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 338
    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»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-11-15 08:31:28 PM
24 votes:
I will gladly boycott Wal-Mart on Black Friday.

/just as I do on the other 364 days of the year
2012-11-15 09:33:25 PM
14 votes:
How do you assholes want it? You biatch and moan about a lot of these same people being on welfare, then you want to put them down for standing up for themselves and demanding livable wages. Oooh, please someone save the multi-billion dollar corporation! They shouldn't have to pay their employees anymore because they are worthless pieces of shiat that knew what they were getting into. Give me a farking break.
2012-11-15 09:50:56 PM
11 votes:

DubtodaIll: When did we pass the place where the employees of a company, no matter the size, are not looked after by their employer in America? The primary pillar that Capitalism stood on during the Cold War is that the workers are treated well in trade for a job well done. I suppose the demands of a job at Wal-Mart are not all that demanding and hardly fulfilling for a full-realized human being but there is still work to be done to satisfy the demands of the American consumer in the ever-lasting battle towards the bottom of the barrel of prices. Even so, the more we demand out of one sack of meat at the lowest level of competent employment the further away from the shining star we hope to become we venture.
I'm all for it. If there's a large amount of participation in the strike the harder it will be to fill those vacated man hours in such a limited amount of time, thus giving higher ups pause against driving the line so hard. Also people freaking shopping during a freaking holiday of thanks makes me sad to live amongst them.

/man that was a good j


Jan 20th, 1981 was the exact date that hard work and loyalty stopped being valued by the private sector
2012-11-15 08:36:58 PM
11 votes:
Done in two - both the humane and the asshole views have been spoken.
2012-11-15 09:06:37 PM
9 votes:

TiiiMMMaHHH: The workers are demanding the following from Walmart:


We should be demanding similar requirements for every human on this Earth.

Good for the WM employees for getting together to do this.
2012-11-15 08:29:55 PM
9 votes:

Silly Jesus: LULZ. I hope they are all fired. Plenty more people out there who would love their job.


Generally speaking, that is untrue. While working at Wal-mart is not a job that requires a particularly high skill level, the people who are skilled enough are also the people who like to be able to eat and who don't like to be told to do work that is in violation of labor laws. Now, I'm sure there are people that are willing to put up with that, but I believe Wal-mart will find the quality of those workers to be lacking.

Basically, you pay for what you get.

Which also happens to be true when you shop at Wal-mart.
2012-11-15 09:42:42 PM
8 votes:
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.
2012-11-15 09:37:17 PM
8 votes:

Howlin Mad Murphy: How do you assholes want it? You biatch and moan about a lot of these same people being on welfare, then you want to put them down for standing up for themselves and demanding livable wages. Oooh, please someone save the multi-billion dollar corporation! They shouldn't have to pay their employees anymore because they are worthless pieces of shiat that knew what they were getting into. Give me a farking break.


It's a sickness. They feel subservient and unappreciated in their own lives, probably with good reason. So they search desperately to identify with the "oppressor" in situations like this, hoping that it will result in a class of people even more oppressed and broken than they are. Compassion is a gift that not everyone receives.
2012-11-15 09:06:21 PM
8 votes:

Silly Jesus: There's an endless supply of dimwits who need some extra walking around money for cigarettes and lottery tickets. I don't think that Wal-mart is at much risk of running out of a "qualified" applicant pool.


That's where you and I disagree, I think the supply is limited. Would you work there? I wouldn't. Have you ever met any dimwits that you wouldn't trust to know which end of a mop to use? I have. Once you eliminate those people, people who can't communicate, people who have other limiting factors such as a criminal record, you do have a finite available workforce. Now, there are obviously more people who would take the job than are currently employed by the company, but I still believe that those people, once they are employed, will reach the same level off discontent that the current employees have. Eventually you run out of people who are willing to take the shiatty job. Add to that the cost of on-boarding and training new employees and it can be less costly to meet the employees demands, or at least come to some sort of middle ground.

It's kind of like the people who pick vegetables going on strike. Sure, there are other people willing to take their jobs, but not many and once those people realize how difficult the work is and how shiatty the conditions are, they too get fed up and go on strike. Eventually the growers run out of available employees and are forced to make concessions.
2012-11-15 09:04:46 PM
8 votes:
$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.
2012-11-15 11:51:44 PM
7 votes:
Okay people, since there are so many who do not understand what it is like for an average Wal-Mart employee:

Meet my sister. She's 31, married, with 3 kids. Her and her husband receive his disability pay from his service in Iraqi Freedom, but it's not enough to pay the bills. She took a "part time" job at nights at Wal-Mart, who told her that she would need to work night shift "until they got someone else", and they'd "giver her more hours", as in 40 instead of 32, until they "got night shift where they wanted it".

In the past ten months, she worked ONE week at less than 40 hours. But she is not allowed to get insurance, because she is a "part-time" employee. She has to be there for one year.

Day shift had an opening. However, her night shift manager said she was a great worker and he needed her on nights, so the day shift position went to a new hire.

At times, she is asked to stay over by her manager and do extra work. This work is on the clock, but there's a catch:

She is scheduled at 10:00 on Friday night. The end-of-week pay period is midnight Friday night. If she has worked over through the week, she must report in, but is not allowed to clock in because she could wind up with OVERTIME. Instead, she has to show that she came in to work on time, then she is free to stand in the parking lot with all the low-lifes who hang out at the Wal-Mart parking lot at 10:00 on Friday night.

But it gets better!

She was denied a raise at her 6-month eval for.... ATTENDANCE!

But she never misses work!

Guess what? All those times she clocked in late on Friday nights to avoid overtime - SHE WAS TARDY!

She just had a meeting with the GM of the store to address the insurance issue. She was told point blank she would not be receiving insurance becasue she was a "part time" employee. So, she changed her availability to ensure she would only be scheduled for 4 nights a week. Two days later, the schedule was changed back to 5 nights a week.

On Black Friday, she is supposed to work "Security", which is going to entail keeping order in these long lines of people waiting to receive pieces of paper they can exchange for their items at the counter.

She's all in favor of this strike.
2012-11-15 10:48:44 PM
7 votes:

HotIgneous Intruder: sethen320: I wish we didn't even need to have these kinds arguments.

I think as a country a lot of us have forgotten that there is a difference between what's legally OK and what's morally right. This seems to be the root of a lot of or problems and disagreements, at least in my opinion it is.

You're spot on.
It began when presidential candidate George Bush I walked off the interview with Dan Rather because Rather dared ask his majesty about Iran-Contra. Right then and there, I realized we were dealing with people who would didn't give a shiat about doing the right thing and that they obviously thought the rules didn't apply to them. They may have been (barely) limited by laws, but anything not explicitly prohibited by law was possible, no matter what the moral implications of right or wrong. Bush One just continued the Reagan shenanigans except badly and suffered the crashing economy that was the Gipper legacy. Clinton rode the dot-com bubble to fame, then up stepped Junior, even more amoral than his daddy. eight years of his psychodrama nearly wrecked the nation, leaving it more divided and weakened than ever before, with wages depressed and economic equality at record disparity. Along the way, we became a nation of grifters and takers arguing with those still possessing a shred of social conscience while we all became poorer. The poorer we became, the more frightened we became and the more the polarized sides lashed out at each other. A meteor strike would be a gift.


Good thoughts, but I don't agree with the meteor strike thing :) I also think this is a problem which plagues both right and left, though the right is definitely more prone to this behavior. It's greed pure and simple.

I know it sounds silly but I think a lot of it comes down to the way we run our stock market. Right now people invest in stocks in a way not originally intended. Everyone wants to flip them. They want to buy at $20 and sell at $40. They are not interested in dividends or profit sharing. Originally stocks were about reaping some of the income of the company you helped to build through investment. Because people are really only interested in the paper value of the stock which they are looking to flip at any time, they demand higher and higher profits quarter after quarter. This means they are expecting infinite growth, which is impossible to sustain, regardless of what type of government you have. This shareholder expectation of "more more more" causes CEOs and boards to make decisions to increase the bottom line as much as possible constantly because simply making a shiat ton of money every year is not enough. Now they must make the same shiat ton of money + an additional 50% because that's what the shareholders demand. And if they don't make it then they will be voted out. This leads to ammoral decisions by officers which eventually trickles down to managers, who (in fear of their jobs) enforce them.

Basically our motto is "You're not successful unless you're more sucessful than last year". It doesn't matter if you make way more money than you ever expected. You must always make at least that much again + more, or you are running at a loss as far as shareholders are concerned. This is so messed up because in the end everyone eventually gets screwed. You cannot possibly make more than you did last time forever.
2012-11-15 08:53:42 PM
7 votes:

Silly Jesus: timujin: Silly Jesus: LULZ. I hope they are all fired. Plenty more people out there who would love their job.

Generally speaking, that is untrue. While working at Wal-mart is not a job that requires a particularly high skill level, the people who are skilled enough are also the people who like to be able to eat and who don't like to be told to do work that is in violation of labor laws. Now, I'm sure there are people that are willing to put up with that, but I believe Wal-mart will find the quality of those workers to be lacking.

Basically, you pay for what you get.

Which also happens to be true when you shop at Wal-mart.

The few times that I have ventured into Wal-mart I haven't been very impressed by the quality of their employees. Yelling to each other and laughing about nonsense from one register to another one 10 rows away. Standing in your way everywhere talking on cell phones. Literally retarded greeters. Parking lot full of trash and discarded shopping carts. Sort of seems like they are already scraping the bottom of the barrel. I don't think that Wal-mart could possibly find the quality of anyone lacking. So, yeah, there is no shortage of mouth-breathers to fill the positions of the current employees if they don't like it enough to stick around.


That's why I'm trying to explain, though, those are the best they can currently get for the price. Those are the people not willing to put up with their shiat any longer. People willing to put up with it will either be even less qualified or, if they are equally qualified, will soon reach the same conclusions as the current employees.
2012-11-15 08:25:06 PM
7 votes:
LULZ. I hope they are all fired. Plenty more people out there who would love their job.
2012-11-15 11:09:17 PM
6 votes:
How about send WalMart a bill for all the food assistance and other assistance their employees get because they're not paid enough to make it without the assistance?
2012-11-15 11:04:53 PM
6 votes:

Ehcks: Doing it wrong

Ehcks: Doing it wrong! You're not supposed to say you're doing it. You just don't show up!


Know how I know you've never been in a union?

You always give the employer a chance to come to the table and bargain before you walk out. Striking is not the first action, it's the last resort.

And I say good on them. Workers have the right to organize in most states. They have the right to go to management as a group and ask for fair wages and benefits. And they have a right to demand their employers follow labor law, with a collective strength that makes it possible for them to action that and hold them to it.

Telling Wal-Mart that they plan to strike in a week, on the busiest day of the year, is the smartest thing they can do. It gives Wal-Mart a chance to come to the table and give them what they want before shiat gets real, and follows the principles of good faith bargaining while making it clear that they have leverage.

Don't forget - people farking DIED for the 40-hour work week, minimum wage, and the right to take a break. This is exactly the same fight, and shouldn't be necessary at all in this day and age.

And I don't shop at Wal-Mart anyway, so it's fun to point and laugh at them.
2012-11-15 10:45:51 PM
6 votes:

sethen320: Them's revolution words.


We're already at banana republic levels of wealth disparity in the US. We have people that will defend the rights of billionaires to pay ridiculously low tax rates, but when the employees of the billionaires ask for healthcare or a living wage they have no rights at all.

So, who ends up paying for healthcare for WalMart employees? We do. Walmart employees qualify for medicaid because their billionaire bosses, whose wealth is greater than that of the bottom 123,500,000 Americans combined, won't pay their employees a living wage or provide healthcare.

You can't run a society the way we have been doing for the last 30 years and not expect it to break at some point.
2012-11-15 10:14:31 PM
6 votes:

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.


Doesn't matter. You can cite things like this all day and assholes like this thread's merry band of trolls will still lick the Walton heir's taints. We're Amurricans - no one can be too rich and any amount of employee abuse is perfectly OK because, by golly, they chose the work there.

When I hear shiat like this it pisses me off so much I'm ready to to go heads-on spikes. The billionaires and their white knights right next to them.
2012-11-15 10:11:50 PM
6 votes:
I wish we didn't even need to have these kinds arguments.

I think as a country a lot of us have forgotten that there is a difference between what's legally OK and what's morally right. This seems to be the root of a lot of or problems and disagreements, at least in my opinion it is.
2012-11-15 09:53:00 PM
6 votes:

Hunter_Worthington: oh,I know. they'll bring the same high quality employees and world class output they bring to the U.S. Public Education system.

//if I wanted to sit around all day going nowhere, I'd be a public school teacher
//those that can do, those that can't teach
// -Hunter, what about those who can't teach?
//good question. They become lobbyists. See teachers, you're not at the bottom of the food chain after all.


Hey look! Another HerpAderp that hates education! You have never worked as hard as a teacher and you never will. Not a teacher but I know a few. Most personal time consuming, thankless job that there is. Mostly because of fark-nuts like yourself.
2012-11-15 09:22:27 PM
6 votes:

mbillips: Errbody knows this is just a few Wal-Marts in California, right? The rest of the country's obese dunderheads can riot over discounted Christmas toys to their heart's content.


I stand corrected; that was the first "strike" (actually a brief walkout). They're claiming more than 1,000 protests of various types around the country.

This is fairly smart on the union's part. Wal-Mart is absolutely crazed about avoiding union organizing, and they are leaving themselves open to vast expense and potential liability under fair-labor laws because of their allegedly illegal tactics.

The union isn't forcing a flat-out strike that they would lose, because Wal-Mart has no union contract and can just hire replacements, But by constantly trolling Wal-Mart with small actions, the union can put pressure on them, and recruit enough workers to successfully unionize stores. Wal-Mart knows it's way more expensive to recruit and hire a new worker than to put up with one who takes the occasional "strike" day off.

Considering Wal-Mart is owned by a clan of over-entitled billionaires whose great achievement in life was being born the kids and grandkids of Sam Walton, I say screw 'em. I hope they drive themselves bankrupt trying to avoid treating their workers as well as other big retail chains do.
2012-11-15 08:21:13 PM
6 votes:
What took them so damn long?

Good luck, btw
2012-11-15 10:02:31 PM
5 votes:

Silly Jesus: No, derpy-doo. Standing in a doorway and saying hello to everyone is in no way deserving of $12 / hour + benefits. No matter how much the boss makes.


Troll. When you get middle aged and the workforce disposes of you for a cheaper kid and you can't find a job, you'll be glad to do that derpy work.
Karma's a batch who never sleeps.
Rest well in the hell you've helped create, Amerikun.
2012-11-15 09:22:24 PM
5 votes:
I worked at Walmart while in college. Granted, a lot of my coworkers struggled with basic language arts, let alone what a second grader would consider kiddie math. I can honestly say that Walmart pays its employees just enough to shop at Walmart. Even if you make "manager", they're always p****ed off because they are moved around so much between stores that they are more worried about meeting corporate numbers than developing their subordinates.

Genius business plan; but has to fail at some point. Maybe this is that point?
2012-11-15 09:05:23 PM
5 votes:
Good on them.
2012-11-15 09:05:03 PM
5 votes:

Silly Jesus: LULZ. I hope they are all fired. Plenty more people out there who would love their job.


OK Mr. Romney...the election is over. You lost. Now go to the 1/12 of your homes...
2012-11-15 08:38:00 PM
5 votes:
What's cool about having someone on your ignore list is that you can put a note in there that will be displayed each time the ignored person posts something.

And it is filter-free.
2012-11-16 03:40:51 PM
4 votes:

BummerDuck: To a certain degree I see the bleeding heart point...but 25k is about $12 dollars an hour. Expecting that in pay for a zero skills job is pretty ridiculous. Expecting it with health care is out of the question if you are trying to run the cheapest store in town.

I had 2-3 jobs going through college, crappy no skill jobs like Walmart. I did a good job, and didn't whine about the pay, but I didn't plan on staying for life. And working along side career minimum wagers really was a shot in the arm to finish my degree. If they choose to stay, then I choose not to care about their plight.

If we were talking about a skilled position, like machinists, then that would be totally different.


Machinist here. I had to move to Minneapolis from Denver in order to find work that didn't come with the presupposition that I was just a button pusher who should be happy he had a job in the first place. Biggest contributing factor? Minneapolis has a fairly decent union presence and although MN is practically a right to work state the plants around here know that if they don't treat their workers with respect they'll unionize right quick and the public would back them up.

You may think that paying someone barely enough money to feed themselves and make rent for allocating 1/2 of their lives to making someone money is ok, but for the most part those values have been shunned by this country at large since the New Deal. We've only had Reagonomics for 30 years, and the result has been a shrinking middle class and a drop in standard of living. We do best as a country when we operate on the principle of providing a good and free education and stimulating demand by paying a comfortably livable wage. 30+ years of the most prosperous economic growth after WWII to the stagnation for the middle and lower class that has been the "Supply Side Economics" of late? Sorry, the choice is a no brainer.

Capitalism is not the temple at which our founders worshipped when they fought for independence. Freedom, Liberty, and pursuit of happiness. That includes a regulated market where one's labor could earn him a comfortable living.
2012-11-16 12:53:28 AM
4 votes:

ox45tallboy: I don't think it will ever come to making Union organizers disappear again, like what used to happen.


Still does.
And it can still happen here.
Look at austerity. A policy intentionally used to drain the coffers of third world resources towards the first world and away from their own citizens through causing a perpetual debt cycle under the old contract morality and the same old "economic" "moral" justification for violence, debt. The IMF works like the mafia. If we can make onlookers/the victims feel that they owed you something, everybody goes "well they had it coming".
And now they're eating their own and touching traditionally untouched "Western" or "first world" places in Europe. The Zapatistas, Iceland, and Argentina were all somewhat successful in telling them to fark off, so they don't get much coverage.
But don't think for a second there aren't a bunch of neoliberals who wouldn't gladly turn us into Pinochet's Chile if they thought they could.
2012-11-16 12:51:10 AM
4 votes:
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."
2012-11-16 12:34:44 AM
4 votes:

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.


Okay, let's do this then.

Are you paying attention? Do you understand that my sister signed up for 4 days a week, not 5? Do you understand that if she works 40 hours a week, she is supposed to get insurance? 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? Do you really think for 2 seconds (obviously not) that she was told ANY of this before she took the job? Do you think it's just buried down in the fine print somewhere, and she should have read more?

Do you understand that this isn't about people who knew the conditions ahead of time now regretting having signed up to work at Wal-Mart? This is about Wal-Mart changing the rules, and habitually forcing employees to go along with things no one in their right mind would have ever agreed to had they known about it going in!

Please, try to keep up. When you go off on a sanctimonious, better-than-you rant like that, it helps if you have some idea of what you're talking about. Otherwise you just sound condescending.
2012-11-15 11:42:04 PM
4 votes:
For the folks who are all fired up, let us consider something:

Do you support the idea of a Chamber of Commerce? Do you support industry organizations that allow those industries to represent their interests both to the public, as well as to legislators and other politicians? Allow management to confer with one another to build and share strategies that will make said industries run smoother and more efficiently? Even represent their interests in lawsuits to preserve those interests?

If you do, then congratulations, you've just defended the reasons that unions exist. So long as owners and management can confer and associate freely in industry organizations, then workers have the same right to organize themselves in a similar fashion, and even represent their interests to legislators and defend their members from what they see as onerous roadblocks, and even what they see as unfair practices and to defend their compensation.

So long as management has the right to organize and confer, and act upon those meetings and strategize, then labor has the same right.

If you think that NO ONE should associate as such, then congrats, you are likewise against the freedom of assembly, and you should take your Un-American ass out to Somalia or some backwater where they don't have rights guaranteed...
2012-11-15 11:19:38 PM
4 votes:

Fade2black: 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.


one of the things Richard Nixon wanted to introduce was a living wage law. Let that sink in for a while.
2012-11-15 11:04:28 PM
4 votes:

Fark Me Runnin: If it sucks so badly to work there, farking quit. Dumbasses.

Of course, if you walk out on black friday, you might not have to.

Most of the walmart employees I've encountered wouldn't even be worth $1.25 an hour. They act like the world owes them.


Hey look! It's another person who has never worked retail!
2012-11-15 10:39:36 PM
4 votes:
The Internationale

Go WallyWorld workers...anyone that has to do the farking Walmart cheer deserves $12/hr.
2012-11-15 10:28:38 PM
4 votes:

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.


It's a toss-up. It's hard for me to say, because I don't know exactly the pitch Walmart gives the poor & desperate who fill out applications for their crappy jobs; otoh, I've been in a position where I would have taken ANYTHING just to have an income (almost--never big-box retail). So on the one hand, you can say yes, they knew what they were getting into: A crappy job with crappy pay and almost zero benefits where they could fire you for no reason and unionizing was tantamount to murder or worse.

However, in today's economy, you can't just "quit and find a different job" because there aren't really any other jobs out there, and employers know it. They can screw employees with impunity, knowing their workers have zero recourse and zero options. Low pay? No benefits? Bad hours? "Go find another job--Oh, wait, YOU CAN'T! HAHAHAHAHA!" The employer goes off to twirl his mustache and tie another blonde to the train tracks, and the employee can only seethe in fury and hope he still has 38 hours a week next week.

So I do understand the employees' frustration here, and their only hope of getting any attention is to try to strike on the busiest day of the year and hope somebody--anybody--notices. It probably won't help. There are plenty of other desperate people who need crappy jobs at low pay and no benefits who will fill the empty spaces. But what other options do they have?
2012-11-15 10:26:29 PM
4 votes:

sethen320: I wish we didn't even need to have these kinds arguments.

I think as a country a lot of us have forgotten that there is a difference between what's legally OK and what's morally right. This seems to be the root of a lot of or problems and disagreements, at least in my opinion it is.


You're spot on.
It began when presidential candidate George Bush I walked off the interview with Dan Rather because Rather dared ask his majesty about Iran-Contra. Right then and there, I realized we were dealing with people who would didn't give a shiat about doing the right thing and that they obviously thought the rules didn't apply to them. They may have been (barely) limited by laws, but anything not explicitly prohibited by law was possible, no matter what the moral implications of right or wrong. Bush One just continued the Reagan shenanigans except badly and suffered the crashing economy that was the Gipper legacy. Clinton rode the dot-com bubble to fame, then up stepped Junior, even more amoral than his daddy. eight years of his psychodrama nearly wrecked the nation, leaving it more divided and weakened than ever before, with wages depressed and economic equality at record disparity. Along the way, we became a nation of grifters and takers arguing with those still possessing a shred of social conscience while we all became poorer. The poorer we became, the more frightened we became and the more the polarized sides lashed out at each other. A meteor strike would be a gift.
2012-11-15 10:21:41 PM
4 votes:
Remember when $250,000/yr was hardly any money at all, certainly not enough to be considered "rich"?

Now, apparently, $25,000/yr is living pretty high on the hog!
2012-11-15 10:10:17 PM
4 votes:
Don't feed the troll.
2012-11-15 09:55:02 PM
4 votes:

Silly Jesus: 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.

The CEO of my company has oodles of money. Do I deserve more of it just because he has lots of it?

That's some pretty derpy reasoning there, Lou.


No.
Actually, that proves that they aren't hurting for money and they can afford to pay the employees who made them filthy rich better than subsistence wages, plus provide health insurance.
There's no excuse for such insanely wealthy people not to have a social conscience.

You obviously missed the magnitude of those figures and have no functional understanding of economics, troll.
2012-11-15 09:53:54 PM
4 votes:

Silly Jesus: LULZ. I hope they are all fired. Plenty more people out there who would love their job.


It's hard to "love" a place that locks people in at night and refuses to pay them, let alone pay them needed overtime.

But hey, keep on being clueless, we need people like that here on Fark.
2012-11-15 09:43:49 PM
4 votes:
When did we pass the place where the employees of a company, no matter the size, are not looked after by their employer in America? The primary pillar that Capitalism stood on during the Cold War is that the workers are treated well in trade for a job well done. I suppose the demands of a job at Wal-Mart are not all that demanding and hardly fulfilling for a full-realized human being but there is still work to be done to satisfy the demands of the American consumer in the ever-lasting battle towards the bottom of the barrel of prices. Even so, the more we demand out of one sack of meat at the lowest level of competent employment the further away from the shining star we hope to become we venture.
I'm all for it. If there's a large amount of participation in the strike the harder it will be to fill those vacated man hours in such a limited amount of time, thus giving higher ups pause against driving the line so hard. Also people freaking shopping during a freaking holiday of thanks makes me sad to live amongst them.

/man that was a good j
2012-11-15 09:40:50 PM
4 votes:
2.bp.blogspot.com
2012-11-15 09:25:15 PM
4 votes:

Bit'O'Gristle: Good luck to them, although huge corporations like this generally don't give a rats ass about the workers, they just care about the bottom line. But i do wish them well. They should really unionize and actually have some bargaining power.


Wal-Mart has actively engaged in union-busting for years. They're trying to break the will and the backs of labor to bring them on wage parity with China.
2012-11-15 09:22:51 PM
4 votes:
Good luck to them, although huge corporations like this generally don't give a rats ass about the workers, they just care about the bottom line. But i do wish them well. They should really unionize and actually have some bargaining power.
2012-11-15 09:21:21 PM
4 votes:
As a Wal-Mart employee through my college years, I say, PLEASE DO IT. The hilarity would be epic, and it would be nice to see these workers grow a spine. Many of the ones in the store I worked at literally feared their managers, who were complete idiots blessed only with an ability to fly into a rage over no reason.
2012-11-15 09:19:22 PM
4 votes:
good. american labor dead in the water until the take down of big-box schmucks like wally world

I won't shop there anyway but those people deserve better than the crumbs from arkansas.
2012-11-15 09:16:21 PM
4 votes:

Silly Jesus: timujin: Silly Jesus: There's an endless supply of dimwits who need some extra walking around money for cigarettes and lottery tickets. I don't think that Wal-mart is at much risk of running out of a "qualified" applicant pool.

That's where you and I disagree, I think the supply is limited. Would you work there? I wouldn't. Have you ever met any dimwits that you wouldn't trust to know which end of a mop to use? I have. Once you eliminate those people, people who can't communicate, people who have other limiting factors such as a criminal record, you do have a finite available workforce. Now, there are obviously more people who would take the job than are currently employed by the company, but I still believe that those people, once they are employed, will reach the same level off discontent that the current employees have. Eventually you run out of people who are willing to take the shiatty job. Add to that the cost of on-boarding and training new employees and it can be less costly to meet the employees demands, or at least come to some sort of middle ground.

It's kind of like the people who pick vegetables going on strike. Sure, there are other people willing to take their jobs, but not many and once those people realize how difficult the work is and how shiatty the conditions are, they too get fed up and go on strike. Eventually the growers run out of available employees and are forced to make concessions.

Yep. That's how it works. If Wal-mart becomes unable to hire enough employees at current wages, the wages will increase. Until then, they have no reason to pay everyone more than the market deems that they are currently worth.


And hence the strike... it has to start somewhere. It might not work out for these folks, though striking on Black Friday does seem like a position of at least some level of strength, there's no way Wal-mart is going to find enough people and have them trained in one week. But maybe they will, and maybe all of these people will get fired (depending on the laws of the state they strike in, I believe some make it illegal to fire striking workers, though not to hire scabs) But eventually, if they keep with their current practices, they will run out of people willing to put up with them and things will change.

That's my only point, you wrote "Plenty more people out there who would love their job" and I disagree. There might be more plenty of people out there willing to take their job, but I don't believe that they will love it or be willing to put up with Wal-mart's practices for indefinitely.
2012-11-16 09:33:36 PM
3 votes:

EVERYBODY PANIC: Or... you can make a picket sign and go stand outside in the cold. That always makes it better.


The latest unemployment numbers for Alabama show 8.1% unemployment. Normally, 4-5% is a Good Thing, because it means that people are trying to stay happy and employers are putting forth an effort in making them happy. What this means is that there are more people than there are jobs, so someone would expect to spend about 60% longer between jobs than when there is 5% unemployment.

My sister has 3 kids that depend on her to eat.

There is also the fact that finding a new job involves changing one's routines. Right now she works nights, leaves work at about 7AM, and gets home just in time to take the kids to school. Having only one car, this works out okay. But what happens if her new job starts at 8AM? Or worse, 7AM?

I'm not trying to paint this whole sob story about my sister being completely trapped. But I am trying to address the large number of people who believe that anyone can *just quit* if they don't like it. It's NEVER that simple when you have kids relying on you.

She'll work it out. I think right now she's going to tough it out for the next week and a half just to say "fark you" to the store, and encourage others to do the same. She'll manage, and they won't starve. But it will NOT be "easy".
2012-11-16 10:18:50 AM
3 votes:

EVERYBODY PANIC: Testiclaw: TiiiMMMaHHH: The workers are demanding the following from Walmart:

We should be demanding similar requirements for every human on this Earth.

Good for the WM employees for getting together to do this.

You mean, mean guy Testiclaw. We should demand, DEMAND! that everybody on earth be given, not a tolerable wage of perhaps $25,000 as you propose, but a fortune of, say, *puts pinkie to side of lip* ONE MILLION DOLLARS!

Yes this proposal sounds crazy to some, and yes I'm just having fun with you over this, but please explain in your wisdom what makes my evil plan any different from yours, save by degree? And oh yes, also tell us EXACTLY WHO is to 'provide' all of this largess to the nonproductive people of the world.

This I gotta hear.


If everyone worked fo 25k a year, then 25k would be the new starvation wage. Raise wages without raising means and resouces, and it only serves to inflate the dollar.
2012-11-16 09:05:34 AM
3 votes:

Silly Jesus: Sergeant Grumbles: Fade2black: Is there a reason why Wal-Mart should pay a wage to employees that would count as gainfully employed? You haven't explained the repercussions when wages go up dollars an hour, to the product they sell or the services they give. Wages go up, cost goes up. Nothing of value was gained except you might feel better about yourself when you go home after your shift.

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.

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

Why not pay them all $50,000 a year. That would only cost everyone $20 a year. Why not pay them all $100,000 a year? That would cost everyone less than $100 a year. How do you choose the appropriate pay?




Consider this. Walmart makes $15 billion in profit each year. Walmart employees consume $3 billion in government welfare each year.

How about they take a tiny hit off of profit to pay their employees enough to not need welfare, for a start? The employees are each contributing towards the GDP fraction that is being generated, but they are not receiving any of it. It's wage theft, plain and simple.
2012-11-16 04:09:06 AM
3 votes:
I'm not entirely sure of it being the first one:

Wal-Mart to close unionized Quebec store

Aside: The only people to utterly defeat Wal-Mart were the Germans:

World's Biggest Retailer Wal-Mart Closes Up Shop in Germany
2012-11-16 02:15:01 AM
3 votes:

I sound fat: This becomes unforgivable at the busiest times of year.

Wal mart MIGHT have given a crap about their beefs if they did this on September 23rd or something.

Now they will just hold a grudge. And the customers will blame you. You lose. everything.


Well, see, Wal-Mart very cleverly didn't unveil their super-secret plans to fark all their employees on Thanksgiving this year until about a week and a half ago. Last year, they didn't come in until 10 PM, so they got to spend Thanksgiving with their familes. This year, everyone's in at 5 or 6.

Wal-Mart doesn't think enough about their employees to hold a grudge.
2012-11-16 01:26:47 AM
3 votes:

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 01:09:48 AM
3 votes:

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 12:53:44 AM
3 votes:

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 12:52:21 AM
3 votes:

Nerdhurter: I love the guy that makes sure the brew is stocked at 2am, but lets be real, 8 hours of training and he or she could be replaced overnight, gotta have some leverage, and I just dont see what they have.


The fact that they are human freaking beings is a start. Human beings do not deserve to be treated like this.
2012-11-16 12:42:20 AM
3 votes:

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.
2012-11-16 12:32:43 AM
3 votes:

megalynn44: ox45tallboy: megalynn44: Where she gets to be stereotyped as a lazy, stupid loser who doesn't even deserve basic laborer protections for safety and health.

So what do you think of all these people in the thread saying "if she doesn't like it, then she should find herself another job"?

I think those people are spoiled little assholes who have no concept of how bad working conditions could be for them if millions of people in the past hadn't fought hard for workers rights. You stop fighting for them, you lose them. I think making sure everyone gets a certain level of respect as a human being is a very important part of society.


It is sort of sad, that folks don't understand what sacrifices were made, so that they could have the protections that they enjoy today. How many Wobblies got their heads stove in, exactly what price Joe Hill paid, what was endured to create the very conditions that they enjoy today.

In the words of Joe Hill: "Don't mourn, organize."

This fight has been going for over a hundred years, and fear of organized labor has fueled efforts to limit and crush our right to free speech, freedom of association, and freedom to assemble. It strikes against the very fabric of the concept of this nation, and has been a tool of those who fear their workers' freedom, and their power.
2012-11-16 12:24:44 AM
3 votes:

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.
2012-11-16 12:24:33 AM
3 votes:

Zebulon: Testiclaw: TiiiMMMaHHH: The workers are demanding the following from Walmart:

We should be demanding similar requirements for every human on this Earth.

Good for the WM employees for getting together to do this.

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.


Funny thing about about raising prices...if the public can't/won't pay it, you find a way to cut back (executive bonuses), or you die a very capitalistic death.
2012-11-16 12:23:10 AM
3 votes:
Funny story. Times were tough, and I'm not ashamed to say that work was better than no work. Go to Walmart, and ask to apply for a job. They point me to a kiosk to fill out my info into their computers.

Kiosk was broken. I figured out how it worked, booted it correctly, started their application and then filled out the info.

Later, no job. I could fix their job kiosk, but not get employment. Womp womp.

/Life's better now.
2012-11-16 12:14:38 AM
3 votes:

WhyteRaven74: How about send WalMart a bill for all the food assistance and other assistance their employees get because they're not paid enough to make it without the assistance?


That is, roughly, part of the the argument Barbara Ehrenreich makes in her book Nickel and Dimed, that by not paying workers a living wage, businesses are essentially offloading the difference between what they pay and what their workers need to survive onto the taxpayers.
2012-11-16 12:07:15 AM
3 votes:
i24.photobucket.com
2012-11-16 12:05:01 AM
3 votes:
for those cheering on wal-mart:

Wal-Mart's intentionally low wages force employees to need approximately $420,000 per year, per store, totalling $2.66 BILLION annually in Food Stamps and other taxpayer assistance...to survive.

Wal-Mart's intentionally low wages and lack of covered benefits cost taxpayers over $1.02 BILLION a year in healthcare costs.

Wal-Mart's intentionally low wages cost taxpayers as much as $225 MILLION in free and reduced price lunches for school-age children.

Wal-Mart's intentionally low wages cost taxpayers over $780 MILLION in tax deductions for low-income families.


Link


and let's compare the labor costs of unionized Costco vs Wal-marts Sam's Club, shall we? (from those commies at Harvard Business School)

Costco's practices are clearly more expensive, but they have an offsetting cost-containment effect: Turnover is unusually low, at 17% overall and just 6% after one year's employment. In contrast, turnover at Wal-Mart is 44% a year'close to the industry average. In skilled and semi-skilled jobs, the fully loaded cost of replacing a worker who leaves (excluding lost productivity) is typically 1.5 to 2.5 times the worker's annual salary. To be conservative, let's assume that the total cost of replacing an hourly employee at Costco or Sam's Club is only 60% of his or her annual salary. If a Costco employee quits, the cost of replacing him or her is therefore $21,216. If a Sam's Club employee leaves, the cost is $12,617. At first glance, it may seem that the low-wage approach at Sam's Club would result in lower turnover costs. But if its turnover rate is the same as Wal-Mart's, Sam's Club loses more than twice as many people as Costco does: 44% versus 17%. By this calculation, the total annual cost to Costco of employee churn is $244 million, whereas the total annual cost to Sam's Club is $612 million. That's $5,274 per Sam's Club employee, versus $3,628 per Costco employee.

While Sam's Club and Costco generated $37 billion and $43 billion, respectively, in U.S. sales last year, Costco did it with 38% fewer employees-admittedly, in part by selling to higher-income shoppers and offering more high-end goods. As a result, Costco generated $21,805 in U.S. operating profit per hourly employee, compared with $11,615 at Sam's Club. Costco's stable, productive workforce more than offsets its higher costs.


Link
2012-11-15 11:48:44 PM
3 votes:

BravadoGT: You know what kind of employee I want at my business? The kind that tries to hurt me on arguably the busiest day of the year. GTFO--and God help you if you put me down on your next application and they call me.


Yes, I'm sure you masturbate furiously to the fantasy that one day that phone call will come, ONE DAY you will get to deny another human being of the chance at paying work. "God help you" indeed! Oh, the POWER you have!
2012-11-15 11:46:25 PM
3 votes:

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.


It's like you have no idea about the unemployment numbers. Are you really so stupid that you think that people would actually choose to work at Wal-Mart if they had any other option? FFS the people that work there can't even afford to shop there and have to go on government assistance. If you are ok with that then, by all means, please proceed.
2012-11-15 11:42:34 PM
3 votes:

ox45tallboy: so the cost of employee health care (current and future) is not included in the price of their cars.


Funny that having factories in the US hasn't caused the price of cars by Japanese or German companies to increase. It's almost as if the most important thing is how the companies are run, not where.
2012-11-15 11:40:37 PM
3 votes:

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.
2012-11-15 11:37:42 PM
3 votes:

rtaylor92: Are you sitting down for this because I don't want you to hurt yourself....German and Japanese autoworkers are both unionized. U.S. Auto struggling the last few decades was simply because they designed and tried to sell awful awful cars.


Germany and Japan also have socialized medicine, so the cost of employee health care (current and future) is not included in the price of their cars.
2012-11-15 11:37:03 PM
3 votes:

Nutsac_Jim: 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?

If you want to do that, then you work your way up to management and you get more money.


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.
2012-11-15 11:31:47 PM
3 votes:

steamingpile: Sue for what? Forcing them to show up for the job they said they would show up for? Some of you are farking insane.


it's illegal to fire employees for organizing or trying to organize. It's a federal law, and in some states there are additional laws. Laws go back to when Carnegie Steel called in the Pinkertons and had them get all shooty with some striking workers.
2012-11-15 11:25:00 PM
3 votes:

megalynn44: /so sick of buying cheap shiat only to have it break immediately.


Funny thing is, it wouldn't really cost much if anything more to sell good merchandise. Owing to price creep, in many places and on many items the differential between what Wal-Mart sells and good stuff is not much if anything. Costco somehow manages to sell good stuff for cheap, yet Sam's Club doesn't. It's not the stuff, it's the people doing the selling that are the issue.
2012-11-15 11:21:45 PM
3 votes:

Hunter_Worthington: //any defeat for organized Labor is a victory for the American Economy.


why should only one side have the freedom to associate as they see fit for their own gain? Also unions had nothing to do with the troubles of the US steel and auto industries.
2012-11-15 11:21:20 PM
3 votes:

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?


Walmart is a HUGE bully in the business world.

It's a terrible company. I'm very grateful I don't have to shop there. I know plenty of people who aren't so fortunate.

/so sick of buying cheap shiat only to have it break immediately.
//I. would. like. to. purchase. some. quality. goods. please.
///seriously, I'll pay whatever it takes, just, enough with the cheap shiat
////i hope Wal-mart workers fark UP Black Friday
//fark black friday anyways, watching citizens of one of the wealthiest nations in the world fight over cheap consumer goods is just embarrasing
2012-11-15 11:15:20 PM
3 votes:

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.


You assume that outsourcing was caused by consumers demanding lower prices. This is completely false.
Companies outsource to save money. Lower prices may be a side effect of that as the company tries to increase market share, but blaming it on consumer spending habits is wrong.
2012-11-15 11:07:39 PM
3 votes:
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?
2012-11-15 11:06:44 PM
3 votes:

CujoQuarrel: Mikey1969: CujoQuarrel: Do you have a pointer to that case? Love to read up on it.

Here's a quick story I found...
Link

Ok. Looks like they could still get out in case of fire (emergency exits and a manager with the key). Was wondering how they could do it and not get sued since that would be a safety issue.

Looks like from the article all they did was lock the doors to keep people out.

I would think that every store would lock it's doors at night when restocking or cleaning.


You missed this part, I guess...
Ms. Williams said Wal-Mart, with 1.2 million employees in its 3,500 stores nationwide, had recently altered its policy to ensure that every overnight shift at every store has a night manager with a key to let workers out in emergencies.

Here's another part:
Several Wal-Mart employees said that as recently as a few months ago they had been locked in on some nights without a manager who had a key. Robert Schuster said that until last October, when he left his job at a Sam's Club in Colorado Springs, workers were locked in every night, and on Friday and Saturday nights there was no one there with a key. One night, he recalled, a worker had been throwing up violently, and no one had a store key to let him out.

''They told us it's a big fine for the company if we go out the fire door and there's no fire,'' Mr. Schuster said. ''They gave us a big lecture that if we go out that door, you better make sure it's an emergency like the place going up on fire.'
'


And it took The New York TImes' investigation to start the 'Manager with a key' policy:
Several employees said Wal-Mart began making sure that there was someone with a key seven nights a week at the Colorado Springs store and other stores starting Jan. 1, shortly after The New York Times began making inquiries about employees' being locked in.

Then we have a manager chiming in about the real 'Why':
Tom Lewis, who managed four Sam's Clubs in Texas and Tennessee, said: ''It's to prevent shrinkage. Wal-Mart is like any other company. They're concerned about the bottom line, and the bottom line is affected by shrinkage in the store.''

Another reason for lock-ins, he said, was to increase efficiency -- workers could not sneak outside to smoke a cigarette, get high or make a quick trip home.


Sounds like they were locking them in to me, not locking other people out. Especially when you read the parts about low crime area WalMarts having the same policy. Besides, the very case the story talks about is a guy that shattered his ankle, and nobody was there with a key. If they opened the fire door without a fire, they could be fired, and it took a farking hour for the manager to get there with a key.
2012-11-15 10:36:58 PM
3 votes:
What I find particularly odious is not only the Walton's wealth or how crappy they treat their employees but the company's success at gouging local governments out of amazing amounts of TIF that THEY DON"T EVEN NEED.

they are a cancer on this country and should be shunned, boycotted, bankrupted, and sent packing back to Bentonville where Sam Walton's heirs themselves can find gainful employment in demeaning jobs instead of sucking the life blood out of this country.

harumph!
2012-11-15 10:36:54 PM
3 votes:
Working on Black Friday is pretty much the norm for retail. If having to work that day turns out to be a surprise, you probably are at about your intelligence level for employment prospects.

HOWEVER! Starting Black Friday on 8pm Thanksgiving Day is a dick move by Walmart, Target, and Toys*R*Us. That's a farking family day. Let them have at least that before you work them to death the next day.

I've decided to boycott all businesses that start the holiday sales on Thanksgiving evening. For my xmas shopping, I think I'll go 100% online unless I find something especially nice in a shop that recognizes family time.
2012-11-15 10:34:43 PM
3 votes:

CujoQuarrel: Do you have a pointer to that case? Love to read up on it.


Here's a quick story I found...
Link
2012-11-15 10:20:57 PM
3 votes:

Silly Jesus: HotIgneous Intruder: Silly Jesus: 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.

The CEO of my company has oodles of money. Do I deserve more of it just because he has lots of it?

That's some pretty derpy reasoning there, Lou.

No.
Actually, that proves that they aren't hurting for money and they can afford to pay the employees who made them filthy rich better than subsistence wages, plus provide health insurance.
There's no excuse for such insanely wealthy people not to have a social conscience.

You obviously missed the magnitude of those figures and have no functional understanding of economics, troll.

No, derpy-doo. Standing in a doorway and saying hello to everyone is in no way deserving of $12 / hour + benefits. No matter how much the boss makes.


You'be never had a job in retail. Now ask me how I know. I ducking dare you
2012-11-15 09:56:05 PM
3 votes:

gingerjet: So part of their plan is to pre-announce the walk out?

/I don't think they thought this all the way through


You don't understand how these things work, do you? You get the best results when you give the organization that you are protesting a chance to resolve the issue before D-Day. Also, it gets the word out, making it easier to get press coverage and find people familiar with the issue if the protest is carried out.
2012-11-15 09:33:33 PM
3 votes:

rolladuck: insertsnarkyusername: The can ask for a union and the company legally has to say yes.

The company can also legally shut down those stores. And re-open others in the next town where there is high unemployment of un- or marginally-skilled workers.

Unions aren't the be-all and end-all of employer-employee relationship management. And you catch more flies with honey than vinegar, ... at least metaphorically.


How do you suggest employees sweetly get WM to stop locking them in to work 'off the clock', pay them enough that how to apply for welfare directions are not part of the pre-employment package, and to promote female and minority employees fairly?
2012-11-15 09:26:15 PM
3 votes:

fanbladesaresharp: I don't mean to be a dick but that's not worthy of $25k a year AND benefits.


And why not?
Is there some reason working for Wal-Mart need not be gainful employment besides your opinion of what counts as work?
2012-11-15 09:23:57 PM
3 votes:
F*ck Wally World.
2012-11-15 09:20:34 PM
3 votes:
I am not generally "pro-union" but it seems there are a ton of abuses there that are illegal, I hope this can get Wal-Mart to follow the law.
2012-11-15 09:16:33 PM
3 votes:

Silly Jesus: gingerjet: So part of their plan is to pre-announce the walk out?

/I don't think they thought this all the way through

It's for leverage. They think that Wal-mart is going to say "oh no, please come to work, how would we ever be able to find another group of morons with no discernible skills to replace you?" Might work, who knows. Guess we'll find out.


Or maybe they know it won't work and just want to punch WalMart in the wallet.
I think it might work better than you think. The sort of mouth-breathers that apply to WalMart will probably take longer than 2 weeks to figure out how to work a cash register. Even if they got a bunch of job applicants, considering the relatively short time frame the stores would not be running smoothly (even compared to normal) and would cost the store quite a bit of revenue.
2012-11-15 09:09:32 PM
3 votes:
Good luck... you're going to need it.

/Follow up article next week about these employees getting fired....
2012-11-16 10:12:10 PM
2 votes:

Silly Jesus: It comes down to life choices. She has three kids, one car, and works at Wal-Mart. Somewhere along the line some very bad decisions were made. These are the consequences. The Walton's didn't force her to make those decisions.


Yes, indeed. She chose to marry her first husband who put her in a bad situation. She chose to marry a second husband who got shot up in Iraq, and has had a hell of a time getting on disability. She chose to have a special needs child.

Fark you for blaming the victim.

Seriously, f*ck you.

I don't have anything else to say to you.
2012-11-16 06:37:12 PM
2 votes:

apt311: Even if you make "manager", they're always p****ed off because they are moved around so much between stores that they are more worried about meeting corporate numbers than developing their subordinates.


To me, this is the key difference between the Walmart and the 30 years of chain stores before them.

As a kid, one of my best friends' father was manager of the local K-Mart. He was born and raised in the town. He managed the place for ~20 years. Hired people who needed it, developed workers, cared about the store's place in the community, etc, etc. Compared to today, had a fair bit of autonomy in stocking choices, layout, etc.

Walmart's corporate policy is NOT to EVER let that happen. As a WM manager, you are moved around constantly and it's numbers, numbers, and obedience. Only things that matter.
2012-11-16 06:12:54 PM
2 votes:
EVERYBODY PANIC:

Hmmm. Okay. Let's do this.

Nobody forced anybody to hire on at a low wage and with not-the-best benefits. If it was not good enough when they all hired on (and the terms were made very clear to everybody at the time of hiring) what made all these people take the jobs? Seriously, why did they scramble for these jobs?

In the minds of the applicants, getting hired at Wal*Mart was a great deal. It had to be the best opportunity they thought that they could achieve, having made little effort earlier in life to acquire a useful skill or education. They happily accepted the terms, conditions, pay rates and benefits and acted grateful at the time they hired on. Nobody made them go work at Wal*Mart and nobody forced them to stay on over the long haul.

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.


This is complete horse shiat. Very few people who get a job at Walmart think it is a great deal. Most of them take that job, or similar low-paying shiat jobs, because they have the option of working there for slave wages or starving. I don't care if the people should have done this or that with their lives, they shouldn't be treated like dirt simply because you feel that it is a justified punishment for their lack of skills or education. These pay practices are one of the main reasons we are struggling as a nation. Period.
2012-11-16 01:58:08 PM
2 votes:

RedVentrue: They tax the shiat out of everyone over there, too.


Places like Canada really aren't bad for taxes at all. The benefits far outweigh the costs, and, say, 25k is far below the level where the magnitude of the impact would be too much compared to the tax rates in the US - at the very least, the offset of social services for those making 25k would more than make up for it.
2012-11-16 12:31:19 PM
2 votes:

ltdanman44: this needs to be an all or nothing thing. I suspect it will be met with employees who are too scared to jump the line.

the ones that strike will get fired and this will all end by next week


While that's probably true, it's still a PR nightmare, and it's still a labor shortage on one of the busiest shopping days of the year.
2012-11-16 08:59:05 AM
2 votes:

Silly Jesus: timujin: Silly Jesus: There's an endless supply of dimwits who need some extra walking around money for cigarettes and lottery tickets. I don't think that Wal-mart is at much risk of running out of a "qualified" applicant pool.

That's where you and I disagree, I think the supply is limited. Would you work there? I wouldn't. Have you ever met any dimwits that you wouldn't trust to know which end of a mop to use? I have. Once you eliminate those people, people who can't communicate, people who have other limiting factors such as a criminal record, you do have a finite available workforce. Now, there are obviously more people who would take the job than are currently employed by the company, but I still believe that those people, once they are employed, will reach the same level off discontent that the current employees have. Eventually you run out of people who are willing to take the shiatty job. Add to that the cost of on-boarding and training new employees and it can be less costly to meet the employees demands, or at least come to some sort of middle ground.

It's kind of like the people who pick vegetables going on strike. Sure, there are other people willing to take their jobs, but not many and once those people realize how difficult the work is and how shiatty the conditions are, they too get fed up and go on strike. Eventually the growers run out of available employees and are forced to make concessions.

Yep. That's how it works. If Wal-mart becomes unable to hire enough employees at current wages, the wages will increase. Until then, they have no reason to pay everyone more than the market deems that they are currently worth.


This is why Capitalism is dead. There are now more workers than work that can be done, and it's getting worse every day. The end result is an excess of labour supply, causing wages to plummet. Eventually they will hit 0. What then, genius?
2012-11-16 08:48:07 AM
2 votes:

hocho064: I share the same thoughts but you mentioned violation of labor laws; like what & why is a union needed to uphold them? Unsafe work labor conditions: isnt this what OSHA is for? Pushing employees past physical limits? What do you mean?

Again, Im anti-union as well just dont understand your points is all :)


A couple of examples:

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/265540/ea-we-ruined-need-for-spe e d-with-studio-death-march/

EA Games is fond of using "Death Marches" in order to get out a game. They take hopeful college graduates, chew them up and spit them out. Most of the employees have no idea what they are getting themselves into, and many of them had good careers before EA bought up their company.

"In the '04 to '07 period, we had a single studio, Black Box, up in Vancouver, building our [NFS games]. And we literally had them on a death march building for five years in a row. [They were] annual iterations, they had to put it out; no rest for the weary.

"It'd happened before - games publishers do this from time to time. We should have put them on two-year alternating cycles but we didn't. And the title declined dramatically. We started to lose people. they didn't want to work 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year.


Another example: Hershey's.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/18/us/18immig.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

The students, from countries including China, Nigeria, Romania and Ukraine, came to the United States through a long-established State Department summer visa program that allows them to work for two months and then travel. They said they were expecting to practice their English, make some money and learn what life is like in the United States.

In a way, they did. About 400 foreign students were put to work lifting heavy boxes and packing Reese's candies, Kit-Kats and Almond Joys on a fast-moving production line, many of them on a night shift. After paycheck deductions for fees associated with the program and for their rent, students said at a rally in front of the huge packing plant that many of them were not earning nearly enough to recover what they had spent in their home countries to obtain their visas.


As for violation of labor laws, sometimes an individual is unable to make institutional change. When companies cover-up violations, and fire those who would complain, change can be impossible for a single employee.

Employees can also end up between a rock and a hard place. When one has spent the past 15 years with the same company, and is working towards retirement, simply "getting another job" can mean another decade before retirement. Companies can take advantage of this to demand incredible concessions and amounts of work from employees. This is especially the case for salaried employees who are exempt from overtime.


As I said, I rather dislike organized labor in general, but I recognize a few, limited scenarios in which they are the only way to correct rather egregious behavior on the part of employers. I just wish that a) more states were right-to-work, so that individuals couldn't be forced to join, and b) unions had to be recertified every few years, so they could go away once things got better.
2012-11-16 08:23:30 AM
2 votes:
Costco > Walmart
2012-11-16 08:01:11 AM
2 votes:
Back in the 1980's, the company I worked for hired HR consultants to provide some courses on preventing unionization by actually avoiding the pitfalls that lead to it, by actually treating people like human beings. Things like ensuring pay equity, LISTENING to your team's concerns, not only just avoiding unfairness but anything that would APPEAR to be unfair.

Surprisingly, it wasn't all about pay.
Recognition for work well done was #1. A say in such matters as health and safety was important too.
Avoiding unnecessary stress (but a little was ok) on the job was another big thing.
They even had the company mission changed from saying shareholder value was #1 on the list to #3

This was back before those short-sighted neocons (The Regans, Bushes, Mulroonies and Thatchers) got their greedy little hooks in and started strangling the goose that laid their golden eggs.
2012-11-16 07:00:30 AM
2 votes:
I'm horrified that Black Friday exists at all.
2012-11-16 06:50:01 AM
2 votes:
I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night, alive as you or me. Said I, "But, Joe, you're ten years dead." "I never died," said he,
"I never died," said he. Good on the WalMart workers. I wish you well.
2012-11-16 04:25:58 AM
2 votes:

CujoQuarrel: I see stuff like that all the time here on how bad the WallyWorlds look and how non helpful the staff is and I've never see that. The ones near me are spotlessly clean and I've never had any problems getting assistance.

Is it a northern thing maybe? I'm in the deep south.


I hate WalMart, but they're not particularly dirty, and I've never had problems with customer service either.

When it comes to customer service, the place to avoid like the plague? Fry's Electronics. That place TRULY sucks. It's got the BEST selection of computer hardware, and actually has bare circuit boards, and all of the components to build your own circuits, but the customer service is abysmal. I have been looking for things before, and had my wife on the other end of a huge aisle. I've seen an employee waling by and(purposely for this experiment) called out to my wife and said 'Can you find it? I can't see it down there, I wonder if it's in another aisle?'. This doesn't even slow the employee at all. I have probably tried this at least 10 separate times and NEVER had someone stop on their own and offer to help me. They're not a good place for employees either. Their way to shave off wages is that they pay their cashiers commission. There is no way to guarantee which cashier gets which customer, there are usually about 40 cash registers and the waiting line is way back at the beginning, with an employee that manages the line, telling you which register just opened up. Extremely efficient, but the cashiers get screwed over with that pay structure.
2012-11-16 03:24:41 AM
2 votes:

divx88: Unskilled workers doing unskilled things annoyed that they get paid what they're worth.

Loyalty is worth it's own weight in gold. A living wage, benefits and other things which enable someone to work there long term could raise the quality of employees there, but they don't want that. Don't like it, don't work there.

Learn a trade that's in demand.


They would love to be loyal, if their employer would just give them a reason.

Oh, and as far as the 'learn a trade/if they don't like it, don't work there' mantra, you don't seem to realize that these magical jobs aren't infinite in number. Not only that, but working in someplace like WalMart isn't exactly the way to get the money to afford school, and a lot of these people are working 2-3 jobs and also don't have the time to go to school as well as put food on the table. Besides, SOMEONE has to be there to sell you those shiatty flip flops you like so much.

Sure, it helps YOU sleep at night because you can rationalize it away, but it's just a cop out, nothing more. It does nothing to actually solve the problem. In fact, it makes it worse because people ignore it.
2012-11-16 02:30:00 AM
2 votes:

cman: What took them so damn long?

Good luck, btw


Oppressive management and constant bombardment with anti-union propaganda, for starters. Most large non-union stores make you watch an anti-union vid as part of training, and keep the break rooms well stocked with anti-union posters and flyers.

Not that I'm bitter about having spent three years of my life working in a non-union store.

"Competitive pay" my ass.
2012-11-16 02:12:04 AM
2 votes:

divx88: Don't like it, don't work there.

Learn a trade that's in demand.


Stocking groceries is in demand. That's why people are doing it.

If they were to learn a new trade, then who would stock the groceries? And would the new grocery stockers deserve to be treated this way?
2012-11-16 02:07:03 AM
2 votes:

gingerjet: So part of their plan is to pre-announce the walk out?

/I don't think they thought this all the way through


Pretty smart, actually. If customers think it will be more of a hassle than it usually is (read riots, people trampled, etc) they might elect not to shop there and it will impact their bottom line.

The question isn't how many will strike, so much as how many shoppers will be scared by the coverage of this and go elsewhere.
2012-11-16 01:59:26 AM
2 votes:

Lsherm: You need to look up right to work states. They've legislated, on purpose, the means to get around the NRLA. The laws vary by state.

He's ignorant, but so are you.


I'm in a right to work state right now (Alabama). Don't call me ignorant for explaining to someone that it is illegal to fire someone for attempting to organize, no matter what state you're in.

Of course there are ways around it. But that doesn't make it legal, it means that you have to find a different reason to fire the organizers.
2012-11-16 01:53:46 AM
2 votes:

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!
2012-11-16 01:47:50 AM
2 votes:

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 01:40:30 AM
2 votes:

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 01:34:06 AM
2 votes:

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 01:32:01 AM
2 votes:

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 01:09:41 AM
2 votes:

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 01:07:31 AM
2 votes:

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 12:54:48 AM
2 votes:

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 12:48:28 AM
2 votes:

ACallForPeace: With your love of contracts I'd assume if someone forced to sign a contract allowing someone to harvest one of their organs at gunpoint (or at the threat of denying them food and shelter) you'd insist that the only honorable way to end this is for that cheapskate poor bastards to give his organ away?
I guess economic contracts exist in this magical vacuum with no outside circumstances surrounding them.


The worst part of it is that the Wal-Mart employees DID NOT AGREE TO BE TREATED LIKE THIS. This is what EVERYBODY PANIC (and many others in the thread) don't seem to understand. Wal-Mart does not tell people as part of the interview and hiring process that they will be scheduled for full-time hours but not allowed to have benefits becasue they are considered a "part time" employee. They tell people that if they work 28 hours, they are "full-time"! They don't tell people that they will be required to work overtime some days without notice, but the overtime will be deducted when their shift begins on Friday by forcing them to clock out and sit in the parking lot for a few hours, and then have to race to try to do their night's work in only 6 hours instead of 8.
2012-11-16 12:42:11 AM
2 votes:

EVERYBODY PANIC: Nobody made them go work at Wal*Mart and nobody forced them to stay on over the long haul.


Because the options are so plenty. I'll repeat:
It is clear that when a person who is mugged hands over their money to the mugger they do so because they prefer it to the "next best alternative." As such, it is correct that people agree to sell their liberty to a boss because their "next best alternative" is worse (utter poverty or starvation are not found that appealing for some reason). But so what? As anarchists have been pointing out over a century, the capitalists have systematically used the state to create a limit options for the many, to create buyers' market for labour by skewing the conditions under which workers can sell their labour in the bosses favour. To then merrily answer all criticisms of this set-up with the response that the workers "voluntarily agreed" to work on those terms is just hypocrisy. Does it really change things if the mugger (the state) is only the agent (hired thug) of another criminal (the owning class)?

With your love of contracts I'd assume if someone forced to sign a contract allowing someone to harvest one of their organs at gunpoint (or at the threat of denying them food and shelter) you'd insist that the only honorable way to end this is for that cheapskate poor bastards to give his organ away?
I guess economic contracts exist in this magical vacuum with no outside circumstances surrounding them.
2012-11-16 12:38:45 AM
2 votes:

hubiestubert: It is sort of sad, that folks don't understand what sacrifices were made, so that they could have the protections that they enjoy today. How many Wobblies got their heads stove in, exactly what price Joe Hill paid, what was endured to create the very conditions that they enjoy today.

In the words of Joe Hill: "Don't mourn, organize."

This fight has been going for over a hundred years, and fear of organized labor has fueled efforts to limit and crush our right to free speech, freedom of association, and freedom to assemble. It strikes against the very fabric of the concept of this nation, and has been a tool of those who fear their workers' freedom, and their power.


You know, I'd love to ask Jimmie Hoffa about that. Have you seen him around anywhere?

I don't think it will ever come to making Union organizers disappear again, like what used to happen. Nowadays they just use lawyers. And Wal-Mart does NOT lose in Court.

I think much popcorn would be enjoyed by all if Wal-Mart were sued by the Church of Scientology.
2012-11-16 12:36:31 AM
2 votes:

Mikey1969: Well, except by every definition available outside of this board.


I'd always taken the definition to be that the "made money" was implicit with "employment" and the "gainful" necessitated being able to live on and improve yourself. If you're going to say "gainful employment" qualifies as getting a paycheck, there's really no point to the gainful, is there?

If it will make you happy, "living wage" works just as well.
2012-11-16 12:32:41 AM
2 votes:

ciberido: It's amazing how "liberal" people like Reagan and Nixon look when compared to today's Republican Party platform. Or at least what it was days before the election. I honestly have no idea what the Republican Party thinks it stands for now that Obama's been reëlected.


The same thing they have since Reagan.
An organization run by the rich, known for tricking racists and religious fundamentalists into voting for class warfare against themselves.
Maybe there is a slight change, since it seems that some actual racists and religious fundamentalists who believe their own bullshiat have their own caucus now, and seem to be farking things up for the rich Machiavellan side.
2012-11-16 12:27:40 AM
2 votes:

EVERYBODY PANIC: Nobody made them go work at Wal*Mart and nobody forced them to stay on over the long haul.


Hunger may not be a person, but it does make a very convincing argument.
2012-11-16 12:18:56 AM
2 votes:

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?!
2012-11-16 12:16:50 AM
2 votes:

Bucky Katt: Damn unions. Always standing up for the takers not the makers.


Really? Because the National Writer's Union certainly stands up for intellectual property creators, as opposed to the folks who want access to said intellectual property to distribute it. Come to think of it, they also seem to represent a LOT of folks who have skilled trades as well.

Unions represent labor as opposed to those who suckle at the teat of said labor. Be that labor in a factory, in schools, in film, authors, artists, artisans, cooks, chefs, workers in a mill. Unions represent the folks whose labor enables executives to pad out their expense accounts and take their stock options.

Who is taking and who is making, again?
2012-11-16 12:15:50 AM
2 votes:

jayphat: Yes there will be a large number of people on foodstamps working for Walmart. They are the largest private employer in the country. You'll probably be shocked, SHOCKED to know that state and federal workers are on foodstamps too. Maybe they need their pay raised as well.


Dude, the HR office at the Wal-Mart my sister works at has a stack of Medicaid forms for the new hires when they ask about benefits.

I am not making this up.

They also have WIC applications if you get pregnant. And the HR manager will help you fill out the paperwork!
2012-11-16 12:11:49 AM
2 votes:
1.bp.blogspot.com
2012-11-16 12:09:49 AM
2 votes:
The Wal-mart worker I know:

My aunt is pushing 70. In her time, she was way ahead of the curve. When her friends were getting married, she was getting a degree. She worked as a HIgh School English teacher for over 30 years. For most of her life she was a respected, independent professional.

Unfortunately, she's not perfect, went through a terribly messy divorce after being cheated on, and it knocked her down enough that she never quite regained her footing in life. Now, her pension doesn't cover her living expenses, so she works at Wal-mart. Where she gets to be stereotyped as a lazy, stupid loser who doesn't even deserve basic laborer protections for safety and health.
2012-11-16 12:01:01 AM
2 votes:

Fade2black: Is there a reason why Wal-Mart should pay a wage to employees that would count as gainfully employed? You haven't explained the repercussions when wages go up dollars an hour, to the product they sell or the services they give. Wages go up, cost goes up. Nothing of value was gained except you might feel better about yourself when you go home after your shift.


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.

Is there some reason working for Wal-Mart need not be gainful employment besides your opinion of what counts as work?
2012-11-15 11:59:02 PM
2 votes:

Je5tEr: atomic-age: How do you suggest employees sweetly get WM to stop locking them in to work 'off the clock'

Simple. If anyone EVER did that to me it'd be a call to 911 to report that I was being unlawfully imprisoned. And when the cops showed up I'd be standing on the other side of those glass doors with a sledgehammer and I'd tell them that either they get me out of there or I will.


Yeah! And if a guy ever tried to rape me, why I'd just kick him in the balls and laugh! What the hell is wrong with all these people that they can't take a stand and solve their own problems?!

I'll leave this here for the sarcasm-impaired.
2012-11-15 11:58:39 PM
2 votes:

jayphat: Umm, i hate to burst this myth, but they don't. On average, when a Walmart moves in, the number of businesses present beforehand that closes is 4. After 5 years, and if you've ever seen a Walmart built, a ton of crap gets built around it. I'm not going to look for this study tonight, google it yourself if you want to see it.


Yeah, either a bunch of chain restaurants, or places that don't do any business related to WalMart. In other words, no competition.
2012-11-15 11:53:35 PM
2 votes:

Great Janitor: That is no different than me handing someone a hammer and saying "Now, if you bash your hand with this it could break your hand." and then watch as they bash their hand with said hammer and then listen as a bone or two breaks. No sympathy.


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.
2012-11-15 11:50:12 PM
2 votes:
Walmart and other big companies achieve economies of scale due to their size.

a union allows workers to gain that same advantage, and see the benefits of economies of scale.

if you want to take issue with how unions are run, fine (I will probably agree, but they aren't run any better than most companies). but wish for the end of unions? congrats, you don't know jack shiat about economics.
2012-11-15 11:45:30 PM
2 votes:

WhyteRaven74: steamingpile: Sue for what? Forcing them to show up for the job they said they would show up for? Some of you are farking insane.

it's illegal to fire employees for organizing or trying to organize. It's a federal law, and in some states there are additional laws. Laws go back to when Carnegie Steel called in the Pinkertons and had them get all shooty with some striking workers.


It just flabbergasts me that we're still having these fights today against the Titans of Consumerism (who have replaced Titans of Industry in this day and age). I have the sinking feeling that this may get every bit as ugly, though hopefully not as shooty/stabby/clubby.

My local Wal-Mart is one that's planning to walk out, and I'll be there with them.
2012-11-15 11:45:23 PM
2 votes:

jpo2269: and its just another example of "Occupy" being full of shiat.


why not hold WalMart's feet to the flames for treating their employees the way they do? After all, if WalMart does it right, we're not even having this discussion.
2012-11-15 11:39:56 PM
2 votes:

Tellingthem: always wondered where his historical standing would have been if Watergate never happened.


Pretty high up most likely. Granted it doesn't help that almost as soon as he was out of office, the EPA and OSHA, which were created during his time in office and given some very serious teeth, found themselves being weakened, by members of Nixon's own party no less.

Fade2black: And he was also one of the most batshiat insane presidents we've ever had. Let that sink in for a while.


His paranoia was a personal thing, when it came to policy he was completely clear headed. And many times far more insightful than he's been given credit for.
2012-11-15 11:37:00 PM
2 votes:

erveek: ...by the Roberts Supreme Court. Gee, I wonder how that will go.


by the time the case ends up in the Supreme Court there could be a couple, at least, different justices there. Also as evident from his opinion in the Health Care Reform Act ruling, Roberts has much respect for existing precedent when it comes to labor law.
2012-11-15 11:34:04 PM
2 votes:

Cross of Iron: Yeah, but Hostess was already affiliated with the baker's union.


And Hostess has had problems for years owing to some rather badly conceived acquisitions and mergers.
2012-11-15 11:19:55 PM
2 votes:

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?


I would say that's a pretty good assessment. The consumers and shareholders are most definitely a huge part of the problem. In the end it's all about greed. Everyone wants more, more, more...and they don't want to pay for it. Hell, the black Friday event is a celebration of greed. Can anyone think of any logical justification for human beings to be trampled to death by a crowd trying to buy plastic things in a store? No. What you have is a crowd of hundreds of people who saw a person hurting on the ground and then made the decision to ignore them, because they can get a good deal on a shiatty TV or laptop.  That's a pretty serious problem.
2012-11-15 11:17:01 PM
2 votes:

HotIgneous Intruder: In 2010, the Waltons' share [of wealth] equaled the entire bottom 41.5 percent of U.S. families.
Six people hold nearly 42 percent of the national wealth.
They are the Walton family.


I think Sam Walton is spinning in his grave at east as fast as Walt Disney... Talk about raising a dream, and then having people fark it all to Hell...
2012-11-15 11:10:46 PM
2 votes:

John Buck 41: Seeing as how Fark generally is 'liberal' I find it odd that there are so many many posts trashing WalMart workers potentially going on strike.


Fresh troll accounts just like the influx we had when WI was fighting over collective bargaining. Anti labor forces are well organized.
2012-11-15 11:05:16 PM
2 votes:

Silly Jesus: I hope they are all fired.


And then they could sue WalMart for pretty well anything they want. Oh and WalMart would also face federal lawsuits.
2012-11-15 11:02:54 PM
2 votes:

Silly Jesus: It's a voluntary exchange. They went to Wal-mart and asked for the ability to exchange their labor for the amount of money that Wal-mart was offering. They weren't recruited or forced to work there. If they don't like the terms of their voluntary contract, they are free to leave and Wal-mart should be free to replace them with someone else.


Voluntarism implies promising (i.e. the freedom to make agreements), and promising implies that individuals are capable of independent judgement and rational deliberation. In addition, it presupposes that they can evaluate and change their actions and relationships. Contracts under capitalism, however, contradict these implications of voluntarism. For, while technically "voluntary" , capitalist contracts result in a denial of liberty. This is because the social relationship of wage-labour involves promising to obey in return for payment. To promise to obey is to deny or to limit, to a greater or lesser degree, individuals' freedom and equality and their ability to exercise these capacities [of independent judgement and rational deliberation]. To promise to obey is to state, that in certain areas, the person making the promise is no longer free to exercise her capacities and decide upon her own actions, and is no longer equal, but subordinate. This results in those obeying no longer making their own decisions. Thus the rational for voluntarism (i.e. that individuals are capable of thinking for themselves and must be allowed to express their individuality and make their own decisions) is violated in a hierarchical relationship as some are in charge and the many obey. Thus any voluntarism which generates relationships of subordination is, by its very nature, incomplete and violates its own justification.

This can be seen from capitalist society, in which workers sell their freedom to a boss in order to live. In effect, under capitalism you are only free to the extent that you can choose whom you will obey! Freedom, however, must mean more than the right to change masters. Voluntary servitude is still servitude. For if, as Rousseau put it, sovereignty, "for the same reason as makes it inalienable, cannot be represented" neither can it be sold nor temporarily nullified by a hiring contract. Rousseau famously argued that the "people of England regards itself as free; but it is grossly mistaken; it is free only during the election of members of parliament. As soon as they are elected, slavery overtakes it, and it is nothing." [The Social Contract and Discourses, p. 266]

Of course it is claimed that entering wage labour is a "voluntary" undertaking, from which both sides allegedly benefit. However, due to past initiations of force (e.g. the seizure of land by conquest), the control of the state by the capitalist class plus the tendency for capital to concentrate, a relative handful of people now control vast wealth, depriving all others access to the means of life. Thus denial of free access to the means of life is based ultimately on the principle of "might makes right." And as Murray Bookchin so rightly points out, "the means of life must be taken for what they literally are: the means without which life is impossible. To deny them to people is more than 'theft' . . . it is outright homicide." [Remaking Society, p. 187]

It is clear that when a person who is mugged hands over their money to the mugger they do so because they prefer it to the "next best alternative." As such, it is correct that people agree to sell their liberty to a boss because their "next best alternative" is worse (utter poverty or starvation are not found that appealing for some reason). But so what? The capitalists have systematically used the state to create limited options for the many, to create buyers' market for labour by skewing the conditions under which workers can sell their labour in the bosses favour. To then merrily answer all criticisms of this set-up with the response that the workers "voluntarily agreed" to work on those terms is just hypocrisy. Does it really change things if the mugger (the state) is only the agent (hired thug) of another criminal (the owning class)?

So, while it is definitely the case that no one forces you to work for them, the capitalist system is such that you have little choice but to sell your liberty and labour on the "free market." Not only this, but the labour market (which is what makes capitalism capitalism) is (usually) skewed in favour of the employer, so ensuring that any "free agreements" made on it favour the boss and result in the workers submitting to domination and exploitation.
2012-11-15 11:02:50 PM
2 votes:

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?
2012-11-15 11:01:57 PM
2 votes:

Great Janitor: It's up to the employees to make things better.


What do you think this strike is about?
2012-11-15 10:58:38 PM
2 votes:

born_yesterday: MFAWG: RedVentrue: Thanks for the heads up, subby. I'll go on Sunday to make my offering to the Capitalist Temple.

The demand side needs to speak loudly here. So stay the duck away from there

Frankly, I cannot understand the mindset of anyone that would spend Thanksgiving shopping. It's my favorite holiday of the year. Go to a friend's house, big ol' meal, football, beer, more food, nap, more food. Being thankful for having plenty, and appreciating it with friends. I love it.

I did Black Friday once, and got some great deals, but not great enough to deal with that madness again. But...not even taking a day to give thanks? That's farked up.


Thank you. I VERY RELUCTANTLY went to a store to get something my wife wanted about 5 years ago. I drove by, saw the line, realized what the hell I was doing, and never even stopped. That's the closest I've ever come. I said it a while back in another thread, but I'll say it again here: I believe it's my moral duty NOT to patronize stores who choose to ruin their employees' holidays. There is absolutley NO reason black Friday can't start on Friday. There is nothing in any store that I need/want so bad that I need to be a part of ruining someone elses family/personal time. I don't care if they celebrate that holiday or not. Almost everyone else who is non-essential gets it, they should too. If they WANT to work it that's fine, but being required to come in and sell shiatty plastic junk...that's really not necessary.
HBK
2012-11-15 10:57:01 PM
2 votes:

Fade2black: HotIgneous Intruder: fanbladesaresharp: I'll pay you $9 an hour. Take it or leave it. It doesn't require a degree in engineering to run a farking cash register.

Nine bucks an hour is $12 bucks an hour after taxes.

And my 36 an hour is 27 after taxes. You still haven't made a valid point.


I hope people don't pay you $36 an hour to understand jokes. Because you suck at it.
2012-11-15 10:36:01 PM
2 votes:
Wal-Mart was the biggest client of a law firm I used to work for.

The firm defends Wal-Mart against its employees.

This was one of the reasons I stopped enjoying my work there.

I look forward to the outcome of this, even though I'm sure it just means more money in the coffers of the Death Star (nickname of former firm).
2012-11-15 10:34:47 PM
2 votes:
1.- Silly Jesus is a weak attempt of a troll, and you're all feeding him and we're so close to past midnight.

2.- I would love nothing but to see Walmart fall

3.- Then again, I like a little chaos, so that's that
2012-11-15 10:28:29 PM
2 votes:

Benjimin_Dover: I'm sure they would be happy to allow a co-worker to not be a part of their union if they chose.


many states require all union contracts to allow opt-out.

i know i could decide to do so, but then i would not be entitled to union representation if there were a dispute, and i would have no say in union leadership because i would not be a member.

but i can fill out a little slip of paper and do so if i wanted to.

but even the woman who listens to el rushbo every day does not fill out the slip. because the union is worth it
2012-11-15 10:20:23 PM
2 votes:

Mitt Romneys Tax Return: Doesn't matter. You can cite things like this all day and assholes like this thread's merry band of trolls will still lick the Walton heir's taints. We're Amurricans - no one can be too rich and any amount of employee abuse is perfectly OK because, by golly, they chose the work there.


They'll also be the first to complain when, should everyone choose not to work there, that they're just lazy.
There is literally no course of action, short of being born rich, that you're allowed to take to success.
2012-11-15 10:10:02 PM
2 votes:

Silly Jesus: HotIgneous Intruder: In 2010, the Waltons' share [of wealth] equaled the entire bottom 41.5 percent of U.S. families.
Six people hold nearly 42 percent of the national wealth.
They are the Walton family.

Jealousy is a biatch.


No. Karma kills.
Sun Tzu - "If you wait by the river long enough, the bodies of your enemies will float by."
See ya!
2012-11-15 10:05:06 PM
2 votes:
I worked at this terrible place when I was in school for my second degree.

People who work there are not all idiots. You are not above all of them. You would be above most of them, but there are some normal and smart people that work there. Some people need to work there because they need a third or fourth job. I needed a fourth job.

School is an expensive habit. I was running out of places to work, so I applied to work late nights at Wally World.

But yeah, you can quit any time. These workers need to quit b*tching.
2012-11-15 10:02:53 PM
2 votes:
I won't be shopping there that's for sure.

Solidarity and Success, workers!
2012-11-15 09:52:26 PM
2 votes:
wife's step mom and sister work for wally world. this story actually broke over a month ago. I don't know about other states, but Oklahoma is an at will state they can just tell them to fark off if they go through with this. wife's step and sister are planning on going in although begrudgingly. I know black Friday and all get the consumers spending, but how many of you older farts like me remember on Thanksgiving, nothing was open you had to wait until Friday.
2012-11-15 09:50:24 PM
2 votes:

Silly Jesus: Hostess


Don't be too sure.
I was in a Harris Teeter market here in Virginia today and I went to the snack cake shelves.
Little Debbie Swiss Rolls were $1.27 per box.
Hostess HoHos were $4.49 a box, same sized box as the above.
In fact, all the hostess cakes, HoHos, Ding Dongs, Twinkies, Mini Mufffins and etc, were ALL $4.49 per box.

Something is out of whack there and I don't know what it is, but $4.49 for a box of the same size product seems like a losing deal.
2012-11-15 09:46:09 PM
2 votes:
Anyway, there's always Amazon.....
2012-11-15 09:43:24 PM
2 votes:

Lsherm: 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.

Unemployment is still high enough they can be replaced. Sucks, but true, especially since it doesn't look like this is a nationwide-coordinated effort. If they could get all the workers in all the stores to strike on the same day it would be very effective.


Meh. If all the wal-mart employees in my town walked off the job, the company would have serious problems replacing them. Every big box store, fast food place, grocery store, and small retail store is having to raise wages to attract employees. The unskilled retail labor pool is pretty tight.
Lots of temp workers who barely/don't speak English are filling gaps at some places, but would you want to staff a wal-mart in middle America with English-challenged people on black Friday?

The hambeasts fighting over discounted Chinese-made shiat would burn the motherfarker down.

/come to think of it, that might be damned entertaining
2012-11-15 09:42:46 PM
2 votes:

Silly Jesus: If I asked for a job that paid me $1 a day, would the company be evil or would I be a dumbass?


Yes and yes.

Though the latter is true regardless of context.
2012-11-15 09:40:07 PM
2 votes:

Silly Jesus: LULZ. I hope they are all fired. Plenty more people out there who would love their job.


0/10

Just donated $200. Let's do this!
2012-11-15 09:37:37 PM
2 votes:
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.
2012-11-15 09:36:55 PM
2 votes:

Nonesuch: Good luck... you're going to need it.

/Follow up article next week about these employees getting fired....


This is about the only time of year they can pull this off hopefully without getting fired, at least until after the new year. Big box retailers need at least SOME trained employees to keep the temps in line or it will be five times as much chaos as you see on the news every year. I started at a Circuit City in mid October, so I had time to learn the company ropes (on top of five years previous experience selling the same kind of stuff), but they were still hiring temps up til a week or two before Christmas and most of them had no idea what they were doing.

The biggest differences between WM and CC at that point were product lines (so mostly higher class customers at CC) and that they paid the employees enough more that they wouldn't have come nearly that close to a walkout. The 16 hour forced schedule on Black Friday however, was enough to make me hate the place forever.
2012-11-15 09:28:48 PM
2 votes:
I'm not a fan of the unions, but this... this is totally doing it right.
2012-11-15 09:28:37 PM
2 votes:

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.
2012-11-15 09:24:28 PM
2 votes:
Walmart isn't a store; it's an alternate dimension.

Think about it. Every Walmart you've ever been in, from Lickcock Idaho to Bahrain, has the same people. I don't mean they look the same, I mean they *are* the same.
The doors you pass through are a gateway to this dimension.

Think about it. You know I'm right.
2012-11-15 09:19:52 PM
2 votes:

real_headhoncho: Hmmm... I wonder if I should apply for a job at Wal Mart.


FTA: Pay a minimum of $25,000/year

11-12 bucks an hour for stocking shelves and counting change. I don't mean to be a dick but that's not worthy of $25k a year AND benefits. I know people taking those jobs that have college degrees. Stay around a couple years and then you can have that.

That said, apply at Costco. They pay much better than that. But you might be waiting a while for an interview.
2012-11-15 09:15:33 PM
2 votes:

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.


The libertarians would NEVER try to do that. It goes against everything they stand for.
2012-11-15 09:14:19 PM
2 votes:

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.
2012-11-15 09:09:20 PM
2 votes:

djkutch: the president who should have been


DERPA-HERPA-DERPA!
The butt hurt never stops.
2012-11-15 09:04:36 PM
2 votes:
FTFA:

The workers are demanding the following from Walmart:

Improve Workers' Lives
Pay a minimum of $25,000/year and guarantee quality, affordable health coverage for all ...

Rebuild Communities
Sign on to a national community benefits agreement that ensures as Walmart expands into new markets, it strengthens communities, protects the environment ...

Put Its Promises in Writing
Agree to a global labor agreement guaranteeing the fundamental human right of freedom of association for all of its associates and instruct their suppliers to do the same...

Elevate Global Living Standards
Establish a legally binding global responsible contractor policy requiring contractors and subcontractors to provide living wages, worker safety protections, and respect basic human and labor rights...



Is that all? Why exactly do they think ANY of that is going to happen because they refuse to work? Oh yeah, they're walmart employees. Clearly not the best at making important life decisions..
2012-11-15 08:57:12 PM
2 votes:

Silly Jesus: 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.

It's a voluntary exchange. They went to Wal-mart and asked for the ability to exchange their labor for the amount of money that Wal-mart was offering. They weren't recruited or forced to work there. If they don't like the terms of their voluntary contract, they are free to leave and Wal-mart should be free to replace them with someone else.


Exactly! Thanks for articulating much better than I attempted. They accepted the job and should have no opinion whatsoever after.

If they want it different, they can quit and can start their own corporation selling products made in China.
2012-11-15 08:53:45 PM
2 votes:

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.


It's a voluntary exchange. They went to Wal-mart and asked for the ability to exchange their labor for the amount of money that Wal-mart was offering. They weren't recruited or forced to work there. If they don't like the terms of their voluntary contract, they are free to leave and Wal-mart should be free to replace them with someone else.
2012-11-15 08:45:02 PM
2 votes:
I have a few friends who work for Wally World, and they were all notified on Monday that they have to be in Next Thursday no later than 5PM.

[Although apparently you can have until 8 if you blow your department manager... at least at one store]
2012-11-17 06:03:26 PM
1 votes:

FuryOfFirestorm: Silly Jesus: FuryOfFirestorm: leadmetal: Now as to the walmart employment horror stories, why not leave? Are there no Targets? No Safeways? No Kmarts? No Menards? No Home Depots? If these other places pay more and treat people better, just start applying at them. I am sure they would prefer someone with applicable experience than someone right off the street.

If you're a minority/woman/senior citizen with no college education, your job options are limited.

"But why not get a degree?" With what money? All of their income goes to rent, food, and utilities.

"But why not get a loan?". Yes, banks are tripping over themselves to give loans to people who can barely afford to pay rent.

"Why not get a new job?" When you're working two waitressing jobs just feed your kids, you're not going to quit your job in an unstable job market, are you? Don't you think that if there were better paying jobs available out there, that working mother of 2 wouldn't already be applying for it?

Not irresponsibly having the two kids would be a good start.

Wow. You are such a colossal asshole, you make Donald Trump look like Mr. Rogers.

Even Satan would reject your soul.


Yeah, that's usually how liberals react to the concept of personal responsibility.
2012-11-17 02:26:51 PM
1 votes:

ReapTheChaos: Mikey1969: jayphat: Umm, i hate to burst this myth, but they don't. On average, when a Walmart moves in, the number of businesses present beforehand that closes is 4. After 5 years, and if you've ever seen a Walmart built, a ton of crap gets built around it. I'm not going to look for this study tonight, google it yourself if you want to see it.

Yeah, either a bunch of chain restaurants, or places that don't do any business related to WalMart. In other words, no competition.

The Wal-Mart they built here a few years back has a strip mall that now surrounds the entire thing. Aside from the chain restaurants, the stores consist of Radio Shack, Game Stop, Dollar General, Super Cuts, a gas station, a Sprint store as well a couple others I cant think of right now. All these places are in direct competition with what Wal-Mart sells yet they're thriving.


Game Stop: Used games. WalMart doesn't sell these.

Radio Shack: Haven't been able to classify this one for years, not sure how much they compete, because I've never seen anyone buy an actual TV at Radio Shack

Dollar General: Even WalMart doesn't sell that kind of cheap crap

Super Cuts: Hair Salons in WalMart are off and on, some have them, some don't. Sure they compete, but that Salon in WalMart could be turned into a bank tomorrow.

Gas Station: Just like the salon, it's not common enough in WalMart to be a regular thing, I can think of maybe 1 WalMart I know of here that sells gas.

Sprint: You DO realize that WalMart doesn't -rovide phone SERVICE, right? That's where people like Sprint come in. How exactly is WalMart supposed to sell you a cell phone if they drive the coverage providers out of business?
2012-11-17 03:08:05 AM
1 votes:
Silly Jesus thinks you should be a slave if you have kids.

Silly Jesus also thinks having kids is a very bad thing.
2012-11-17 03:07:57 AM
1 votes:

ox45tallboy: 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?


Your sister is working as a "security guard"? Wal-Mart doesn't have a very good reputation when it comes to new, untrained "security guards".

You and your sister are wise to fight this.
2012-11-17 12:39:48 AM
1 votes:

EVERYBODY PANIC: Anybody got any ideas on steps which can be taken to allow his cousin to have a happier and more meaningful life? Anyone?


Change herself? I'm just basing that opinion on this:

CujoQuarrel: I have a cousin that does the same thing. Hates the job. Hates the management. Hates her co-workers. But she won't find something else and just quit.

On the other hand that's the way she's been with every job she's ever had ...


There seems to be a common factor.
2012-11-16 11:42:25 PM
1 votes:

ciberido: Silly Jesus: It comes down to life choices. She has three kids, one car, and works at Wal-Mart. Somewhere along the line some very bad decisions were made. These are the consequences. The Walton's didn't force her to make those decisions.

ox45tallboy: Yes, indeed. She chose to marry her first husband who put her in a bad situation. She chose to marry a second husband who got shot up in Iraq, and has had a hell of a time getting on disability. She chose to have a special needs child.

Fark you for blaming the victim.

Seriously, f*ck you.

I don't have anything else to say to you.

You needn't bother. Silly Jesus has passed beyond what I call the Derpchild radius, the point at which Poe's Law collapses under the burden of its own derp. It's no longer possible to determine whether the farker is sincere, trolling, or sarcastic. Nor, ultimately does it matter. No rational argument will ever be able to escape that singularity. It's just mathematically impossible.


Aww, how precious. You've created an alternate reality to avoid the real world.
2012-11-16 10:24:11 PM
1 votes:

Silly Jesus: We waited for our second child until it was financially feasible.

Who is she the victim of? WalMart? Seriously? She's had shiatty luck and some poor planning, but victim?

That's fine if you cut off anyone who disagrees with you. Just makes you the smaller person.

wellbye.jpg


Your words were

Silly Jesus: It comes down to life choices. She has three kids, one car, and works at Wal-Mart. Somewhere along the line some very bad decisions were made. These are the consequences. The Walton's didn't force her to make those decisions.


You don't know my sister, but you assume that anyone that works at Wal-Mart must have made "some very bad decisions", and should deal with the "consequences".

This isn't about me disagreeing with you, this is about your very personal insult to my sister, who you've never even met.

Seriously, f*ck you.
2012-11-16 09:34:23 PM
1 votes:

People_are_Idiots: ox45tallboy: People_are_Idiots: Whoa, a bigger idiot! Did I say FEDERAL law? I said CONSTITUTION. Constitution does not necessarily mean Federal. This is like saying Texas Law is valid in Arizona... next time, READ!

-10/10

Next time, figure out what the hell you are talking about. I called Great Janitor out for claiming that he had the right to fire anyone attempting to organize a Union. I pointed out an article discussing Constitutional Theory, as well as the Wagner Act. You butted in and called me "ignorant" and said I had no idea what I was talking about, and demanded a better reference. I linked straight to the Wagner Act, and now you're spouting off some nonsense about the Constitution and how Federal law Texas valid in Arizona... I have no idea what you think you are talking about, but I gave you the FEDERAL law which trumps any and all State laws. If that's not good enough for you, then fark off.

I rate you negative infinity/10. So there.

I know what I am talking about do you? The first thing you quoted was the Constitution in relation the union strikes. I pointed out the Constitution has no amendment or article saying a group of employees cannot leave work without risk of getting fired just to protest. A theory is at best an educated guess, but the Constitution does not protect you from loss of a job because you go outside when you're supposed to be working. At best you can complain in your off-time. THEN you decided to throw a Fed law at me. I'm not arguing on State or Fed law, I am arguing Constitutional law. You can argue Fed and State law til you're blue in the face, and I wouldn't disagree with you, but the subject matter is not such. Yes we have laws on the books, for those that want to put a union in a store (then again, there are ways around that). The Constitution however has no such article guaranteeing the right of striking.

That is what I'm concentrating on: The Constitution... wanna talk Fed law now, go on ahead.


The Constitution may not have anything specific on that...but it DOES have a little clause about how Congress can in fact make laws, and it would seem that Congress has in fact made a law (that is the law of the land) that says that a company can't fire employees simply for being on strike. It's also been around long enough that if the law in question had been seen as un-constitutional it'd have been ruled as such (especially after thirty years of Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats in office appointing Supreme Court justices).

Trust me, if Massey Coal could make it legal to fire striking workers, they would have :D

In fact, about the only times a union isn't allowed to strike is if they're considered a union for people working in essential infrastructure--Wally-World during Black Friday sales doesn't count; they're talking shiat like healthcare, police, fire, federal employees, municipal services like water, stuff like that. (Probably the best known union that routinely has "no strike because we're seriously essential" clauses in their contracts is AFSCME, a union primarily working with government and healthcare workers.)
2012-11-16 04:21:31 PM
1 votes:

timujin: I'm going to give you a 3/10 for this one. Sure, there are more workers than this type of work to be done, but there are 3,000,000 unfilled jobs in this country right now. Those are jobs that require certain types of training, though, and we're not doing what we can as a country to get people that training.


BULLSHIAT, BULLSHIAT, BULLAHIAT!
Let me fix that for you:
Those are jobs that require certain types of training, though, and we're not doing what we can as a country to get people that training employers expect to hire people who have either paid out of their pockets or had subsidized schooling for the exact training and experience to fill those jobs.

So yes, employers don't want to spend any time or money training anyone. It's their problem, not anyone else's. The hiring requirements are so narrow and specific and the HR hurdles are so high and exclusive right now, it's not wonder the economy is shiatting out its guts right now.
Low wages stifle demand.
Until employers get this through their greedy heads, nothing will change.
Until employers invest in their workforce and show some reciprocal loyalty, they're going to suffer.
2012-11-16 03:34:10 PM
1 votes:

DeathCipris: Dunno if this has already been said during the 648 comments already in this thread, but...
Mistreatment of workers? Coming from the same company that took out "secret" life insurance policies on employees and pocketed a large amount of the return when they kicked it?

Bwah? Color me surprised...


Google "Wal-Mart: and "Dead peasants insurance" for more details.
2012-11-16 02:47:21 PM
1 votes:

Howlin Mad Murphy: How do you assholes want it? You biatch and moan about a lot of these same people being on welfare, then you want to put them down for standing up for themselves and demanding livable wages. Oooh, please someone save the multi-billion dollar corporation! They shouldn't have to pay their employees anymore because they are worthless pieces of shiat that knew what they were getting into. Give me a farking break.


THIS a lot.
2012-11-16 02:20:31 PM
1 votes:

MagicPlasticTreeFrog: Yes. Dial back time a few decades and many of the expectations you say your sister wants from her job were not even common place. Once workers and legislators got those benefits working, the working class started asking for more.

Also, if your sister is getting fleeced that badly, she should really do something about it.


Dial it back a few decades and many people had good pension plans that they were being offered for staying with their company. Also, most workers were being paid more (adjusted for inflation).
2012-11-16 01:55:40 PM
1 votes:
Plenty of people will take their jobs?
Maybe. But not quick enough to save Black Friday.
2012-11-16 01:53:48 PM
1 votes:
Dunno if this has already been said during the 648 comments already in this thread, but...
Mistreatment of workers? Coming from the same company that took out "secret" life insurance policies on employees and pocketed a large amount of the return when they kicked it?

Bwah? Color me surprised...
2012-11-16 01:44:00 PM
1 votes:
"First 150 customers win a free Wal-Mart vest!"

There. Problem solved.
2012-11-16 01:30:39 PM
1 votes:

Carth: RedVentrue: EVERYBODY PANIC: Testiclaw: TiiiMMMaHHH: The workers are demanding the following from Walmart:

We should be demanding similar requirements for every human on this Earth.

Good for the WM employees for getting together to do this.

You mean, mean guy Testiclaw. We should demand, DEMAND! that everybody on earth be given, not a tolerable wage of perhaps $25,000 as you propose, but a fortune of, say, *puts pinkie to side of lip* ONE MILLION DOLLARS!

Yes this proposal sounds crazy to some, and yes I'm just having fun with you over this, but please explain in your wisdom what makes my evil plan any different from yours, save by degree? And oh yes, also tell us EXACTLY WHO is to 'provide' all of this largess to the nonproductive people of the world.

This I gotta hear.

If everyone worked fo 25k a year, then 25k would be the new starvation wage. Raise wages without raising means and resouces, and it only serves to inflate the dollar.

If only there was a country nearby that had a minimum wage of over $10 an hour, single payer health insurance and a dollar that was about at parity with the USD. Nope, that could never happen the US economy could never match the Canadian one.


They tax the shiat out of everyone over there, too.
2012-11-16 09:15:58 AM
1 votes:

hocho064: HotWingConspiracy: hocho064: HotWingConspiracy: hocho064: Put Its Promises in Writing
Agree to a global labor agreement guaranteeing the fundamental human right of freedom of association for all of its associates and instruct their suppliers to do the same, and recognize and negotiate with OUR Walmart. Since when is it a requirement that Walmart dictates other companies policies?

They do it all the time when they are cutting deals.

Not sure I agree with you on this.

You don't think Walmart demands certain operational conditions from their suppliers? LOL

Yes but NOT for things like "you need to pay your employees a certain wage DUH

Elevate Global Living Standards
Establish a legally binding global responsible contractor policy requiring contractors and subcontractors to provide living wages, worker safety protections, and respect basic human and labor rights, including freedom of association and freedom from racial and gender discrimination. Again, why is this Walmarts responsibility?

Because they're profiting from it.

And other similar companies arent profiting; Sears, Kohls, Target, H&M, etc? Why should a company have to "overpay" someone just because they demand it?

What?

I get that you're a huge fan of overseas slave labor, but a lot of people aren't. As long as we're competing with Asian orphans on wages, nothing will get better here.

Companies leveraging overseas labor is nothing new. I'm 47 and as long as I can remember, we've seen "Made in China" tags on tons of products growing up.


Yeah, and now people want to do something about it. You have a problem with this.
2012-11-16 09:10:31 AM
1 votes:

MithrandirBooga: Silly Jesus: Sergeant Grumbles: Fade2black: Is there a reason why Wal-Mart should pay a wage to employees that would count as gainfully employed? You haven't explained the repercussions when wages go up dollars an hour, to the product they sell or the services they give. Wages go up, cost goes up. Nothing of value was gained except you might feel better about yourself when you go home after your shift.

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.

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

Why not pay them all $50,000 a year. That would only cost everyone $20 a year. Why not pay them all $100,000 a year? That would cost everyone less than $100 a year. How do you choose the appropriate pay?



Consider this. Walmart makes $15 billion in profit each year. Walmart employees consume $3 billion in government welfare each year.

How about they take a tiny hit off of profit to pay their employees enough to not need welfare, for a start? The employees are each contributing towards the GDP fraction that is being generated, but they are not receiving any of it. It's wage theft, plain and simple.


So generous with other peoples money, nice. Maybe you should run for office
2012-11-16 09:09:02 AM
1 votes:

mbillips: Errbody knows this is just a few Wal-Marts in California, right? The rest of the country's obese dunderheads can riot over discounted Christmas toys to their heart's content.


Yeehaw! Pull up the Hoveround; I know what I'm doing on Black Friday...working, sadly. Though, I am going to try shopping at Target on Thursday night, first time I've ever got to "enjoy" any Black Friday-like shopping activities due to working every Black Friday for the last ...12 years or so. Just going in, grabbing a PS3, and getting out of there.
2012-11-16 09:06:54 AM
1 votes:

hocho064: HotWingConspiracy: hocho064: Put Its Promises in Writing
Agree to a global labor agreement guaranteeing the fundamental human right of freedom of association for all of its associates and instruct their suppliers to do the same, and recognize and negotiate with OUR Walmart. Since when is it a requirement that Walmart dictates other companies policies?

They do it all the time when they are cutting deals.

Not sure I agree with you on this.


You don't think Walmart demands certain operational conditions from their suppliers? LOL

Elevate Global Living Standards
Establish a legally binding global responsible contractor policy requiring contractors and subcontractors to provide living wages, worker safety protections, and respect basic human and labor rights, including freedom of association and freedom from racial and gender discrimination. Again, why is this Walmarts responsibility?

Because they're profiting from it.

And other similar companies arent profiting; Sears, Kohls, Target, H&M, etc? Why should a company have to "overpay" someone just because they demand it?


What?

I get that you're a huge fan of overseas slave labor, but a lot of people aren't. As long as we're competing with Asian orphans on wages, nothing will get better here.
2012-11-16 08:57:31 AM
1 votes:

Sergeant Grumbles: Fade2black: Is there a reason why Wal-Mart should pay a wage to employees that would count as gainfully employed? You haven't explained the repercussions when wages go up dollars an hour, to the product they sell or the services they give. Wages go up, cost goes up. Nothing of value was gained except you might feel better about yourself when you go home after your shift.

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.

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


Why not pay them all $50,000 a year. That would only cost everyone $20 a year. Why not pay them all $100,000 a year? That would cost everyone less than $100 a year. How do you choose the appropriate pay?
2012-11-16 08:53:13 AM
1 votes:

Joe Blowme: Because it worked out so well for the Hostess employees? 
[cdn.motinetwork.net image 640x694]


The typical American consumer seems to need cheap Chinese plastic crap just a little more than unhealthy food-like material.
2012-11-16 08:39:49 AM
1 votes:

hocho064: Put Its Promises in Writing
Agree to a global labor agreement guaranteeing the fundamental human right of freedom of association for all of its associates and instruct their suppliers to do the same, and recognize and negotiate with OUR Walmart. Since when is it a requirement that Walmart dictates other companies policies?


They do it all the time when they are cutting deals.

Elevate Global Living Standards
Establish a legally binding global responsible contractor policy requiring contractors and subcontractors to provide living wages, worker safety protections, and respect basic human and labor rights, including freedom of association and freedom from racial and gender discrimination. Again, why is this Walmarts responsibility?


Because they're profiting from it.
2012-11-16 08:20:00 AM
1 votes:
Looking at walmart's blackfriday ad there is nothing great going on sale anyway. The only people who will be there lining up are the morans who don't watch prices during the year and won't care about the employees anyways.
2012-11-16 08:16:59 AM
1 votes:

insertsnarkyusername: The can ask for a union and the company legally has to say yes.


Sort-of (depending on the state).

Option A (right to work state):
Workers: "We demand a union!"
Feds: "Well, vote on it"
[Workers get a union]
Union: "Here's our list of demands."
Wal-Mart: "No."
Union: "Meet our demands, or we strike!"
Wal-Mart: "No."
[Union strikes]
[Wal-Mart fires all union workers for nonperformance]

Option B (unionization of small portion of workforce in one or more stores):
Workers: "We demand a union!"
Feds: "Well, vote on it"
[Workers get a union]
[Wal-mart shuts down positions and/or subcontracts them]

Option C (unionization of significant portions of single store):
Workers: "We demand a union!"
Feds: "Well, vote on it"
[Workers get a union]
[Wal-mart shuts down store for "renovation", transfers a few workers to other stores, conveniently doesn't have positions for the rest of the employees.] 

They take their anti-union stance seriously. Wal-mart has already done Option B. Option C was done by Target. It's not a coincidence the two largest retail stores are both extremely anti-union.
2012-11-16 08:15:37 AM
1 votes:
The workers are demanding the following from Walmart:

Improve Workers' Lives

Pay a minimum of $25,000/year and guarantee quality, affordable health coverage for all Walmart associates and workers in the company's US distribution chain. So I can work 10 hours a week and make $25K? Cool.

Rebuild Communities

Sign on to a national community benefits agreement that ensures as Walmart expands into new markets, it strengthens communities, protects the environment and is responsible for the well-being of its employees in its retail stores and US supply and distribution chain. What if Walmart doesnt want to expand?

Put Its Promises in Writing

Agree to a global labor agreement guaranteeing the fundamental human right of freedom of association for all of its associates and instruct their suppliers to do the same, and recognize and negotiate with OUR Walmart. Since when is it a requirement that Walmart dictates other companies policies?

Elevate Global Living Standards

Establish a legally binding global responsible contractor policy requiring contractors and subcontractors to provide living wages, worker safety protections, and respect basic human and labor rights, including freedom of association and freedom from racial and gender discrimination. Again, why is this Walmarts responsibility?
2012-11-16 06:51:42 AM
1 votes:

divx88: ox45tallboy: divx88: Don't like it, don't work there.

Learn a trade that's in demand.

Stocking groceries is in demand. That's why people are doing it.

If they were to learn a new trade, then who would stock the groceries? And would the new grocery stockers deserve to be treated this way?

It's an entry level job that anyone can do. A stepping stone, not a life long career. If all you ever do is aspire to bag groceries then you shouldn't expect to get paid anymore than an unskilled bagger. If that makes you happy then great. If the company you're doing unskilled labor doesn't want to pay you more than minimum wage and no benefits and that doesn't work for you and you are happy with the bare minimum, then you're working for the wrong company ... though guess what, there's more demand to be the lowest common denominator and have a living wage with benefits. If they learn a trade to move on from grocery bagging, I somehow doubt we'd all be in a great bagger shortage.


It's not a stepping stone when the employer plays merry havoc with your scheduled hours due to computerized forecasts of staffing requirements - and makes it impossible for you to further your education or learn a trade. Wal-Mart's not the only employer that does this, but they are the largest.
2012-11-16 05:09:02 AM
1 votes:

CujoQuarrel: BTW people keep misunderstanding 'right to work' laws. If you are in a right to work state all it means is that 'closed shops' are illegal. A closed shop is where the company agrees that all employees must join the union. It does not mean that unions are outlawed.


The problem with RTW is that it only counts employee unions, not employer-organized unions such as temporary, contract, contingent, agency and part-time labor. I'd wonder what would happen if Right to Work applied to the employer as well - where one would not be forced to join a staffing agency, to accept temporary work, and/or to be 1099'd in order to begin/continue work.
2012-11-16 04:12:49 AM
1 votes:

Lsherm: Man, you need to update your Amazon wishlist.


yeah I hadn't touched it in a while

/and thanks :D
2012-11-16 03:14:03 AM
1 votes:

fredklein: ox45tallboy: 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.

So... it's a non-issue then.

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.

Do the computers get more or less pissy than management?

And, she's scheduled 10pm to 7am? 9 hours straight?

You have to close payroll sometime. If it were done at any other time, it would surely f*ck someone else just as much.

Most timekeeping software (that I know of) is designed to 'attach' the workers shift to the appropriate day, even if it goes past midnight.


No, the software can't be that ambivalent about which work week it is putting the hours in. States have distinct laws about how often you get paid, and the maximum amount of time allowed in between paychecks. Arizona, for example said you had to be paid twice a month, and no more than 15 days in between checks(we looked it up when the TV station I worked for kept having paychecks bounce), and as a result, you have to have a specific time of day on the last day of the pay period where the next minute, hour, whatever, ends up on the next pay period, and overtime stops, even if your shift doesn't. I've known people over the years who have had employers who took advantage of that. Only a couple, but there ARE companies who play that game, and the software can't do anything about it. Besides, it would really fark up accounting if the overtime cutoff varied from person to person, week to week, and pay period to pay period.
2012-11-16 02:44:36 AM
1 votes:

Silly Jesus: timujin: Silly Jesus: LULZ. I hope they are all fired. Plenty more people out there who would love their job.

Generally speaking, that is untrue. While working at Wal-mart is not a job that requires a particularly high skill level, the people who are skilled enough are also the people who like to be able to eat and who don't like to be told to do work that is in violation of labor laws. Now, I'm sure there are people that are willing to put up with that, but I believe Wal-mart will find the quality of those workers to be lacking.

Basically, you pay for what you get.

Which also happens to be true when you shop at Wal-mart.

The few times that I have ventured into Wal-mart I haven't been very impressed by the quality of their employees. Yelling to each other and laughing about nonsense from one register to another one 10 rows away. Standing in your way everywhere talking on cell phones. Literally retarded greeters. Parking lot full of trash and discarded shopping carts. Sort of seems like they are already scraping the bottom of the barrel. I don't think that Wal-mart could possibly find the quality of anyone lacking. So, yeah, there is no shortage of mouth-breathers to fill the positions of the current employees if they don't like it enough to stick around.


Keep in mind the high turnover rate. Of course they have the bottom of the barrel, because they're not exactly getting the creme de la creme in applicants. Higher pay will attract more people, and then they can be picky about whom they hire.

As much as I dislike Starbucks, take a look there. The pay is good (comparatively) and the hiring standards are strict. Thus, the folks at Starbucks are typically a lot more friendly and generally happier than say... a McDonalds worker.
2012-11-16 02:39:14 AM
1 votes:
People_are_Idiots: Whoa, a bigger idiot! Did I say FEDERAL law? I said CONSTITUTION. Constitution does not necessarily mean Federal. This is like saying Texas Law is valid in Arizona... next time, READ!

-10/10


ox45tallboy: Next time, figure out what the hell you are talking about. I called Great Janitor out for claiming that he had the right to fire anyone attempting to organize a Union. I pointed out an article discussing Constitutional Theory, as well as the Wagner Act. You butted in and called me "ignorant" and said I had no idea what I was talking about, and demanded a better reference. I linked straight to the Wagner Act, and now you're spouting off some nonsense about the Constitution and how Federal law Texas valid in Arizona... I have no idea what you think you are talking about, but I gave you the FEDERAL law which trumps any and all State laws. If that's not good enough for you, then fark off.

I rate you negative infinity/10. So there.


Mine goes to -11/10.
2012-11-16 02:38:00 AM
1 votes:

Mitt Romneys Tax Return: Doesn't matter. You can cite things like this all day and assholes like this thread's merry band of trolls will still lick the Walton heir's taints. We're Amurricans - no one can be too rich and any amount of employee abuse is perfectly OK because, by golly, they chose the work there.

When I hear shiat like this it pisses me off so much I'm ready to to go heads-on spikes. The billionaires and their white knights right next to them.


Send me your newsletter, eip.
/eip, if you need someone to swing the axe
2012-11-16 02:17:18 AM
1 votes:

ox45tallboy: Lsherm: You need to look up right to work states. They've legislated, on purpose, the means to get around the NRLA. The laws vary by state.

He's ignorant, but so are you.

I'm in a right to work state right now (Alabama). Don't call me ignorant for explaining to someone that it is illegal to fire someone for attempting to organize, no matter what state you're in.

Of course there are ways around it. But that doesn't make it legal, it means that you have to find a different reason to fire the organizers.


BTW people keep misunderstanding 'right to work' laws. If you are in a right to work state all it means is that 'closed shops' are illegal. A closed shop is where the company agrees that all employees must join the union. It does not mean that unions are outlawed.
2012-11-16 02:11:28 AM
1 votes:
This becomes unforgivable at the busiest times of year.

Wal mart MIGHT have given a crap about their beefs if they did this on September 23rd or something.

Now they will just hold a grudge. And the customers will blame you. You lose. everything.
2012-11-16 02:09:06 AM
1 votes:

People_are_Idiots: Whoa, a bigger idiot! Did I say FEDERAL law? I said CONSTITUTION. Constitution does not necessarily mean Federal. This is like saying Texas Law is valid in Arizona... next time, READ!

-10/10


Next time, figure out what the hell you are talking about. I called Great Janitor out for claiming that he had the right to fire anyone attempting to organize a Union. I pointed out an article discussing Constitutional Theory, as well as the Wagner Act. You butted in and called me "ignorant" and said I had no idea what I was talking about, and demanded a better reference. I linked straight to the Wagner Act, and now you're spouting off some nonsense about the Constitution and how Federal law Texas valid in Arizona... I have no idea what you think you are talking about, but I gave you the FEDERAL law which trumps any and all State laws. If that's not good enough for you, then fark off.

I rate you negative infinity/10. So there.
2012-11-16 01:57:01 AM
1 votes:

People_are_Idiots: 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


Great user name for someone that is arguing that Federal law prohibits retaliation against employee organizing. A self-fulfilling prophecy, if you will. Like a Republican who says "government doesn't work" and then, once elected, does his best to prove it.

Here you go. Educate thyself!
2012-11-16 01:54:41 AM
1 votes:

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.


You need to look up right to work states. They've legislated, on purpose, the means to get around the NRLA. The laws vary by state.

He's ignorant, but so are you.
2012-11-16 01:45:54 AM
1 votes:

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 01:37:53 AM
1 votes:

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 01:21:07 AM
1 votes:

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 01:12:48 AM
1 votes:

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 01:07:16 AM
1 votes:

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 01:06:02 AM
1 votes:

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 01:02:21 AM
1 votes:

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 01:01:58 AM
1 votes:

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 12:59:01 AM
1 votes:

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 12:58:18 AM
1 votes:
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 12:55:44 AM
1 votes:

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 12:55:19 AM
1 votes:

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 12:55:15 AM
1 votes:

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 12:50:32 AM
1 votes:

ciberido: WhyteRaven74: How about send WalMart a bill for all the food assistance and other assistance their employees get because they're not paid enough to make it without the assistance?

That is, roughly, part of the the argument Barbara Ehrenreich makes in her book Nickel and Dimed, that by not paying workers a living wage, businesses are essentially offloading the difference between what they pay and what their workers need to survive onto the taxpayers.


Paying them more will also offset the cost to the taxpayer as a consumer. However, it's my guess that the overall cost will be lower because the private business will be more efficient than any government agency providing assistance.

It comes down to do you want to pay higher taxes, or do you want to pay more for your cheap plastic junk from China?
2012-11-16 12:42:52 AM
1 votes:

Nerdhurter: Yeah no shiat they can't afford craft beer that was an intentional inclusion.
Hey buddy read my post a little closer and you may notice I criticize Wal Mart along with self righteous individuals like yourself, in fact the whole point of my previous post was the condescending attitude the progressives take towards minimum wage employees.


Okay, I've read it a little closer. If you say that's what you meant, then I will take your word for it. But your tone was rather smug and condescending against people that were crunching the numbers to understand the viability, and how much something like this might actually hurt Wal-Mart. And you weren't being very nice towards the workers that keep that beer stocked for YOU at 2 AM.
2012-11-16 12:39:09 AM
1 votes:

Bucky Katt: hubiestubert: Bucky Katt: Damn unions. Always standing up for the takers not the makers.

Really? Because the National Writer's Union certainly stands up for intellectual property creators, as opposed to the folks who want access to said intellectual property to distribute it. Come to think of it, they also seem to represent a LOT of folks who have skilled trades as well.

Unions represent labor as opposed to those who suckle at the teat of said labor. Be that labor in a factory, in schools, in film, authors, artists, artisans, cooks, chefs, workers in a mill. Unions represent the folks whose labor enables executives to pad out their expense accounts and take their stock options.

Who is taking and who is making, again?

oops. didn't mean to troll you. i thought the handful of people who noticed my musings knew i was a smart ass.


Long day, and my sarcasm detector is perhaps off kilter. No hoo hoo...
2012-11-16 12:38:56 AM
1 votes:

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?
2012-11-16 12:37:10 AM
1 votes:
Great Janitor: That is no different than me handing someone a hammer and saying "Now, if you bash your hand with this it could break your hand." and then watch as they bash their hand with said hammer and then listen as a bone or two breaks. No sympathy.

moefuggenbrew: 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.


I have a couple of standard tags I assign to farkers to describe (what I perceive to be) their merits or shortcomings. Certain threads tend to result in certain tags being applied (or incremented). Speaking of sympathy, this thread has resulted in me bestowing a fair number of "heartless" and "compassionate" tags. I'm sure you could make a pretty good guess at some of the names getting each.
2012-11-16 12:37:07 AM
1 votes:

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.
2012-11-16 12:35:40 AM
1 votes:

hubiestubert: Bucky Katt: Damn unions. Always standing up for the takers not the makers.

Really? Because the National Writer's Union certainly stands up for intellectual property creators, as opposed to the folks who want access to said intellectual property to distribute it. Come to think of it, they also seem to represent a LOT of folks who have skilled trades as well.

Unions represent labor as opposed to those who suckle at the teat of said labor. Be that labor in a factory, in schools, in film, authors, artists, artisans, cooks, chefs, workers in a mill. Unions represent the folks whose labor enables executives to pad out their expense accounts and take their stock options.

Who is taking and who is making, again?


oops. didn't mean to troll you. i thought the handful of people who noticed my musings knew i was a smart ass.
2012-11-16 12:35:05 AM
1 votes:

Kittypie070: F*ck Wally World.


Kitty angry. KITTY SMASH!
2012-11-16 12:33:42 AM
1 votes:

sethen320: Bucky Katt: Damn unions. Always standing up for the takers not the makers.

I enjoy a good laugh, but now is not the time for joking. :)


killjoy :P
2012-11-16 12:30:39 AM
1 votes:

js34603: Isn't the answer "the market has determined their skillset is not worth 'gainful' employment"? That isn't an opinion about what counts as work (working at Wal Mart definitely counts as hard work to me, that job would suck). But it is just a fact, Wal Mart can pay what it does and still attract enough employees to make money. The services those employees provide are only worth that to Wal Mart. Maybe they're worth more to a different company, but Wal Mart is apparently satisfied with the workers they can get for the wage they offer.

The good news is if the supply of people willing to work for the wages Wal Mart pays drops enough, they'll have no choice but to pay more (or close I guess). But until it does, the reason working at Wal Mart is not gainful employment is because the skillset required to work there isn't worth enough money to be "gainfully employed".


Well, finally someone answers, and it's not even an asshole.
I was going to go one about the cost to society, workers in China, blah blah blah, but it's getting late and I doubt you'd disagree.
I will say that Wal-Mart has such an economy of scale as to be able to artificially undermine the value of labor.
2012-11-16 12:28:17 AM
1 votes:

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.


Maybe because nobody can afford to buy craft beer on a Wal-Mart salary?

I'm a libby lib liberal and I see what Wal-Mart does to not just my sister, but the other employees she works with. Don't walk in with that attitude and accuse others of "smugness".

It's like you are PROUD to sound ignorant.
2012-11-16 12:23:59 AM
1 votes:

Mikey1969: Myself, I totally feel for her entire family. Occasionally, when money has been tight, my wife has entertained the idea of working at WallyWorld for the holidays. So far, I've been able to talk her out of it, and we've always survived. I can only hope that trend will continue.


Her husband just got a breakthrough on his disability, so it looks like she can possibly quit. She's probably going to do so in solidarity with this bunch.

megalynn44: I think those people are spoiled little assholes who have no concept of how bad working conditions could be for them if millions of people in the past hadn't fought hard for workers rights. You stop fighting for them, you lose them. I think making sure everyone gets a certain level of respect as a human being is a very important part of society.


Thank you for that.

jayphat: I worked in 9, NINE, different Walmarts, 3 as a manager. Never once did I ever see or encourage anyone to fill out forms for social assistance. This situation actually baffels me.


How long ago was that? And when you were a manager, did you force your "part-time" employees to work 40 hours every week, but still call them "part-time" so that they didn't get benefits?

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


That always seemed to me like the Health Insurance Mandate of Obamacare. I see the rationale (all the workers benefit from the Union, so everyone needs to contribute) but I don't like it.
2012-11-16 12:23:23 AM
1 votes:

Klom Dark: zedster: ...growing up my home number was 425-8864, the local Walmart was 425-8864. We had Walmart employees call in sick to our answering machine.

I don't see what you did there.


My bad 8846 and 8864
2012-11-16 12:21:39 AM
1 votes:

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.
2012-11-16 12:21:13 AM
1 votes:

Mija: That is the Republican dream. Heck, I bet when they owned slaved they biatched because they had to feed and shelter them. Face it, Republican/Libertarians won't truly be happy till they have child slaves working for free and sleeping on the ground outside the factories.


This is pretty much the modern version of those arguments.
Wage slavery is far from chattel slavery, as representative democracy is far from dictatorship and capitalism is far from plain feudalism. The hierarchies are more flexible, and for a reason. Some people have forgotten that reason. So the main argument is held by two factions of the leaders of these hierarchies, those who forgot why they made things more flexible and those who haven't.
Democrats realize that if you want subservient wage labor underclasses you at least want to take the time to be "benevolent" about it in the same way "benevolent" slave masters took care of their slaves with the basics to stay productive. A slave master has a duty to be a "moral" slavemaster and do right by his business. Republicans are the people who say "fark it, they're subhuman scum that are where they deserve to be and all I care about is being a step above them so I'm going to keep abusing them until I have none left and I destroy my entire plantation or a slave rebellion kicks in."
And abolitionists are just looked at as batshiat crazy.
2012-11-16 12:19:22 AM
1 votes:

Great Janitor: ox45tallboy: Great Janitor: Taking a guess, I'm going to say that for those employees who aren't happy working there, there probably are enough other jobs out there to take. They just have to go out and find the job.

Indeed. You are merely taking a guess. Do you know how long my sister had to wait before the opening in Wal-Mart came up?

So, she just waited for an opening at Walmart? Did she not apply for work anywhere else?

I don't know about where you live, but in my area, even after all the illegal aliens taking jobs, there are still plenty of job openings. Some companies can't even hire enough people. Tax season is starting up. I know people starting classes next week to get their IRS certifications to do tax work. I have a friend who started a job today, all he does is pass out flyers. He gets paid ten cents for every flyer he passes out and paid daily. He made $87 in just four hours. I've got another friend, he just works two and a half hours a night door knocking for a roofing company. He's making a thousand dollars a week.

There are jobs out there. No one has to settle for Walmart unless they want to.


This hasn't been argued yet, but I think part of the problem may be employers requiring college degrees where they're really not necessary. I've noticed that trend in recent years. I don't have any data to back that up, it's just anecdotal.
2012-11-16 12:19:19 AM
1 votes:

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.
2012-11-16 12:19:00 AM
1 votes:

debug: 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?

Try these:

Link


There's also Pointer Brand jeans. Made in the USA.
2012-11-16 12:18:54 AM
1 votes:

WhyteRaven74: Fade2black: 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.

one of the things Richard Nixon wanted to introduce was a living wage law. Let that sink in for a while.


It's amazing how "liberal" people like Reagan and Nixon look when compared to today's Republican Party platform.  Or at least what it was days before the election. I honestly have no idea what the Republican Party thinks it stands for now that Obama's been reëlected.
2012-11-16 12:17:58 AM
1 votes:

ox45tallboy: megalynn44: Where she gets to be stereotyped as a lazy, stupid loser who doesn't even deserve basic laborer protections for safety and health.

So what do you think of all these people in the thread saying "if she doesn't like it, then she should find herself another job"?


I think those people are spoiled little assholes who have no concept of how bad working conditions could be for them if millions of people in the past hadn't fought hard for workers rights. You stop fighting for them, you lose them. I think making sure everyone gets a certain level of respect as a human being is a very important part of society.
2012-11-16 12:17:50 AM
1 votes:

ox45tallboy: Okay people, since there are so many who do not understand what it is like for an average Wal-Mart employee:


But obviously she WANTS to work there and loves it.

...At least according to certain jack-holes on this board tonight.

Myself, I totally feel for her entire family. Occasionally, when money has been tight, my wife has entertained the idea of working at WallyWorld for the holidays. So far, I've been able to talk her out of it, and we've always survived. I can only hope that trend will continue.
2012-11-16 12:14:34 AM
1 votes:

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?


Try these:

Link
2012-11-16 12:13:14 AM
1 votes:
Wal-Mart on Thursday reported that its investigation into violations of a federal antibribery law had extended beyond Mexico to China, India and Brazil, some of the retailer's most important international markets.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/16/business/wal-mart-expands-foreign-b r ibery-investigation.html?pagewanted=all
2012-11-16 12:12:10 AM
1 votes:

Great Janitor: Read my posts, find out where I said the name Obama. People aren't working crappy jobs because of Obama or Bush. They work crappy jobs because they chose to accept those crappy jobs

were all that was available, due to employer collusion.

FTFY.

People with your philosophy really have no idea what life is like for many people. Do you know how much stress and effort and money it takes to change jobs? To rearrange yourself and your family around a new schedule? Especially when you're married with three kids?
2012-11-16 12:08:47 AM
1 votes:

BravadoGT: You know what kind of employee I want at my business? The kind that tries to hurt me on arguably the busiest day of the year. GTFO--and God help you if you put me down on your next application and they call me.


You don't know how THAT works, do you? Pretty much all that they get to ask you is if the person is considered eligible for rehire. You can't say more, or you're violating the very types of labor laws that WalMart has been ignoring requests to stop violating for YEARS. It's not like this is the first, or even the millionth, time this has come up.
2012-11-16 12:06:11 AM
1 votes:

Great Janitor: Taking a guess, I'm going to say that for those employees who aren't happy working there, there probably are enough other jobs out there to take. They just have to go out and find the job.


Indeed. You are merely taking a guess. Do you know how long my sister had to wait before the opening in Wal-Mart came up?
2012-11-16 12:05:43 AM
1 votes:

Fade2black: Is there a reason why Wal-Mart should pay a wage to employees that would count as gainfully employed?


It already does. You need a new soapbox.

Here ya go:

Definition
Gainful employment is a general term referring to a job, especially a job that a student takes after graduation. In the most basic sense, gainful employment is any type of employment that leads to profit for the employee. Gainful employment is often assumed to be a source of consistent revenue for the worker, with the classical connotations associated with a steady job.


Link

In short, "gainfully employed" means having a paying job.
2012-11-16 12:05:33 AM
1 votes:

jayphat: As a former Walmart manager, i say, Fark Em. You'll never notice on Black Friday. There's so many damn people there that it's never going to be enough. Besides, reports say it's something like 100 people at most across the country. With 1.2 million people working across the country, yeah, let those 100 people walk.


I salute those with the courage to walk.
2012-11-16 12:04:46 AM
1 votes:
"a ton of crap gets built around it. I'm not going to look for this study tonight,..."

Yes, a ton of chain stores owned by large corporations do build strip malls near Walmarts.
But they don't sell the same products.

Walmart closes small business. Those franchises around the area are owned by big business.

But drive the miles of back roads and look at what is not there anymore.

"What is seen.....and what is unseen"
2012-11-16 12:03:23 AM
1 votes:

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!
2012-11-16 12:03:10 AM
1 votes:

jayphat: Umm, i hate to burst this myth, but they don't. On average, when a Walmart moves in, the number of businesses present beforehand that closes is 4. After 5 years, and if you've ever seen a Walmart built, a ton of crap gets built around it. I'm not going to look for this study tonight, google it yourself if you want to see it.


Ummmm I hate to bust your myth, but Wal-Mart also puts in in many places where it doesn't negatively impact local businesses. This is why you provided the average. Tell that to the people in small towns all around the South that feel the impact of a Wal-Mart far, far more than the larger cities, many of which already have a Wal-Mart but the second and/or third Wal-Mart's are included in these averages.

And if you're talking about the "satellite" stores that surround Wal-Mart's, have you noticed that they are invariably huge chains with their own issues and history of treating their employees like crap?
2012-11-16 12:02:27 AM
1 votes:

ox45tallboy: Great Janitor: Because in towns with Walmarts, there are no other employers at all???

Sigh,

Okay, so where do *all* of these employees go? Do you think there are enough other businesses to absorb even a fraction of the number of people Wal-Mart employs?


Taking a guess, I'm going to say that for those employees who aren't happy working there, there probably are enough other jobs out there to take. They just have to go out and find the job.

moefuggenbrew: Great Janitor: That is no different than me handing someone a hammer and saying "Now, if you bash your hand with this it could break your hand." and then watch as they bash their hand with said hammer and then listen as a bone or two breaks. No sympathy.

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.


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."
2012-11-16 12:01:18 AM
1 votes:

OgreMagi: Working on Black Friday is pretty much the norm for retail. If having to work that day turns out to be a surprise, you probably are at about your intelligence level for employment prospects.

HOWEVER! Starting Black Friday on 8pm Thanksgiving Day is a dick move by Walmart, Target, and Toys*R*Us. That's a farking family day. Let them have at least that before you work them to death the next day.

I've decided to boycott all businesses that start the holiday sales on Thanksgiving evening. For my xmas shopping, I think I'll go 100% online unless I find something especially nice in a shop that recognizes family time.


This
2012-11-16 12:00:57 AM
1 votes:

ciberido: CujoQuarrel: Mikey1969: Silly Jesus: Mikey1969: Silly Jesus: LULZ. I hope they are all fired. Plenty more people out there who would love their job.

It's hard to "love" a place that locks people in at night and refuses to pay them, let alone pay them needed overtime.

But hey, keep on being clueless, we need people like that here on Fark.

Are they not capable of calling 911? That's called false imprisonment and it's a pretty serious felony.

Not sure. They were told that they were being locked in because it was company policy that the doors were locked when the store was closed. Regardless, it is hard to "love" to have a job like that, which is what I was pointing out in your original statement. I've heard of plenty of people who worked there because they 'had' to, but never anyone that worked there because they "loved" to have the job.

Do you have a pointer to that case? Love to read up on it.

This NY Times article was my first search result.


Any retail store where the door locks on the inside require a key to unlock them is a fire marshals wet farking dream!
2012-11-15 11:58:55 PM
1 votes:

Blue_Blazer: It's like you have no idea about the unemployment numbers. Are you really so stupid that you think that people would actually choose to work at Wal-Mart if they had any other option? FFS the people that work there can't even afford to shop there and have to go on government assistance. If you are ok with that then, by all means, please proceed.


He should have said, "they are free to attempt to find new jobs".

Most men reach their 50's and buy a convertible. My dad hit his 50's and quit his $75k/year job as a hospital equipment maintenance technician to work as a fry cook at Burger King, then moved over to Walmart. He could be better, but if he were on Fark, he'd be Bevets-adjacent, ... plus paranoid as all holy hell. I love him, but he's got no where else to go.
As his only son, I can and would get him doing something more promising with his life if he would simply believe that he could 1) do well at it, and 2) not be a paranoid-delusional cluster-fark of a human. But he simply fails to think that he can succeed. That, and he has no people skills. He's not reclusive, he thinks YOU want to be interested in everything HE is interested in... and he's interested in lots of stuff.
Maybe I should try... he was the only one in my family that didn't flip his shiat when I told them I was an atheist, so there's gotta be some good in there, I know it! [/Luke Skywalker Mode]
2012-11-15 11:58:34 PM
1 votes:

WhyteRaven74: ox45tallboy: so the cost of employee health care (current and future) is not included in the price of their cars.

Funny that having factories in the US hasn't caused the price of cars by Japanese or German companies to increase. It's almost as if the most important thing is how the companies are run, not where.


Uh, they tend to build factories in "right to work" states. I haven't researched it, but I'd venture a guess that foreign car companies influenced the whole "right to work" movement.
2012-11-15 11:53:37 PM
1 votes:

Great Janitor: Because in towns with Walmarts, there are no other employers at all???


Sigh,

Okay, so where do *all* of these employees go? Do you think there are enough other businesses to absorb even a fraction of the number of people Wal-Mart employs?
2012-11-15 11:52:17 PM
1 votes:

ILoveBurritos: 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.


That's not quite it... Companies actually make inferior versions of their products specifically for WalMart. They still make their 'original formula' for everyone else. I saw it in both socks and underwear when I used to buy them there. I continued to buy the same brand outside of WalMart and found a noticeable improvement. My brother in law pointed this out after watching this movie... Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price

ILoveBurritos: 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?


I wouldn't ever buy Levi's at WalMart, but a pair still lasts me 3 or 4 years, and then the first thing to go is the one knee that drops first when I stop at someone's desk to set tup, remove or repair their computer. Otherwise I'd probably get another year or so out of them. The bonus is that by watching for sales, I can still get the Levi's I wear for $32 to $38 a pair.

In short, the only clothes I buy from WalMart are TShirts, and those are only the retro-styled printed ones they have for like $7-$10. All my other clothes I buy at stores like Kohl's or Sears...
2012-11-15 11:51:10 PM
1 votes:

CujoQuarrel: Mikey1969: Silly Jesus: Mikey1969: Silly Jesus: LULZ. I hope they are all fired. Plenty more people out there who would love their job.

It's hard to "love" a place that locks people in at night and refuses to pay them, let alone pay them needed overtime.

But hey, keep on being clueless, we need people like that here on Fark.

Are they not capable of calling 911? That's called false imprisonment and it's a pretty serious felony.

Not sure. They were told that they were being locked in because it was company policy that the doors were locked when the store was closed. Regardless, it is hard to "love" to have a job like that, which is what I was pointing out in your original statement. I've heard of plenty of people who worked there because they 'had' to, but never anyone that worked there because they "loved" to have the job.

Do you have a pointer to that case? Love to read up on it.


This NY Times article was my first search result.
2012-11-15 11:45:51 PM
1 votes:

Mikey1969: lostcat: Wal-Mart was the biggest client of a law firm I used to work for.

The firm defends Wal-Mart against its employees.

This was one of the reasons I stopped enjoying my work there.

I look forward to the outcome of this, even though I'm sure it just means more money in the coffers of the Death Star (nickname of former firm).

WalMart is the most litigated entity on the planet, INCLUDING governments. Scary...


In 2000, 12 farking years ago, they had a lawsuit filed against them every 23 seconds. Yes, even more than the federal government.
2012-11-15 11:38:45 PM
1 votes:
What I've learned from this thread:

If you're an unskilled laborer, you deserve no protections from unsafe or unpleasant working conditions.
2012-11-15 11:38:39 PM
1 votes:

LavenderWolf: atomic-age: rolladuck: insertsnarkyusername: The can ask for a union and the company legally has to say yes.

The company can also legally shut down those stores. And re-open others in the next town where there is high unemployment of un- or marginally-skilled workers.

Unions aren't the be-all and end-all of employer-employee relationship management. And you catch more flies with honey than vinegar, ... at least metaphorically.

How do you suggest employees sweetly get WM to stop locking them in to work 'off the clock', pay them enough that how to apply for welfare directions are not part of the pre-employment package, and to promote female and minority employees fairly?

Locked in to work? I would kill over that.


/Yes, I expect to be the subject of a dark article one day.


There are a lot of things I say I would kill over but I don't mean it. This is one of those things I probably would not kill over, but there would probably be a broken door and a job to fill when all was said and done if it was me.
2012-11-15 11:35:51 PM
1 votes:

rtaylor92: Hunter_Worthington: I wonder what Labor's pitch to wal-mart's workers is?

"let us do for you, what we've done to the U.S. Auto and steel industries"

At least Wal-Mart got a free way to identify lazy, shiftless, braindead workers. They'll fire the dead wood, and the company will be better off.

//any defeat for organized Labor is a victory for the American Economy.

Are you sitting down for this because I don't want you to hurt yourself....German and Japanese autoworkers are both unionized. U.S. Auto struggling the last few decades was simply because they designed and tried to sell awful awful cars.


Their unions are also much better than ours, quality of the cars aside. And it's not like they're getting paid peanuts either. American auto union average is 56/hr...foreign auto union is still up around 35-40/hr. But they also train multiple people to do multiple tasks, instead of having the door installer just do door installing for 30 years.
2012-11-15 11:35:22 PM
1 votes:

John Buck 41: My job involves 4 good things.

1. I never work weekends.
2. I don't deal with dancing peasants, i.e., the public
3. My hours are the same every day.
4. Decent benefits

In other ways my job sucks moldy moosecock.


You forgot:
5. Did not at any time bite my sister.
2012-11-15 11:35:12 PM
1 votes:

WhyteRaven74: Fade2black: 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.

one of the things Richard Nixon wanted to introduce was a living wage law. Let that sink in for a while.


Richard Nixon was quite the interesting guy. I always wondered where his historical standing would have been if Watergate never happened.
2012-11-15 11:34:12 PM
1 votes:

WhyteRaven74: erveek: And then it will wind its way through the courts until the plaintiffs run out of money in about 7 hours.

there are plenty of lawyers who'd take the case on a contingency fee basis if not flat out pro bono. Also if the feds get involved, they'll stay involved until things get resolved.


...by the Roberts Supreme Court. Gee, I wonder how that will go.
2012-11-15 11:33:01 PM
1 votes:

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.


Keep in mind that WalMart ruthlessly stomps out all competition, including that corner hardware store that your parents shopped at, or the local grocery store. As a result, there is almost nothing BUT WalMart to choose from anymore, where else are the consumers supposed to go? Me, I prefer Target, but there are 6 WalMarts closer than Target, and it's a little irresponsible to drive across town, wasting gas, just to shop somewhere else.

Yes, you still have a point, and that consumer behavior is what put WalMart in the position they have now, but at this point, I think a large portion of the customers are people who just plain have no other retail options.
2012-11-15 11:30:43 PM
1 votes:

Nutsac_Jim: If you want to do that, then you work your way up to management and you get more money.


That's just like... your opinion... man.
Really, give me something besides your opinion that they don't deserve it.
It won't bankrupt Wal-Mart to pay every one of their employees a minimum of $12/hr. This is fact. I'll find the study if I have to, but I recall such a move would cost the average Wal-Mart consumer $1.12 per visit.
They're clearly making Wal-Mart more money than they're getting in return. The disparity is so great that the only credible explanations are greed and cruelty.
2012-11-15 11:28:47 PM
1 votes:

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.


I don't think the strike is because they don't want to work on Black Friday.
2012-11-15 11:27:34 PM
1 votes:
Welcome to Romney's America.
2012-11-15 11:27:14 PM
1 votes:

Hunter_Worthington: I wonder what Labor's pitch to wal-mart's workers is?

"let us do for you, what we've done to the U.S. Auto and steel industries"

At least Wal-Mart got a free way to identify lazy, shiftless, braindead workers. They'll fire the dead wood, and the company will be better off.

//any defeat for organized Labor is a victory for the American Economy.


Are you sitting down for this because I don't want you to hurt yourself....German and Japanese autoworkers are both unionized. U.S. Auto struggling the last few decades was simply because they designed and tried to sell awful awful cars.
2012-11-15 11:27:00 PM
1 votes:

erveek: WhyteRaven74: Silly Jesus: I hope they are all fired.

And then they could sue WalMart for pretty well anything they want. Oh and WalMart would also face federal lawsuits.

And then it will wind its way through the courts until the plaintiffs run out of money in about 7 hours.


Nope, I would bet they'd find a way to make this a class action, by rolling it with other employment complaints. Those are quite often freebies, because the settlements are huge and the lawyers get paid directly from the settlement. Only problem is that they quite often take years to resolve... Hell, I got a check the other day from the Classmates.com settlement, and that was from around 2002 or so...
2012-11-15 11:22:03 PM
1 votes:

Fade2black: I just explained why.


No, you didn't.
You just stated your opinion, and now you've followed up with a second one, an unfounded assumption, and an ad hominem attack.

I'll put it you again:

Is there some reason working for Wal-Mart need not be gainful employment besides your opinion of what counts as work?
2012-11-15 11:22:00 PM
1 votes:

IlGreven: Great Janitor: n short, Walmart workers, you knew what you were getting into when you filled out the job application.

And thus, Wal-Mart is absolved of absolutely all responsibility to you.

/If you're not saying that, don't imply it.


Yeah, I've always LOVED that line of "reasoning". It's the same thing you hear when you point out that waiters make $2.13/hour. Especially ironic coming from the same people who go on rampages against Obama about the unemployment rate, and how people have to take crappy jobs just to get by.
2012-11-15 11:21:50 PM
1 votes:

loaba: 25k a year? That's like $12.00 an hour, man. So, like, how many wage-slaves does Wally world employ anyway? I mean, what'll it cost, man, what'll it cost?!


Call Hillary....she was on the board of directors for years. She helped push out the small business and get Walmart to be the wage slaves they are today.

Hope they walk out.
2012-11-15 11:19:43 PM
1 votes:

Hunter_Worthington: I wonder what Labor's pitch to wal-mart's workers is?

"let us do for you, what we've done to the U.S. Auto and steel industries"

At least Wal-Mart got a free way to identify lazy, shiftless, braindead workers. They'll fire the dead wood, and the company will be better off.

//any defeat for organized Labor is a victory for the American Economy.


Well, the richest 1% of it, anyway.
2012-11-15 11:15:07 PM
1 votes:

lostcat: Wal-Mart was the biggest client of a law firm I used to work for.

The firm defends Wal-Mart against its employees.

This was one of the reasons I stopped enjoying my work there.

I look forward to the outcome of this, even though I'm sure it just means more money in the coffers of the Death Star (nickname of former firm).


WalMart is the most litigated entity on the planet, INCLUDING governments. Scary...
2012-11-15 11:13:38 PM
1 votes:

ACallForPeace: Silly Jesus: It's a voluntary exchange. They went to Wal-mart and asked for the ability to exchange their labor for the amount of money that Wal-mart was offering. They weren't recruited or forced to work there. If they don't like the terms of their voluntary contract, they are free to leave and Wal-mart should be free to replace them with someone else.

Voluntarism implies promising (i.e. the freedom to make agreements), and promising implies that individuals are capable of independent judgement and rational deliberation. In addition, it presupposes that they can evaluate and change their actions and relationships. Contracts under capitalism, however, contradict these implications of voluntarism. For, while technically "voluntary" , capitalist contracts result in a denial of liberty. This is because the social relationship of wage-labour involves promising to obey in return for payment. To promise to obey is to deny or to limit, to a greater or lesser degree, individuals' freedom and equality and their ability to exercise these capacities [of independent judgement and rational deliberation]. To promise to obey is to state, that in certain areas, the person making the promise is no longer free to exercise her capacities and decide upon her own actions, and is no longer equal, but subordinate. This results in those obeying no longer making their own decisions. Thus the rational for voluntarism (i.e. that individuals are capable of thinking for themselves and must be allowed to express their individuality and make their own decisions) is violated in a hierarchical relationship as some are in charge and the many obey. Thus any voluntarism which generates relationships of subordination is, by its very nature, incomplete and violates its own justification.

This can be seen from capitalist society, in which workers sell their freedom to a boss in order to live. In effect, under capitalism you are only free to the extent that you can choose whom you will obey! Freedom, ho ...


i.qkme.me
2012-11-15 11:12:52 PM
1 votes:

erveek: And then it will wind its way through the courts until the plaintiffs run out of money in about 7 hours.


there are plenty of lawyers who'd take the case on a contingency fee basis if not flat out pro bono. Also if the feds get involved, they'll stay involved until things get resolved.
2012-11-15 11:08:13 PM
1 votes:

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.


Stop being mean to Libertarians. They will do no such thing. Oh, wait, did you mean Republicans? That description does not fit that party very much. When pressed, most Republicans back away from their slogans. I have fun with this sometimes.
2012-11-15 10:59:40 PM
1 votes:

timujin: And hence the strike... it has to start somewhere. It might not work out for these folks, though striking on Black Friday does seem like a position of at least some level of strength, there's no way Wal-mart is going to find enough people and have them trained in one week.


Really? All they would have to do it offer workers time and half from the neighboring wal-marts.
If it hurt, then pay double time and shuttle bus the workers in. Eventually you can staff the store.
You also can increase the pay of the workers that did not go on strike, and let them fill any slots open in the newly vacated dept manager slots.
2012-11-15 10:57:28 PM
1 votes:

Cybernetic: As a side note to all of the arrogant, affluent liberals who think so highly of themselves when they prevent Wal-Mart from opening stores in New York City: the next time you look down your nose at Wal-Mart as you head to Whole Foods to pay $20 for some free-range organic cruelty-free wheatgrass, remember that there are hundreds of thousands of people in that city who would benefit far more from access to cheaper groceries than they ever will from your smug, condescending concern.


Stockholm Syndrome, I'd guess.
Some people don't even know they're free.
2012-11-15 10:51:50 PM
1 votes:
I worked at Wal-Mart. If they try to walk out as those customers are going in they are going to die.
2012-11-15 10:51:05 PM
1 votes:

fanbladesaresharp: I'll pay you $9 an hour. Take it or leave it. It doesn't require a degree in engineering to run a farking cash register.


Is there some reason working for Wal-Mart need not be gainful employment besides your opinion of what counts as work?
2012-11-15 10:50:44 PM
1 votes:

Great Janitor: I don't know what they tell their people before they get hired, but honestly, how do you not know that working at Walmart isn't a pleasant experience?


And therefore, we should never, ever take steps to make the experience better.

/Again, if you're not saying that, don't imply it.
2012-11-15 10:48:41 PM
1 votes:

Gyrfalcon: because there aren't really any other jobs out there


B.S.

I work for a welfare office. there are jobs out there, enough for people to find second jobs and enough for welfare recipients to close their cases all the time because their new income is over the limit. the obama recovery is in full swing
2012-11-15 10:47:34 PM
1 votes:

Great Janitor: n short, Walmart workers, you knew what you were getting into when you filled out the job application.


And thus, Wal-Mart is absolved of absolutely all responsibility to you.

/If you're not saying that, don't imply it.
2012-11-15 10:45:15 PM
1 votes:
I used to work at the Wal-Mart home office. I'm pretty sure they didn't like unions.
2012-11-15 10:43:13 PM
1 votes:
As a former Walmart manager, i say, Fark Em. You'll never notice on Black Friday. There's so many damn people there that it's never going to be enough. Besides, reports say it's something like 100 people at most across the country. With 1.2 million people working across the country, yeah, let those 100 people walk.
2012-11-15 10:41:54 PM
1 votes:
All I can say about Wal-Mart employees is this, growing up my home number was 425-8864, the local Walmart was 425-8864. We had Walmart employees call in sick to our answering machine.

That being said, good luck to them.
2012-11-15 10:35:12 PM
1 votes:
Get a job.

What if you worked in the spirit of "What If..."


You wouldn't hear "no" very often. You'd hear "Try it and see." And you'd end up with far more than you set out to. When you work at Walmart, you join incredible professionals doing the never-before-seen to save people money so they can live better. It's all part of our unique career experience, and of how - across industries and the globe - we're Making Better Possible.
2012-11-15 10:34:52 PM
1 votes:

Gotfire: Walmart Strippers -NSFW


img837.imageshack.us

I truly like how the site reminds me that Adblock is ruining their site revenue while they serve up copyrighted pictures of "The Women of Walmart" from Playboy without permission. The "unregistered" tag for the animated gif software is an added bonus.

That takes some balls.
2012-11-15 10:32:59 PM
1 votes:

MFAWG: RedVentrue: Thanks for the heads up, subby. I'll go on Sunday to make my offering to the Capitalist Temple.

The demand side needs to speak loudly here. So stay the duck away from there


Frankly, I cannot understand the mindset of anyone that would spend Thanksgiving shopping. It's my favorite holiday of the year. Go to a friend's house, big ol' meal, football, beer, more food, nap, more food. Being thankful for having plenty, and appreciating it with friends. I love it.

I did Black Friday once, and got some great deals, but not great enough to deal with that madness again. But...not even taking a day to give thanks? That's farked up.
2012-11-15 10:26:49 PM
1 votes:

RedVentrue: Thanks for the heads up, subby. I'll go on Sunday to make my offering to the Capitalist Temple.


The demand side needs to speak loudly here. So stay the duck away from there
2012-11-15 10:17:46 PM
1 votes:
These godless socialist heathens are denying christians their god-given discount outlet merchandise to celebrate the birth of their saviour!
2012-11-15 10:13:49 PM
1 votes:
When you're a company that does everything short of eating your workers' children in front of them, I guess you'd better expect the eventual backlash to be massive.
2012-11-15 10:11:42 PM
1 votes:

Silly Jesus: Mikey1969: Silly Jesus: LULZ. I hope they are all fired. Plenty more people out there who would love their job.

It's hard to "love" a place that locks people in at night and refuses to pay them, let alone pay them needed overtime.

But hey, keep on being clueless, we need people like that here on Fark.

Are they not capable of calling 911? That's called false imprisonment and it's a pretty serious felony.


Not sure. They were told that they were being locked in because it was company policy that the doors were locked when the store was closed. Regardless, it is hard to "love" to have a job like that, which is what I was pointing out in your original statement. I've heard of plenty of people who worked there because they 'had' to, but never anyone that worked there because they "loved" to have the job.
2012-11-15 10:08:22 PM
1 votes:

Silly Jesus: Lol. 0 skill jobs are still not worth $12 an hour no matter how much your heart bleeds.


Yes. You'll be there soon enough.
Enjoy the rapid devaluation of your accumulated life skills and experience and the near-instant decompression of your entire economic life.
Oh. Don't get sick or you'll get fired.
2012-11-15 10:06:17 PM
1 votes:
"I'll be all around in the dark - I'll be everywhere.
Wherever you can look - wherever there's a fight, so hungry people can eat, I'll be there.
Wherever there's a cop beatin' up a guy, I'll be there.
I'll be there in the way guys yell when they're mad.
I'll be there in the way kids laugh when they're hungry and they know supper's ready, and when people are eatin' the stuff they raise and livin' in the houses they built - I'll be there, too."
2012-11-15 10:05:27 PM
1 votes:
In 2010, the Waltons' share [of wealth] equaled the entire bottom 41.5 percent of U.S. families.
Six people hold nearly 42 percent of the national wealth.
They are the Walton family.
2012-11-15 10:00:48 PM
1 votes:

Silly Jesus: Mikey1969: Silly Jesus: LULZ. I hope they are all fired. Plenty more people out there who would love their job.

It's hard to "love" a place that locks people in at night and refuses to pay them, let alone pay them needed overtime.

But hey, keep on being clueless, we need people like that here on Fark.

Are they not capable of calling 911? That's called false imprisonment and it's a pretty serious felony.


LULZ! Enough money > justice!
2012-11-15 09:53:12 PM
1 votes:
To a certain degree I see the bleeding heart point...but 25k is about $12 dollars an hour. Expecting that in pay for a zero skills job is pretty ridiculous. Expecting it with health care is out of the question if you are trying to run the cheapest store in town.

I had 2-3 jobs going through college, crappy no skill jobs like Walmart. I did a good job, and didn't whine about the pay, but I didn't plan on staying for life. And working along side career minimum wagers really was a shot in the arm to finish my degree. If they choose to stay, then I choose not to care about their plight.

If we were talking about a skilled position, like machinists, then that would be totally different.
2012-11-15 09:50:23 PM
1 votes:

Mrs. Beasley: Just donated $200. Let's do this!


There are only 88 workers nationwide who have been striking since October. What are you donating for?

Donate AFTER people walk off the job. Right now you're only supporting a potential walkoff, and only groceries at that. Striking workers need cash.
2012-11-15 09:47:45 PM
1 votes:

El Dudereno: but would you want to staff a wal-mart in middle America with English-challenged people on black Friday?


That seems to be the case with most WalMart cashiers in my town the other 364 days a year.
2012-11-15 09:40:27 PM
1 votes:

Hunter_Worthington: At least Wal-Mart got a free way to identify lazy, shiftless, braindead workers.


Yup, they are easy to identify because they work at Walmart. And even they aren't putting up with Walmart's shiat.
2012-11-15 09:39:18 PM
1 votes:

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.


Yes, increased human misery is beautiful.

Cur.
2012-11-15 09:38:59 PM
1 votes:

El Dudereno: You can simply fire everyone and hire scabs, but that's only a temporary solution because eventually you run out of people willing to do shiatty work for low pay who are also qualified.


That actually won't be a problem for a while. Even in good economies, the "Less than high school diploma" group has 5-7% unemployment. The last few years, that has gone up to about 15%. And new kids drop out of high school everyday. There will always be plenty of people around. Source
2012-11-15 09:38:43 PM
1 votes:
Just a stunt by the occupy crowd. Most Wal Marts are open 24 - 7 so black Friday is irrelevant
2012-11-15 09:36:20 PM
1 votes:

Howlin Mad Murphy: How do you assholes want it? You biatch and moan about a lot of these same people being on welfare, then you want to put them down for standing up for themselves and demanding livable wages. Oooh, please someone save the multi-billion dollar corporation! They shouldn't have to pay their employees anymore because they are worthless pieces of shiat that knew what they were getting into. Give me a farking break.


This.
2012-11-15 09:35:11 PM
1 votes:

Ehcks: Doing it wrong! You're not supposed to say you're doing it. You just don't show up!


You show up, then leave Hilarity ensues

Way more hilarity than a sick out
2012-11-15 09:34:25 PM
1 votes:

jaytkay: I fully support the right of Walmart workers to decent wages, benefits and working conditions.

Except I have never set foot in their crummy stores and hope I never will.

/ True story
// Not sure what it means, feel free to explain


I walked into one once. I discovered they didn't sell beer. I walked out. Haven't been back since.
2012-11-15 09:32:52 PM
1 votes:

liam76: I am not generally "pro-union" but it seems there are a ton of abuses there that are illegal, I hope this can get Wal-Mart to follow the law.


Laws are for poors.
2012-11-15 09:30:11 PM
1 votes:

insertsnarkyusername: The can ask for a union and the company legally has to say yes.


The company can also legally shut down those stores. And re-open others in the next town where there is high unemployment of un- or marginally-skilled workers.

Unions aren't the be-all and end-all of employer-employee relationship management. And you catch more flies with honey than vinegar, ... at least metaphorically.
2012-11-15 09:29:53 PM
1 votes:
damienkatz.net
2012-11-15 09:27:37 PM
1 votes:

WhippingBoy: Walmart isn't a store; it's an alternate dimension.

Think about it. Every Walmart you've ever been in, from Lickcock Idaho to Bahrain, has the same people. I don't mean they look the same, I mean they *are* the same.
The doors you pass through are a gateway to this dimension.

Think about it. You know I'm right.


Maybe it's where dangerous criminals get TimeLooped, much like how Aornis Hades was left to spend the same eight minutes over and over in line at a T.J. Maxx.
2012-11-15 09:27:27 PM
1 votes:
Seeing as how Fark generally is 'liberal' I find it odd that there are so many many posts trashing WalMart workers potentially going on strike.
2012-11-15 09:27:21 PM
1 votes:

pxlboy: Bit'O'Gristle: Good luck to them, although huge corporations like this generally don't give a rats ass about the workers, they just care about the bottom line. But i do wish them well. They should really unionize and actually have some bargaining power.

Wal-Mart has actively engaged in union-busting for years. They're trying to break the will and the backs of labor to bring them on wage parity with China.


But not Target or Apple, right? Because we like them.
2012-11-15 09:27:14 PM
1 votes:
I seem to recall some incidents of near riots at Wal*Marts on "black Friday" in recent years. This could get really messy when all those people show up and get turned away because of the strike. Not that it matters to me, because I think Wal*Mart sucks.
2012-11-15 09:26:33 PM
1 votes:

AdolfOliverPanties: I will gladly boycott Wal-Mart on Black Friday.

/just as I do on the other 364 days of the year


Agreed. I avoid SocialistMart unless absolutely necessary.
2012-11-15 09:25:56 PM
1 votes:
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.
2012-11-15 09:25:27 PM
1 votes:

insertsnarkyusername: The can ask for a union and the company legally has to say yes.


And then the union can violate one of the things that they are demanding from the company.

Demand FTA: guaranteeing the fundamental human right of freedom of association for all of its associates

I'm sure they would be happy to allow a co-worker to not be a part of their union if they chose.

/suuuure they would
2012-11-15 09:24:34 PM
1 votes:
This should be beautiful.
2012-11-15 09:24:03 PM
1 votes:
Doing it wrong! You're not supposed to say you're doing it. You just don't show up!
2012-11-15 09:23:29 PM
1 votes:
Does this mean there will be double the trampling at other big box stores?
2012-11-15 09:18:32 PM
1 votes:

AdolfOliverPanties: Shadow Blasko: [Although apparently you can have until 8 if you blow your department manager... at least at one store]

Nice friends you have there.


What makes you think the friend is the department manager?

The hell is wrong with you.
2012-11-15 09:16:40 PM
1 votes:

mbillips: Errbody knows this is just a few Wal-Marts in California, right? The rest of the country's obese dunderheads can riot over discounted Christmas toys to their heart's content.


If you follow the link in the article, it appears that some employees at multiple Wal-marts across 12 states are already striking, and it's planning to expand. So not just California.
2012-11-15 09:15:15 PM
1 votes:
So, get in the lines at Target instead?
2012-11-15 09:09:52 PM
1 votes:

timujin: Silly Jesus: There's an endless supply of dimwits who need some extra walking around money for cigarettes and lottery tickets. I don't think that Wal-mart is at much risk of running out of a "qualified" applicant pool.

That's where you and I disagree, I think the supply is limited. Would you work there? I wouldn't. Have you ever met any dimwits that you wouldn't trust to know which end of a mop to use? I have. Once you eliminate those people, people who can't communicate, people who have other limiting factors such as a criminal record, you do have a finite available workforce. Now, there are obviously more people who would take the job than are currently employed by the company, but I still believe that those people, once they are employed, will reach the same level off discontent that the current employees have. Eventually you run out of people who are willing to take the shiatty job. Add to that the cost of on-boarding and training new employees and it can be less costly to meet the employees demands, or at least come to some sort of middle ground.

It's kind of like the people who pick vegetables going on strike. Sure, there are other people willing to take their jobs, but not many and once those people realize how difficult the work is and how shiatty the conditions are, they too get fed up and go on strike. Eventually the growers run out of available employees and are forced to make concessions.


At this level of employment, if Wally World runs piss tests, and I'm sure they do, I'm surprised they aren't forced to staff the store with robots due to lack of qualified applicants.

/there's only so many octegenarians left to fill these spots
2012-11-15 09:09:21 PM
1 votes:

timujin: Silly Jesus: There's an endless supply of dimwits who need some extra walking around money for cigarettes and lottery tickets. I don't think that Wal-mart is at much risk of running out of a "qualified" applicant pool.

That's where you and I disagree, I think the supply is limited. Would you work there? I wouldn't. Have you ever met any dimwits that you wouldn't trust to know which end of a mop to use? I have. Once you eliminate those people, people who can't communicate, people who have other limiting factors such as a criminal record, you do have a finite available workforce. Now, there are obviously more people who would take the job than are currently employed by the company, but I still believe that those people, once they are employed, will reach the same level off discontent that the current employees have. Eventually you run out of people who are willing to take the shiatty job. Add to that the cost of on-boarding and training new employees and it can be less costly to meet the employees demands, or at least come to some sort of middle ground.

It's kind of like the people who pick vegetables going on strike. Sure, there are other people willing to take their jobs, but not many and once those people realize how difficult the work is and how shiatty the conditions are, they too get fed up and go on strike. Eventually the growers run out of available employees and are forced to make concessions.


Yep. That's how it works. If Wal-mart becomes unable to hire enough employees at current wages, the wages will increase. Until then, they have no reason to pay everyone more than the market deems that they are currently worth.
2012-11-15 09:05:38 PM
1 votes:

Silly Jesus: djkutch: Silly Jesus: 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.

It's a voluntary exchange. They went to Wal-mart and asked for the ability to exchange their labor for the amount of money that Wal-mart was offering. They weren't recruited or forced to work there. If they don't like the terms of their voluntary contract, they are free to leave and Wal-mart should be free to replace them with someone else.

Exactly! Thanks for articulating much better than I attempted. They accepted the job and should have no opinion whatsoever after.

If they want it different, they can quit and can start their own corporation selling products made in China.

They can ask for a raise, and the company can say no. They can ask for a unicorn and the company can say no. Not sure what you're missing here.


The can ask for a union and the company legally has to say yes.
2012-11-15 09:04:43 PM
1 votes:

gingerjet: So part of their plan is to pre-announce the walk out?

/I don't think they thought this all the way through


It's for leverage. They think that Wal-mart is going to say "oh no, please come to work, how would we ever be able to find another group of morons with no discernible skills to replace you?" Might work, who knows. Guess we'll find out.
2012-11-15 09:03:20 PM
1 votes:

Silly Jesus: timujin: Silly Jesus: LULZ. I hope they are all fired. Plenty more people out there who would love their job.

Generally speaking, that is untrue. While working at Wal-mart is not a job that requires a particularly high skill level, the people who are skilled enough are also the people who like to be able to eat and who don't like to be told to do work that is in violation of labor laws. Now, I'm sure there are people that are willing to put up with that, but I believe Wal-mart will find the quality of those workers to be lacking.

Basically, you pay for what you get.

Which also happens to be true when you shop at Wal-mart.

The few times that I have ventured into Wal-mart I haven't been very impressed by the quality of their employees. Yelling to each other and laughing about nonsense from one register to another one 10 rows away. Standing in your way everywhere talking on cell phones. Literally retarded greeters. Parking lot full of trash and discarded shopping carts. Sort of seems like they are already scraping the bottom of the barrel. I don't think that Wal-mart could possibly find the quality of anyone lacking. So, yeah, there is no shortage of mouth-breathers to fill the positions of the current employees if they don't like it enough to stick around.


There is a reason for that. Your other points have merit though.
2012-11-15 09:01:42 PM
1 votes:

djkutch: Silly Jesus: 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.

It's a voluntary exchange. They went to Wal-mart and asked for the ability to exchange their labor for the amount of money that Wal-mart was offering. They weren't recruited or forced to work there. If they don't like the terms of their voluntary contract, they are free to leave and Wal-mart should be free to replace them with someone else.

Exactly! Thanks for articulating much better than I attempted. They accepted the job and should have no opinion whatsoever after.

If they want it different, they can quit and can start their own corporation selling products made in China.


They can ask for a raise, and the company can say no. They can ask for a unicorn and the company can say no. Not sure what you're missing here.
2012-11-15 09:00:53 PM
1 votes:
Well....bye.
2012-11-15 08:56:48 PM
1 votes:
www.threadbombing.com
2012-11-15 08:51:57 PM
1 votes:

Shadow Blasko: [Although apparently you can have until 8 if you blow your department manager... at least at one store]


Nice friends you have there.
2012-11-15 08:29:41 PM
1 votes:
Hmmm... I wonder if I should apply for a job at Wal Mart.
 
Displayed 338 of 338 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report