husband beats her. Her reaction is "But I had it coming." I one time, ONE TIME tried to help her and got the cops involved. She lied to the cops to cover for her husband and insulted me to the police as part of the cover. So later that year when he back the car over her toe or blackened her eye I didn't care. She had her chance to tell the police the truth and instead she lied to protect that son of a biatch. So when he hits and kicks her I tell her that I don't care. I did my part she turned on me, and if he kills her she's to blame.

If a woman gets raped, I do sympathize and really want to punch anyone in the face who says that she was wanting it or asking for it because of the way she was dressed.
 
2012-11-16 01:12:42 AM

Sergeant Grumbles: Zebulon: Lets make it so everyone in America gets $12 an hour, minimum.

Okay, let's do it.

Zebulon: Oh, that would cause the economy to collapse? Whoops, my bad.

Wouldn't even come close. We'd see an economic boom as the people most likely to spend money, the poor, suddenly have more of it.


You apparently have no idea how most retail companies work. Do you know how much of every dollar you spend at a Walmart actually turns into profit? 3 cents. That's it. 3 pennies. So, to increase one Walmart associate's pay by $4 an hour would take an extra $133 or so in sales. Doesn't seem like much, right? Now, take into account that the average Walmart has about 200 employees, and lets say a third of them are there at any given time. That means that the store would need to cover 67 employees, which would mean they would need an extra $2211 in sales, *every hour*. For a 24 hr supercenter, that would mean a little over $53000 a day. The Walmart I work at usually only averages about $200000 in sales a day, so we would need to increase our sales by about 25% to cover those costs. Not going to happen.
 
2012-11-16 01:12:48 AM

ciberido: Is it your assertion that Wal*Mart has never, ever gone back on their word or done anything that their contract or other official documents said they would not do, nor broken any laws? Despite the examples given in this thread and in the linked articles?

Because I think your argument kinda depends on the premise that Wal*Mart kept their end of the bargain.


Thank you for that. You put it rather more succinctly than I seem to have been able to.
 
2012-11-16 01:13:19 AM
I'm out for the night. Everyone have fun.
 
2012-11-16 01:14:10 AM

ciberido: Nerdhurter: Watching "progressives" swallow their puke trying to defend Wal Mart workers is worth the price of admission. "Do you know someone who'll do that job?" "It will take time for Wal Mart to train another mouth breather to do the job." Disdain and self congratulatory pity forming a superstorm of liberal smugness, guess what pukes this is the real little man you purport to defend. Not alot of locally sourced craft beers being sipped amongst the dudes who stock shelves at 2 in the morning.

*pats the little man on the head*

You really are precious.

/smugness off


Whoa... that is some serious smugness, I'm at a loss.
 
2012-11-16 01:15:28 AM

phunkey_monkey: I hope they do unionize. After a year or so of paying extortionate union dues for nothing will teach them that unionizing is a bad idea.


You sound like the anti-union video Walmart made me watch when I was hired. "YOU"D JUST BE PAYING PEOPLE TO MAKE DECISIONS FOR YOU"
 
2012-11-16 01:19:35 AM

Zebulon: Sergeant Grumbles: Zebulon: Lets make it so everyone in America gets $12 an hour, minimum.

Okay, let's do it.

Zebulon: Oh, that would cause the economy to collapse? Whoops, my bad.

Wouldn't even come close. We'd see an economic boom as the people most likely to spend money, the poor, suddenly have more of it.

You apparently have no idea how most retail companies work. Do you know how much of every dollar you spend at a Walmart actually turns into profit? 3 cents. That's it. 3 pennies. So, to increase one Walmart associate's pay by $4 an hour would take an extra $133 or so in sales. Doesn't seem like much, right? Now, take into account that the average Walmart has about 200 employees, and lets say a third of them are there at any given time. That means that the store would need to cover 67 employees, which would mean they would need an extra $2211 in sales, *every hour*. For a 24 hr supercenter, that would mean a little over $53000 a day. The Walmart I work at usually only averages about $200000 in sales a day, so we would need to increase our sales by about 25% to cover those costs. Not going to happen.


Hey Mr Fancy Pants!! Don't you go tossing around NUMBERS and LOGIC around here. This if FARK and it'll just confuse people.
 
2012-11-16 01:21:07 AM

The Downfall: "YOU"D JUST BE PAYING PEOPLE TO MAKE DECISIONS FOR YOU"


It's funny because "profit" is essentially workers paying people to make decisions for them.
 
2012-11-16 01:21:36 AM

ox45tallboy: Yes, it was absoltely clear, punched in by the General Manager herself, that she would work Monday thru Thursday nights. Period.

And as for leaving early, the problem is that payroll ends on Friday night at midnight, so the overtime has to come off before then. But don't you dare come in late!


If it was "absoltely clear", that she was not available Friday nights, why did she come in at all? If she's mistakenly scheduled for it, she can speak to a manager and get it taken off. And that would solve the whole 'overtime' thing, too.

Or, (assuming she wanted to work Fridays and has less than 2 hours OT) she could punch in at 10pm (on time, no tardys!), and immediately punch out for lunch. Wait the time needed, then punch in from lunch.

Or, she could carry a tape recorder and record management telling her to punch in late, then dinging her for being late. Present the evidence to the next level of management.

Or, you know, just do nothing.

/who the heck closes the payroll week at Friday midnight??
 
2012-11-16 01:22:20 AM

sethen320: Great Janitor: Sergeant Grumbles: Zebulon: Lets make it so everyone in America gets $12 an hour, minimum.

Okay, let's do it.

Zebulon: Oh, that would cause the economy to collapse? Whoops, my bad.

Wouldn't even come close. We'd see an economic boom as the people most likely to spend money, the poor, suddenly have more of it.

Right now minimum wage is $7.25. So, if a person is making $11/hour, that person is making $3.75/hour more than minimum wage. Pretty good if they started out at minimum wage and worked their way to $11/hour. Now, if minimum wage is jacked up to $12/hour, that person who was making $11/hour is now making a dollar more an hour, but is back to making minimum wage. It doesn't matter what the minimum wage is, if you're making minimum wage you're still making the lowest amount that your employer is allowed to pay you.

If you want more money, find a better job, gain more marketable skills, start your own business. Don't expect the government to increase minimum wage or protest your employer into paying you more.

There is no way you are serious. You've been at it all night. Are you really that excited about sucking the corporate cock, or is it just really important to you that someone be there on Thanksgiving to sell you that piece of shiat you're wanting? Please tell me it's the latter, because the former means that you're lost already, and frankly, humanity needs you.


It's not about sucking corporate dick, it's about fact. If you want to get paid more money it's up to you and no one else. How is that so hard to accept. There is a reason why it's called minimum wage. If you want to make more than minimum wage than it's up to you.

In November 2008 I had two friends who sought to make more money. One voted for Obama because he pledged to raise minimum wage. Another bought a house that same day on the court house steps and sold it less than a week later for a profit of more than the first friend will see in two years of income. One relied on the government, the other relied on himself. I started asking the guy who relied on himself for some advice.

As for Black Friday, believe it or not, I don't do those sales. I have decided that companies have the right to be open on what ever hours they wish to be open on during Black Friday, even if it starts on Thanksgiving. I have the right to not participate. Honestly, since that trampling death a few years ago, I actually look down on the Black Friday shoppers who line up and crowd the doors right before the store opens.
 
2012-11-16 01:26:39 AM

Zebulon: Sergeant Grumbles: Sergeant Grumbles: Zebulon: So you think the federal minimum wage should be raised up to a little over $12 an hour? Because that is how much it takes to equal $25 k a year. Have fun paying all the extra money that companies would charge for *everything* to pay for that shiat.

Not sure what happened there...

Raising the pay of Wal-Mart's U.S. workers to a minimum of $12 an hour would lift many out of poverty, reduce their reliance on public assistance, and cost the average consumer, at most, $12.49 a year.

HOW WILL ANYONE BE ABLE TO AFFORD THAT?!

I don't know what sort of math they used to come up with those figures, but raising a company's payroll by roughly a third would have much more of an impact than the article claims. Plus, do you not care about Target employees? What about people who work at the local grocery store? They don't make $12 an hour either. Why does Walmart, and ONLY Walmart, have to start treating their employees better? Why not give the person who works behind the counter at McDonalds $12 an hour? How about your paper boy? Does he get $12 an hour for delivering newspapers? Does the guy who bags your groceries at the supermarket get $12 an hour? Why not? Lets make it so everyone in America gets $12 an hour, minimum. Oh, that would cause the economy to collapse? Whoops, my bad.


You might be surprised at what some grocery store employees make. Many of them are unionized. I know that's not really your point, just sayin'.
 
2012-11-16 01:26:47 AM

Zebulon: You apparently have no idea how most retail companies work. Do you know how much of every dollar you spend at a Walmart actually turns into profit? 3 cents. That's it. 3 pennies. So, to increase one Walmart associate's pay by $4 an hour would take an extra $133 or so in sales. Doesn't seem like much, right? Now, take into account that the average Walmart has about 200 employees, and lets say a third of them are there at any given time. That means that the store would need to cover 67 employees, which would mean they would need an extra $2211 in sales, *every hour*. For a 24 hr supercenter, that would mean a little over $53000 a day. The Walmart I work at usually only averages about $200000 in sales a day, so we would need to increase our sales by about 25% to cover those costs. Not going to happen.


Sigh. Math simply does not work that way.

While your "gross profit" number is accurate, you're also not taking into account that this number is arrived after calculating the huge salaries and bonuses and stock options of the highest level executives, as well as the individuals who hold "honorary" positions at the company due to their ownership. It's a classic dodge for the owner/executive, as his stock options are counted pre-profit, so his slice comes out of the pie before everyone else divvies it up. Reducing salaries of the highest levels of management that are profiting the most from their own decisions to treat the employees like crap would be a huge start.

Also, increasing income does NOT necessarily mean increasing the number of people who shop there, or the number of items they purchase. It can also mean "raise prices". Wal-Mart prices are artificially low due to the fact that they treat their employees like crap. If they paid their employees better, or provided them with benefits, then yes, they would have to raise their prices.

A further refutation of your argument was given earlier in the thread in the comparison with CostCo, who treats their employees much better. A side effect of treating your employees like human beings is that they tend to stay with you longer, thereby lowering employee training costs as you are no longer having to train replacements due to atrocious turnover.

Your oversimplification simply does not do justice to the issue.
 
2012-11-16 01:27:16 AM

ox45tallboy: Great Janitor: If you want more money, find a better job, gain more marketable skills, start your own business. Don't expect the government to increase minimum wage or protest your employer into paying you more.

Pull themselves up by their bootstraps, eh?

But someone still has to stock the groceries. If EVERYONE did as you suggested, who would stock the groceries?


Some people honestly like working at Walmart. I know, it's odd. When I worked at Krogers in 1996 I had a coworker, he had been there for years as a bagger. He refused promotion after promotion because he just wanted to be a bagger and nothing more. For those who like working at Walmart, stay there, be happy. For those who don't like it there, find a different job or shut up.
 
2012-11-16 01:32:01 AM

fredklein: If it was "absoltely clear", that she was not available Friday nights, why did she come in at all? If she's mistakenly scheduled for it, she can speak to a manager and get it taken off. And that would solve the whole 'overtime' thing, too.


She just had the GM do it last week. Then "someone" overrode the GM and scheduled her for the week after Thanksgiving, 5 nights. The issue hasn't had time to resolve itself this way, and, depending on the way Black Friday works out, it might not have to.

fredklein: Or, (assuming she wanted to work Fridays and has less than 2 hours OT) she could punch in at 10pm (on time, no tardys!), and immediately punch out for lunch. Wait the time needed, then punch in from lunch.


Believe it or not, this was discussed. However, the computers tend to get pissy about people not taking the right amount of time for lunch. Plus, this would mean that she has to go from midnight to 7 AM with no break.

fredklein: /who the heck closes the payroll week at Friday midnight??


You have to close payroll sometime. If it were done at any other time, it would surely f*ck someone else just as much.
 
2012-11-16 01:34:06 AM

Great Janitor: For those who don't like it there, find a different job or shut up.


Or organize and use your freedom of speech and association.
For some reason it's okay for management to be organized and put pressure on workers, but the reverse should be unthinkable and only be done by lazy deadbeats right?
 
2012-11-16 01:35:19 AM
Wal-mart is going to mass-hire a crop of new employees after firing the employees who choose to walk from their duties.
 
2012-11-16 01:37:39 AM
Welp, it should be interesting on Black Friday. Im a Deputy Sheriff and along with about ten others, we will be working security at our local Walmart. Less people is good as long as I still get paid for being there. LOL!
 
2012-11-16 01:37:53 AM

Great Janitor: When I worked at Krogers in 1996


Calling it "Krogers" instead of "Kroger" (its real name) let's me know that you actually DID work there. I have no idea why, but people in the South add the "s".

Great Janitor: For those who like working at Walmart, stay there, be happy. For those who don't like it there, find a different job or shut up.


Once again, many people DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE. If your bagger friend had been told that he would be required to also do other work during his shift, and receive no extra pay, would he have quit? What if there were no other grocery stores in the area for him to work at?

I'm glad your friend was able to find a job he liked that gave him fulfillment. But to think that Wal-Mart workers should just find somewhere else to work if they don't like it, as if the problem was the employee and not the job, is just wrong.
 
2012-11-16 01:40:30 AM

Litterbox: Welp, it should be interesting on Black Friday. Im a Deputy Sheriff and along with about ten others, we will be working security at our local Walmart. Less people is good as long as I still get paid for being there. LOL!


So, are you doing this a "side job" for $25+/hour?

What do you think about the employees at Wal-Mart that are being ordered to work "security" and "prevent people from cutting in line or getting into fights", like my sister? For $8.50/hr?
 
2012-11-16 01:40:35 AM

ACallForPeace: Great Janitor: For those who don't like it there, find a different job or shut up.

Or organize and use your freedom of speech and association.
For some reason it's okay for management to be organized and put pressure on workers, but the reverse should be unthinkable and only be done by lazy deadbeats right?


I view it this way: I own a company. I decide how much a job is worth. A person applies for that job. I tell them what that job pays and what the duties involved are. They then make the choice as to whether or not they accept the job if it's offered. Since the worker does not own the company, they can ask for more money and I, the owner, can refuse. If the workers start to organize, I can exercise my right to fire the organizers.

These workers wanting better working conditions are going to have an easier task finding jobs that meet those better working conditions than they are trying to get Walmart to change.
 
2012-11-16 01:45:54 AM

Great Janitor: I view it this way: I own a company. I decide how much a job is worth. A person applies for that job. I tell them what that job pays and what the duties involved are. They then make the choice as to whether or not they accept the job if it's offered. Since the worker does not own the company, they can ask for more money and I, the owner, can refuse. If the workers start to organize, I can exercise my right to fire the organizers.


1) Wal-Mart violated their own agreements many times
2) It's illegal to fire employees for organizing, but yes you could be a snake bastard about it and use excuses.
So both illegal and unethical, good job.
 
2012-11-16 01:47:50 AM

Great Janitor: If the workers start to organize, I can exercise my right to fire the organizers.


No. No, you cannot.

You have proudly displayed your ignorance for all to witness. Go forth and educate thyself before spouting such nonsense in this forum.
 
2012-11-16 01:48:04 AM

ox45tallboy: Great Janitor: When I worked at Krogers in 1996

Calling it "Krogers" instead of "Kroger" (its real name) let's me know that you actually DID work there. I have no idea why, but people in the South add the "s".

Great Janitor: For those who like working at Walmart, stay there, be happy. For those who don't like it there, find a different job or shut up.

Once again, many people DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE. If your bagger friend had been told that he would be required to also do other work during his shift, and receive no extra pay, would he have quit? What if there were no other grocery stores in the area for him to work at?

I'm glad your friend was able to find a job he liked that gave him fulfillment. But to think that Wal-Mart workers should just find somewhere else to work if they don't like it, as if the problem was the employee and not the job, is just wrong.


First, when you work hourly, if you're told to do extra work you do it. If they tell you to work off the clock go up the chain of command. I used to work in the corporate office for Gamestop. Store managers were instantly fired once the corporate office discovered they were forcing people to work off the clock. I believe it's an OSHA violation, OSHA or not, the company still gets fined for it. Workers who are required to work off the clock should complain as soon as possible. And not just to the District Manager, but going through the BBB or local government offices. Being required to work off the clock and not saying anything about it changes nothing.

And please, explain to me how someone does not have a choice when it comes to finding work. I've never had that problem.
 
2012-11-16 01:49:19 AM

Smelly McUgly: Silly Jesus: Maybe it will shape up like the Hostess strike. Hostess told the workers that if they went on strike they would shutter the factories and fire them all. They went on strike...Hostess closed the factories...the workers went all WHARGARBLLL "yall took are jerbs!" It was beeeautiful.

I am looking forward to Hostess going out of business. Good. One less crappy company making terrible products and screwing their employees. It's the free market; someone else will pop up and maybe do things right the next time.


Mhmm, most likely some Mexican company will buy the brand and move all of it overseas. Mrs Baird's bread anyone?
 
2012-11-16 01:52:41 AM

ox45tallboy: Great Janitor: If the workers start to organize, I can exercise my right to fire the organizers.

No. No, you cannot.

You have proudly displayed your ignorance for all to witness. Go forth and educate thyself before spouting such nonsense in this forum.


Uhm, the Constitution protects the right of the workers to protest and peacefully assemble to speak out on unfair practices. It does not protect a worker walking out of his/her job to do so, since Wal-mart has no union contract. Quote better next time please?

0/10
 
2012-11-16 01:53:46 AM

Great Janitor: And please, explain to me how someone does not have a choice when it comes to finding work. I've never had that problem.


You probably have a better-than-average education, as well as few (if any) people dependent upon you for that next paycheck so that they can EAT.

Just because you don't have a particular problem, it is silly to think that the problem doesn't exist for others. A statement like yours makes you sound like someone that works nights and never understands why everyone complains about the rush hour traffic - you don't drive during rush hour!
 
Displayed 50 of 709 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report