Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Salon)   The Complete Idiot's Guide to Wal-Mart's Black Friday Showdown, which pits low-wage workers against greedy management and owners   (salon.com ) divider line
    More: PSA, Wal-Mart, picket lines, forced labour, North Jersey, unfair labor practice, cover letters  
•       •       •

12460 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Nov 2012 at 10:30 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2012-11-20 10:10:31 PM  
I, for one, welcome our new underpaid Walmart worker overlords.
 
2012-11-20 10:12:52 PM  
Should start taking bets on how many get trampled/pepper-sprayed in what cities.
 
2012-11-20 10:27:52 PM  

gopher321: Should start taking bets on how many get trampled/pepper-sprayed in what cities.


Not many, it's the ones in the stores who will get trampled.

Link
 
2012-11-20 10:32:47 PM  
base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.
 
2012-11-20 10:34:44 PM  
someone please tell me what Fox News thinks I should think so I can have an independent opinion on this
 
2012-11-20 10:35:03 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.


Which I'm sure is a delight to the people at WalMart working poverty-level wages with no insurance coverage & forced and unpaid overtime. But hey, 5% of almost nothing!
 
2012-11-20 10:35:21 PM  

JosephFinn: AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.

Which I'm sure is a delight to the people at WalMart working poverty-level wages with no insurance coverage & forced and unpaid overtime. But hey, 5% of almost nothing!


Beggars can't be choosers.
 
2012-11-20 10:35:27 PM  
Go greedy management! Squeeze those workers! They thought they could just fark around in high school and get away with it? Hah.
 
2012-11-20 10:36:39 PM  

JosephFinn: AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.

Which I'm sure is a delight to the people at WalMart working poverty-level wages with no insurance coverage & forced and unpaid overtime. But hey, 5% of almost nothing!


Dont worry obamacare will save them!
 
2012-11-20 10:37:06 PM  
What's wrong with the executives earning 1% less if it means your lowest paid staff member earns a living wage?
 
2012-11-20 10:37:14 PM  
It is another Union trying to bleed poor unskilled workers of their union dues. Ask the Hostess how much their union has done for them.
 
2012-11-20 10:37:17 PM  
I was told they're striking because they just don't want to work holidays.

/I know it's because they want to form a union without Walmart quashing them
 
2012-11-20 10:37:43 PM  
I make it a tradition to get rip-roaring drunk after Thanksgiving and therefore remove all potential that I will be doing any Black Friday shopping.
 
2012-11-20 10:38:00 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: What's wrong with the executives earning 1% less if it means your lowest paid staff member earns a living wage?


Because it's socialism and we can't have that in our completely free market capitalism.
 
2012-11-20 10:39:03 PM  
 
2012-11-20 10:39:34 PM  

Trafficguy2000: JosephFinn: AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.

Which I'm sure is a delight to the people at WalMart working poverty-level wages with no insurance coverage & forced and unpaid overtime. But hey, 5% of almost nothing!

Dont worry obamacare will save them!


The insurance exchanges, to be sure, are a good start.
 
2012-11-20 10:39:45 PM  
This thread is going to suck.
 
2012-11-20 10:40:56 PM  
I'm confused; nowhere in the article does it explain that these people were FORCED to take these jobs without knowing what the wage was. I men, that had to be case, right? Otherwise...
 
2012-11-20 10:41:11 PM  
Best advice: Shop local.
 
2012-11-20 10:41:15 PM  
FTA,
a Demos study that says that raising the salary of all full-time workers at large retailers to $25,000 per year would lift more than 700,000 people out of poverty, at a cost of only a 1 percent price increase for customers.

Instead of adding the price increase to the customers, why not take it out of the Walton family pay packet. You know who, those five of the top 10 richest Americans.
 
2012-11-20 10:41:48 PM  
Farking iPad autocomplete....
 
2012-11-20 10:43:07 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.


but, but, but that's not FAIR! Sure, I have no skills and can only stack boxes on a shelf - but I'm ENTITLED to have a 65" TV, a new car, a large house, every available cable channel, and a cell phone for my 6 year old. I DEMAND you pay me more!!!
 
2012-11-20 10:43:42 PM  

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: I'm confused; nowhere in the article does it explain that these people were FORCED to take these jobs without knowing what the wage was. I men, that had to be case, right? Otherwise...


While pay is part of the equation, just as much or more is about what is endured for such pay.

FTFA: Walmart employees across the country have a host of grievances including unsafe and unsanitary working conditions, sexual harassment, excessive hours, forced labor and low pay.

Wal-Mart is squeezing its workers for no other reason than it can.
 
2012-11-20 10:44:20 PM  
The one up the road from me has been targeted, and I fully expect to go to cheer the workers on, then go inside and buy something just to add to the workload.

LULZ will be had by all.

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: I'm confused; nowhere in the article does it explain that these people were FORCED to take these jobs without knowing what the wage was. I men, that had to be case, right? Otherwise...


Have you looked for a job lately?
 
2012-11-20 10:44:27 PM  

Too Pretty For Prison: AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.

but, but, but that's not FAIR! Sure, I have no skills and can only stack boxes on a shelf - but I'm ENTITLED to have a 65" TV, a new car, a large house, every available cable channel, and a cell phone for my 6 year old. I DEMAND you pay me more!!!


I mean, I've worked here for six whole weeks!
 
2012-11-20 10:44:29 PM  

sgnilward: This thread is going to suck.


You're goddam right.

Hickory-smoked: Best advice: Shop local.


Best advice: Don't shop on Thanksgiving.
 
2012-11-20 10:44:46 PM  

Summoner101: I was told they're striking because they just don't want to work holidays.

/I know it's because they want to form a union without Walmart quashing them


And it really would be a good idea for Walmart employees to unionize, if possible.

The types of worker hours policy shenanigans Walmart is trying to pull is little better than slave driving.
 
2012-11-20 10:44:59 PM  

Too Pretty For Prison: but, but, but that's not FAIR! Sure, I have no skills and can only stack boxes on a shelf - but I'm ENTITLED to have a 65" TV, a new car, a large house, every available cable channel, and a cell phone for my 6 year old. I DEMAND you pay me more!!!


You forgot refrigerator, you hyperbolic fark.
 
2012-11-20 10:45:30 PM  

MFAWG: Have you looked for a job lately?


I was told the job situation was fixed. Thanks Obama!
 
2012-11-20 10:45:47 PM  
good, good. I love war.

/May both sides lose.
 
2012-11-20 10:46:22 PM  

Too Pretty For Prison: AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.

but, but, but that's not FAIR! Sure, I have no skills and can only stack boxes on a shelf - but I'm ENTITLED to have a 65" TV, a new car, a large house, every available cable channel, and a cell phone for my 6 year old. I DEMAND you pay me more!!!


How about they get paid enough so they don't soak up welfare, SNAP, and Medicaid benefits?
 
2012-11-20 10:46:37 PM  
The average minimum wage in Australia/Europe/Japan is $16.50.
 
2012-11-20 10:46:49 PM  
Pretty sure management doesn't want to do it either, at least at the store level. But hey, the Walton family needs another sports team, you know?
 
2012-11-20 10:46:53 PM  

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: I'm confused; nowhere in the article does it explain that these people were FORCED to take these jobs without knowing what the wage was. I men, that had to be case, right? Otherwise...

Seriously!!! These dumbasses take these low paying jobs when there are plenty of high paying jobs just sitting there unfiiled! Man those poor sure are stupid!
 
2012-11-20 10:47:14 PM  

smitty04: Ask the Hostess how much their union has done for them.


Yes, ask them.
 
2012-11-20 10:47:47 PM  
photos1.blogger.com
 
2012-11-20 10:48:32 PM  

drewsclues: sgnilward: This thread is going to suck.

You're goddam right.

Hickory-smoked: Best advice: Shop local.

Best advice: Don't shop on Thanksgiving.


Best advice is shop online and buy groceries at Meijer, Walmart or Kroger and curse all of them for putting the milk in the far back corner.
 
2012-11-20 10:48:39 PM  

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: MFAWG: Have you looked for a job lately?

I was told the job situation was fixed. Thanks Obama!


No, seriously: You stated that nobody forced these people to take these jobs. These people have mouths to feed. That's what forces them to take these jobs.

So, have you looked for a job, ever?
 
2012-11-20 10:48:53 PM  

Coelacanth: The average minimum wage in Australia/Europe/Japan is $16.50.


Edward Rooney Dean of Students: MFAWG: Have you looked for a job lately?

I was told the job situation was fixed. Thanks Obama!


The situation is as fixed as it ever was. The only difference is that this time the unemployed have gadgets and an internet to tell you how the situation is. I DON'T HAVE A farkING JOB! #noteventrying
 
2012-11-20 10:48:58 PM  

Blue_Blazer: Edward Rooney Dean of Students: I'm confused; nowhere in the article does it explain that these people were FORCED to take these jobs without knowing what the wage was. I men, that had to be case, right? Otherwise...
Seriously!!! These dumbasses take these low paying jobs when there are plenty of high paying jobs just sitting there unfiiled! Man those poor sure are stupid!


Not the point at all. But taking a minimum wage job and expecting it to be something more than that is not exactly bright.
 
2012-11-20 10:49:08 PM  

Summoner101: Too Pretty For Prison: AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.

but, but, but that's not FAIR! Sure, I have no skills and can only stack boxes on a shelf - but I'm ENTITLED to have a 65" TV, a new car, a large house, every available cable channel, and a cell phone for my 6 year old. I DEMAND you pay me more!!!

How about they get paid enough so they don't soak up welfare, SNAP, and Medicaid benefits?


Oh SNAP!
 
2012-11-20 10:49:18 PM  

Summoner101: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: What's wrong with the executives earning 1% less if it means your lowest paid staff member earns a living wage?

Because it's socialism and we can't have that in our completely free market capitalism.


It's not even socialism though. It's a net positive for society, even with a heavily capitalist mixed economy, to have a strong and thriving middle class.

Time and time again throughout history, it's clearly demonstrated that severe discrepancies in income (with 1 or 2% holding a supermajority of wealth) leads to wholesale financial collapse.

In the long-term, the rich would be better served by being a little less rich in the short-term in exchange for an economically secure labor force.
 
2012-11-20 10:49:20 PM  

LemSkroob: good, good. I love war.

/May both sides lose.


So you are against corporations AND labor. You just want to watch the world burn don't you?
 
2012-11-20 10:49:41 PM  

MFAWG: The one up the road from me has been targeted, and I fully expect to go to cheer the workers on, then go inside and buy something just to add to the workload.

LULZ will be had by all.

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: I'm confused; nowhere in the article does it explain that these people were FORCED to take these jobs without knowing what the wage was. I men, that had to be case, right? Otherwise...

Have you looked for a job lately?


No. You gotta go fill up a cart with frozen and perishable groceries. Go wait in line, then decide the line is too long and leave empty handed.
 
2012-11-20 10:50:10 PM  
You forgot refrigerator, you hyperbolic fark.

I didn't forget - I just didn't want to appear to be a hyperbolic fark
 
2012-11-20 10:50:11 PM  
My niece works at Wal*Mart at the deli counter. She is 30 years old, unmarried, with a two year-old. Why yes, she is on food stamps and Medicaid - why do you ask?
 
2012-11-20 10:50:26 PM  

Coelacanth: The average minimum wage in Australia/Europe/Japan is $16.50.


BS
 
2012-11-20 10:50:36 PM  

gopher321: Should start taking bets on how many get trampled/pepper-sprayed in what cities.


upload.wikimedia.org
Pepper spray? What sort of pansy is running this company?
 
2012-11-20 10:50:45 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Summoner101: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: What's wrong with the executives earning 1% less if it means your lowest paid staff member earns a living wage?

Because it's socialism and we can't have that in our completely free market capitalism.

It's not even socialism though. It's a net positive for society, even with a heavily capitalist mixed economy, to have a strong and thriving middle class.

Time and time again throughout history, it's clearly demonstrated that severe discrepancies in income (with 1 or 2% holding a supermajority of wealth) leads to wholesale financial collapse.

In the long-term, the rich would be better served by being a little less rich in the short-term in exchange for an economically secure labor force.


Just to let you know, I was being facetious and I agree with you.
 
2012-11-20 10:50:50 PM  
I do my best to stay the hell out of WallyWorld as I can. I don't think that I have been inside one in 3 years.
 
2012-11-20 10:51:11 PM  

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: Blue_Blazer: Edward Rooney Dean of Students: I'm confused; nowhere in the article does it explain that these people were FORCED to take these jobs without knowing what the wage was. I men, that had to be case, right? Otherwise...
Seriously!!! These dumbasses take these low paying jobs when there are plenty of high paying jobs just sitting there unfiiled! Man those poor sure are stupid!

Not the point at all. But taking a minimum wage job and expecting it to be something more than that is not exactly bright.


So you deny them their right to complain? How very.
 
2012-11-20 10:51:27 PM  

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: Not the point at all. But taking a minimum wage job and expecting it to be something more than that is not exactly bright.


FTFA: Walmart employees across the country have a host of grievances including unsafe and unsanitary working conditions, sexual harassment, excessive hours, forced labor and low pay.

Pay someone enough, and they'll endure all of that. Since Wal-Mart wasn't, and still subjecting its employees to it, this is far askew of what expectations of a minimum wage job should be.
 
2012-11-20 10:51:33 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: Too Pretty For Prison: but, but, but that's not FAIR! Sure, I have no skills and can only stack boxes on a shelf - but I'm ENTITLED to have a 65" TV, a new car, a large house, every available cable channel, and a cell phone for my 6 year old. I DEMAND you pay me more!!!

You forgot refrigerator, you hyperbolic fark.

 
2012-11-20 10:51:34 PM  
Strike, baby, strike.

Wal-Mart is just one giant bundle of corporate welfare. They often get tax subsidies for opening new stores. Many of their employees qualify for low-income support programs like food stamps, Medicaid, subsidized housing and busing. I doubt the tax subsidies are going anywhere, but I would like to see their employees paid better.
 
2012-11-20 10:51:38 PM  

Coelacanth: The average minimum wage in Australia/Europe/Japan is $16.50.


The best minds in America have assured me that a minimum wage that high will result in the total collapse of everything. TOP men, I'm talking about.
 
2012-11-20 10:51:45 PM  

MFAWG: Edward Rooney Dean of Students: MFAWG: Have you looked for a job lately?

I was told the job situation was fixed. Thanks Obama!

No, seriously: You stated that nobody forced these people to take these jobs. These people have mouths to feed. That's what forces them to take these jobs.

So, have you looked for a job, ever?


Yes I have.. Many times. And the minimum wage ones I had were a good starting point, but I was under no illusions that they would have sustained me and my family for long.
 
2012-11-20 10:52:12 PM  
Still relevant:

www.theconnextion.com
 
2012-11-20 10:53:21 PM  

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: MFAWG: Edward Rooney Dean of Students: MFAWG: Have you looked for a job lately?

I was told the job situation was fixed. Thanks Obama!

No, seriously: You stated that nobody forced these people to take these jobs. These people have mouths to feed. That's what forces them to take these jobs.

So, have you looked for a job, ever?

Yes I have.. Many times. And the minimum wage ones I had were a good starting point, but I was under no illusions that they would have sustained me and my family for long.


So you quit as soon as you couldn't take the shiat any longer?
 
2012-11-20 10:54:46 PM  

herrDrFarkenstein: Edward Rooney Dean of Students: Blue_Blazer: Edward Rooney Dean of Students: I'm confused; nowhere in the article does it explain that these people were FORCED to take these jobs without knowing what the wage was. I men, that had to be case, right? Otherwise...
Seriously!!! These dumbasses take these low paying jobs when there are plenty of high paying jobs just sitting there unfiiled! Man those poor sure are stupid!

Not the point at all. But taking a minimum wage job and expecting it to be something more than that is not exactly bright.

So you deny them their right to complain? How very.


Oh, they can complain all they want. Heck, I even support their right to strike. I also support walmarts right to not give a shiat. Or maybe Walmart does give a shiat, and they'll work something out.
 
2012-11-20 10:56:09 PM  

Summoner101: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Summoner101: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: What's wrong with the executives earning 1% less if it means your lowest paid staff member earns a living wage?

Because it's socialism and we can't have that in our completely free market capitalism.

It's not even socialism though. It's a net positive for society, even with a heavily capitalist mixed economy, to have a strong and thriving middle class.

Time and time again throughout history, it's clearly demonstrated that severe discrepancies in income (with 1 or 2% holding a supermajority of wealth) leads to wholesale financial collapse.

In the long-term, the rich would be better served by being a little less rich in the short-term in exchange for an economically secure labor force.

Just to let you know, I was being facetious and I agree with you.


No, I know, I was just clarifying because some people out there really so think that way.

And for the people who are saying "Guess thy should have got a better job!" - This is the United States. I want this to be a nation where working a full-time job, even a menial low-skill job, affords one the basic necessities of life. We need a living wage, not a race-to-the-bottom minimum wage.
 
2012-11-20 10:56:09 PM  

MFAWG: Edward Rooney Dean of Students: MFAWG: Edward Rooney Dean of Students: MFAWG: Have you looked for a job lately?

I was told the job situation was fixed. Thanks Obama!

No, seriously: You stated that nobody forced these people to take these jobs. These people have mouths to feed. That's what forces them to take these jobs.

So, have you looked for a job, ever?

Yes I have.. Many times. And the minimum wage ones I had were a good starting point, but I was under no illusions that they would have sustained me and my family for long.

So you quit as soon as you couldn't take the shiat any longer?


Not unless I had something else lined up. Sometimes you got to shovel shiat for a while.
 
2012-11-20 10:56:34 PM  
As a taxpayer, i don't feel like i should foot the bill for Walmart employees that have to be on welfare just to get by even though they work. Pay your people a living wage for fark's sake.
 
2012-11-20 10:56:40 PM  

drewsclues: The situation is as fixed as it ever was. The only difference is that this time the unemployed have gadgets and an internet to tell you how the situation is. I DON'T HAVE A farkING JOB! #noteventrying


Try telling that to the Middle East. Try telling that to the Egyptians, to the Libyans, to the Tunisians, to the Yemans. Look at what the unemployed did with their gadgets and the internet over there.
 
2012-11-20 10:58:39 PM  
Wal-mart workers are figthing to get more from those that shop at Wal-mart. I am still unclear why anyone has a problem with this. Many more Fark Duh moments to come
 
2012-11-20 11:00:10 PM  

EmmaLou: As a taxpayer, i don't feel like i should foot the bill for Walmart employees that have to be on welfare just to get by even though they work. Pay your people a living wage for fark's sake.


This. It's obscene that we live in a developed nation and many of our full-time workers can survive on their wages alone. There's something very, very wrong with a society where you can work full-time and not break even.
 
2012-11-20 11:00:13 PM  

Coelacanth: The average minimum wage in Australia/Europe/Japan is $16.50.


What's the average living costs in these countries? One piece of the puzzle, forms no argument.
 
2012-11-20 11:00:56 PM  
cant* survive
 
2012-11-20 11:02:26 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: Pay someone enough, and they'll endure all of that. Since Wal-Mart wasn't, and still subjecting its employees to it, this is far askew of what expectations of a minimum wage job should be.


I'd argue that there is an inverse bell curve in effect for that. On the upper end, people eat shiat because they're paid very well to do so. On the bottom end, people do so because they have no choice. If they could get a better job, they probably would. Everyone in the middle has the skills or opportunity to work someplace better, so they do.

Hostess fell in the middle of that curve. In a few years, wages were expected to be half of what they were when the VC firm purchased them. Their pension plan was also in shambles. So they decided it was splitsville, which saved what remained of their pensions by kicking it to the Feds.
 
2012-11-20 11:02:56 PM  
Is this the thread where a

theenez: Wal-mart workers are figthing to get more from those that shop at Wal-mart. I am still unclear why anyone has a problem with this. Many more Fark Duh moments to come


Because communism. Duh.
 
2012-11-20 11:03:49 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: EmmaLou: As a taxpayer, i don't feel like i should foot the bill for Walmart employees that have to be on welfare just to get by even though they work. Pay your people a living wage for fark's sake.

This. It's obscene that we live in a developed nation and many of our full-time workers can survive on their wages alone. There's something very, very wrong with a society where you can work full-time and not break even.


What compounds the problem is that people have come to some agreement that unions are unnecessary because of state/federal laws except many of the anti-labor business practices Walmart employs would take a union to combat.
 
2012-11-20 11:04:01 PM  

Coelacanth: The average minimum wage in Australia/Europe/Japan is $16.50.


Luxembourg has highest standard of living in the world and has about $10.00 minimum wage.
 
2012-11-20 11:06:00 PM  

drewsclues: Best advice: Don't shop on Thanksgiving.


Amen to this. Actually, don't shop on Black Friday, either.
 
2012-11-20 11:06:25 PM  

smitty04: Coelacanth: The average minimum wage in Australia/Europe/Japan is $16.50.

Luxembourg has highest standard of living in the world and has about $10.00 minimum wage.


That's interesting. How much does a Luxembourgian pay in health insurance premiums for basic care?
 
2012-11-20 11:07:31 PM  

Linkster: Coelacanth: The average minimum wage in Australia/Europe/Japan is $16.50.

What's the average living costs in these countries? One piece of the puzzle, forms no argument.


Link
 
2012-11-20 11:07:48 PM  
Stage a boycott of Wal-Mart.. it worked so well for Chick-Fil-A

or look at it this way:

Boycott Wal-Mart so employees will be fired due to lack of business.. it's not like you can find an employee while your there anyway

Win/Win
 
2012-11-20 11:07:57 PM  
Japan and Australia are commie poofs who did not start illegal wars like real men do.

Real men spend money on finding non-existent weapons of mass destruction. Not on that fairy minimum wage.
 
2012-11-20 11:08:13 PM  

smitty04: Coelacanth: The average minimum wage in Australia/Europe/Japan is $16.50.

Luxembourg has highest standard of living in the world and has about $10.00 minimum wage.


It's roughly $14.25/hr
 
2012-11-20 11:08:30 PM  

smitty04: Coelacanth: The average minimum wage in Australia/Europe/Japan is $16.50.

Luxembourg has highest standard of living in the world and has about $10.00 minimum wage.


$14.21 according to this Link
 
2012-11-20 11:09:44 PM  

Linkster: Coelacanth: The average minimum wage in Australia/Europe/Japan is $16.50.

What's the average living costs in these countries? One piece of the puzzle, forms no argument.


Not to mention exchange rate. JPY vs USD has been ridiculously skewed in the past few years.
 
2012-11-20 11:09:56 PM  
Ned Resnikoff at MSNBC flagged a leaked internal document (first obtained by HuffPo) that revealed that base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour (or $16,000 per year), with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

Long ago and far away, I was one of those flogged and underpaid drones (employee unit #XJ43061, if you must know). I started out at $8 an hour FT, and that made for a marginally acceptable living with someone else around to share expenses with. A few months in, while chatting with a sweetheart in softlines whose only fault was a massive overbite and a harsh hand dealt from time and poverty. It turned out she'd been there a number of years, and her pay wasn't even equal to mine.

As someone who has BT;DT - yes, the working conditions ARE that bad. It's better than nothing, but it's so degrading and soul-crushing, and is the sort of job that just keeps you awake at night long after you've thrown that farking vest somewhere out of sight. /CSB

/Walmart was so bad I started smoking
//Good luck, striking workers!
///Fark Black Friday
 
2012-11-20 11:12:49 PM  

Vector R: As someone who has BT;DT - yes, the working conditions ARE that bad. It's better than nothing, but it's so degrading and soul-crushing, and is the sort of job that just keeps you awake at night long after you've thrown that farking vest somewhere out of sight.


Hah, that's because they fark your sleep schedule so badly with a schedule that varies weekly.
 
2012-11-20 11:15:24 PM  
Are we taking Black Friday bets?
Put me down for
6 tramplings
2 deaths
3 stabbins
10 punchins
 
2012-11-20 11:16:14 PM  
Why doesn't the union just open up its own wal-mart competitor and pay everyone 25,000 per year.
I'm sure they could get nice discounts from suppliers that are union shops. They wont even need that 1% price increase. But that 1% more, plenty of people will go there instead.
Then, they can drive wal-mart out of business.
 
2012-11-20 11:16:45 PM  
There aren't any other jobs to be had, and the jobs there are... pretty damn bad.

I just don't get it. People like my mom ("UNIONS ARE TERRORISITS", she's fond of saying these days, "How?" "They just are!". ...she swears she's not a Republican) would BENEFIT from this stuff, but..

I dunno.

/Mom finally found a job. Maybe her brain will start kicking in
//Making 14 an hour and forced to split the bills with my mother.
 
2012-11-20 11:17:32 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: Vector R: As someone who has BT;DT - yes, the working conditions ARE that bad. It's better than nothing, but it's so degrading and soul-crushing, and is the sort of job that just keeps you awake at night long after you've thrown that farking vest somewhere out of sight.

Hah, that's because they fark your sleep schedule so badly with a schedule that varies weekly.


My niece loves her job.. 8a-4p Sun-Thu. You must mean a different Wal-Mart
 
2012-11-20 11:18:01 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.


.20 to .40 an hour? That's like a wage increase of 1.60 - 2.30 for just 1 eight hour shift!!! I'm lucky if I see .85 for a whole year. Time to get me a job at Sam's Place!
 
2012-11-20 11:18:01 PM  
The only thing unions care about is they are hoping the "Black Friday on Thursday" shenanigans can get them to break into Walmart and get those tasty union dues from the countries largest private employer.

/only the the US DOD has more employees then WalMart.
 
2012-11-20 11:18:52 PM  

JosephFinn: AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.

Which I'm sure is a delight to the people at WalMart working poverty-level wages with no insurance coverage & forced and unpaid overtime. But hey, 5% of almost nothing!


Its only almost nothing if that 8$ is in NJ. In Houston, that gets you a loan for a small house.
 
2012-11-20 11:20:31 PM  

Vector R: Ned Resnikoff at MSNBC flagged a leaked internal document (first obtained by HuffPo) that revealed that base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour (or $16,000 per year), with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

Long ago and far away, I was one of those flogged and underpaid drones (employee unit #XJ43061, if you must know). I started out at $8 an hour FT, and that made for a marginally acceptable living with someone else around to share expenses with. A few months in, while chatting with a sweetheart in softlines whose only fault was a massive overbite and a harsh hand dealt from time and poverty. It turned out she'd been there a number of years, and her pay wasn't even equal to mine.

As someone who has BT;DT - yes, the working conditions ARE that bad. It's better than nothing, but it's so degrading and soul-crushing, and is the sort of job that just keeps you awake at night long after you've thrown that farking vest somewhere out of sight. /CSB

/Walmart was so bad I started smoking
//Good luck, striking workers!
///Fark Black Friday


I often state half-jokingly that working there is one of the reasons I still drink.
 
2012-11-20 11:20:49 PM  

Vector R: It turned out she'd been there a number of years, and her pay wasn't even equal to mine.


Women are bad at negotiating. Doesn't matter if it's salary or asking her partner to wear a condom.
 
2012-11-20 11:21:59 PM  
Since this is a somewhat liberal site, I'm sure to get flamed by this, but anyway....

People who work for Walmart, Target, or any other RETAIL store....well, suck it up!
You are working a RETAIL store! If people didn't come into those stores on Thanksgiving,
or 4am on black Friday, you would be able to stay home. The fault isn't the retailer, it
is the lazy a&& consumer who wants (or thinks they will get) a bargain.
If they didn't show up, the store wouldn't be open!
Also, yes, the economy is (if you live in real-ville) DOWN THE TOILET, so that might be
the reason you are working a low wage or minimum wage job. Now, if you are the countless
drones that are working low/minimum wage jobs, and you are at least in your 20's, you have
to stop and have someone toss a bucket of ice water in your face. Why? Because you
need to evaluate your life. How did you screw up your life, that you are only QUALIFIED to
be a minimum wage employee with little or NO skills in anything other than "do you want
fries with that". As the judge in Caddyshack said "the world needs ditch diggers".
When you were in high school, I'll just bet you were uber cool, skipping school, getting high
daily, girls falling all over you, getting kicked out of school for fighting....yeah, how cool are
you now? The rest of us, STUDIED, went to college (I paid my own way), and got a good
job, that allows us the freedom of having nights, holidays & weekends off!
So, suck it up, and take it in the butt....you have no one to complain to, but yourself!
 
2012-11-20 11:22:29 PM  

Blue_Blazer: Edward Rooney Dean of Students: I'm confused; nowhere in the article does it explain that these people were FORCED to take these jobs without knowing what the wage was. I men, that had to be case, right? Otherwise...
Seriously!!! These dumbasses take these low paying jobs when there are plenty of high paying jobs just sitting there unfiiled! Man those poor sure are stupid!


Maybe dropping out of middle school was not such a good idea. No education and no skills likely means a tough life.
 
2012-11-20 11:23:11 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: I want this to be a nation where working a full-time job, even a menial low-skill job, affords one the basic necessities of life.


They have the basic necessities. They are striking, not dying in the streets.
 
2012-11-20 11:23:39 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Linkster: Coelacanth: The average minimum wage in Australia/Europe/Japan is $16.50.

What's the average living costs in these countries? One piece of the puzzle, forms no argument.

Not to mention exchange rate. JPY vs USD has been ridiculously skewed in the past few years.


They also get all kinds of benefits we can only dream of in this country, plus health care.
 
2012-11-20 11:24:31 PM  

KarmicDisaster: Are we taking Black Friday bets?
Put me down for
6 tramplings
2 deaths
3 stabbins
10 punchins


I'm in with at least one person losing an eye.
 
2012-11-20 11:24:49 PM  
Don't pretty much 100% of people in Japan, Australia and Europe graduate from high school or an equivalent?

Why don't they get pregnant at 15 and drop at like Jebus said to?

There aren't as many Walmarts in New England because New England has fewer high school dropouts to staff the.
 
2012-11-20 11:27:24 PM  
Sergeant Grumbles: Vector R: As someone who has BT;DT - yes, the working conditions ARE that bad. It's better than nothing, but it's so degrading and soul-crushing, and is the sort of job that just keeps you awake at night long after you've thrown that farking vest somewhere out of sight.

Hah, that's because they fark your sleep schedule so badly with a schedule that varies weekly.


tell them you cant work those hours because you have another job.  Walmart never scheduled me
at times I said I wasnt available.
 
2012-11-20 11:28:04 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Why doesn't the union just open up its own wal-mart competitor and pay everyone 25,000 per year.
I'm sure they could get nice discounts from suppliers that are union shops. They wont even need that 1% price increase. But that 1% more, plenty of people will go there instead.
Then, they can drive wal-mart out of business.


Union leaders aren't that smart...
If it were really that easy, even you could do it

/Damn I love being a Farker
 
2012-11-20 11:30:23 PM  

Coelacanth: AverageAmericanGuy: Linkster: Coelacanth: The average minimum wage in Australia/Europe/Japan is $16.50.

What's the average living costs in these countries? One piece of the puzzle, forms no argument.

Not to mention exchange rate. JPY vs USD has been ridiculously skewed in the past few years.

They also get all kinds of benefits we can only dream of in this country, plus health care.


Such as?
 
2012-11-20 11:30:25 PM  

diaphoresis: My niece loves her job.. 8a-4p Sun-Thu. You must mean a different Wal-Mart


Min Wage isn't bad when you don't have to take shiat far above your pay grade. I've seen enough of the good and the bad to know that your niece could be perfectly happy and her store might be a great place to work even for peanuts, and that others put you through so much shiat that no amount of money would ever justify it.

My wife is a pharmacy tech for Walgreens. She's worked at many of them as I've moved around for work. Some are great, and she'll have a set schedule of roughly the same time every day, every week and knows it won't change for the next four months. Others she has to call the store on Monday because the manager hasn't posted a schedule, has her closing, then opening, then opening again, then a mid shift, a day off, and a closing, and it varies every week with no rhyme or reason.
 
2012-11-20 11:30:56 PM  

KarmicDisaster: Are we taking Black Friday bets?
Put me down for
6 tramplings
2 deaths
3 stabbins
10 punchins


And a partridge in a pear tree!
 
2012-11-20 11:31:57 PM  
Does anyone have the basic run-down on how Obamacare (there, I'm being nice) will affect WM and its employees? Appreciate info/opinions.
 
2012-11-20 11:33:07 PM  
I predict complaints of Walmart workers after they end up in the united food and commercial workers' union. They are complaining about 20 and 40 cent an hour raises? That's exactly what they'll get as union employees. Except there won't be any by-passing the time in job stuff. Oh and they will have to pay union entrance fees and union dues and so on and so forth. They'll be lucky to be above minimum wage after their union obligations.

Of course the union officers will get richer and there's nothing more important than that for a union.

I'll just sit back and watch the show.
 
2012-11-20 11:33:31 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Such as?


Unless you want to give me a TotalFark subscription, I'm not looking up anything else tonight. Sorry.
 
2012-11-20 11:34:15 PM  
Again, for all the folks who have a bug up their tochises about unions, I ask this:

Do you support Chambers of Commerce? Do you support industry associations? Do you support lobbying by industries? Do you support business owners freedom to call upon their Congresscritters?

If you do, then by extension, you should be supporting unions doing EXACTLY the same thing. Freedom of association. Freedom to pursue redress and file suit. Freedom to negotiate through intermediaries who know the law and who represent your interests. THAT is what unions do. They are a collective bargaining unit, representing a group of folks. Much like industry lobbying, and much like industry associations looking out for the interests of their constituent businesses.

Nothing more. And nothing less. If you support the right of owners to discuss with one another how their industries should proceed, then you should likewise be supporting the right of workers to do the same. Especially since the freedom of association is the freedom to assemble and the freedom to seek redress, and has been upheld by the Supreme Court already. If you like the Constitution, and you like the freedom of speech, and the freedom to assemble, then you should be likewise be in support of unions representing the interests of laborers who are busy working for a living.
 
2012-11-20 11:35:15 PM  
ZERO skilled labor striking in a bad economy with a huge pool of unemployed? ... This is why they work at walmart
 
2012-11-20 11:35:38 PM  

smitty04: It is another Union trying to bleed poor unskilled workers of their union dues. Ask the Hostess how much their union has done for them.


Eh, try to strike from a company that has claimed Bankruptcy 3 times in the last 10 years and they are bound to go under for good. My hope is that the next company that buys the brand makes some decent food for once.
 
2012-11-20 11:35:40 PM  

Coelacanth: AverageAmericanGuy: Such as?

Unless you want to give me a TotalFark subscription, I'm not looking up anything else tonight. Sorry.


It's called backing your own argument.
 
2012-11-20 11:35:50 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: diaphoresis: My niece loves her job.. 8a-4p Sun-Thu. You must mean a different Wal-Mart

Min Wage isn't bad when you don't have to take shiat far above your pay grade. I've seen enough of the good and the bad to know that your niece could be perfectly happy and her store might be a great place to work even for peanuts, and that others put you through so much shiat that no amount of money would ever justify it.

My wife is a pharmacy tech for Walgreens. She's worked at many of them as I've moved around for work. Some are great, and she'll have a set schedule of roughly the same time every day, every week and knows it won't change for the next four months. Others she has to call the store on Monday because the manager hasn't posted a schedule, has her closing, then opening, then opening again, then a mid shift, a day off, and a closing, and it varies every week with no rhyme or reason.


That's about crap... I guess people put up with a lot of garbage just to keep a job. In this economy it's an employer's market... I'll tell my niece to be thankful for such a smooth work schedule.
 
2012-11-20 11:36:17 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: tell them you cant work those hours because you have another job. Walmart never scheduled me
at times I said I wasnt available.


All depends on how accommodating your employer is and how they go about accommodating. You might get lucky and never get scheduled during that time, but on the other hand you might never get scheduled other times to make up for it. If you can't get enough hours to make it worthwhile, why work there?

When I worked for a Walgreens, my manager flat out told me he couldn't accommodate my schedule around a second job because it wouldn't be fair to the other workers.
 
2012-11-20 11:37:58 PM  
It will be a disaster for the union, the workers, and unionization in general. They'll be lucky if 1% of Wal-mart employees get involved at all, and those that do will be fired for some excuse or be hassled and mistreated until they quit. I'm increasingly convinced UFCW is a plot to destroy the last vestiges of unionization and hijack the attention of activists.
 
2012-11-20 11:38:36 PM  

KarmicDisaster: Are we taking Black Friday bets?
Put me down for
6 tramplings
2 deaths
3 stabbins
10 punchins


That version of The Twelve Days of Christmas is all messed up.
 
2012-11-20 11:38:54 PM  
icepriestess
Eh, try to strike from a company that has claimed Bankruptcy 3 times in the last 10 years

and yet was still able to give their executives 80% pay raises last year
 
2012-11-20 11:39:39 PM  
This one is easy.

You have X number of employees scheduled for Y number of Customers.

If X/2 employees show up, you simply start a line outside like a club, when one leaves another can go inside.

At the end of the day, you fire anyone that didn't show up.
 
2012-11-20 11:40:59 PM  
Yeah because those workers had no idea what they were getting into when they SIGNED THE CONTRACT as they were hired by WalMart. I feel so terrible for those poor, duped bastards that wanted nothing more than 20 dollars an hour for doing a job that is worth around 6 dollars an hour. Seriously, my heart is bleeding for the people who got employed, signed a contract that clearly states what the expectations of the job were, and decided to fark off in school instead of actually trying to learn something.

Somewhere a fiddle is playing....
 
2012-11-20 11:41:11 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Why doesn't the union just open up its own wal-mart competitor


It's up to some other party to build the business.

I feel for these people though and support their effort to make things better for themselves. Hopefully it doesnt blow up in their face.

I dont feel for the kids who are just learning how to show up at a job on time and make enough for their phone and the occassional dime bag, but the older ones who arent employable elsewhere.

I dont know what to tell them other than you got a shiatty hand at birth and possibly made things worse along the way through some of your own actions and now this is your lot in life.

I'd try to pool resources with a friend/friends to rent a home together on a bus-line, have the tubes tied and put a TV antenna on the roof. 

In the mean-time, take all the hours you can stand and make the best of those 20 cent raises.

Good luck.
 
2012-11-20 11:41:30 PM  

Hagbardr: KarmicDisaster: Are we taking Black Friday bets?
Put me down for
6 tramplings
2 deaths
3 stabbins
10 punchins

And a partridge in a pear tree!


And some Teen Angst.
 
2012-11-20 11:43:00 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: KarmicDisaster: Are we taking Black Friday bets?
Put me down for
6 tramplings
2 deaths
3 stabbins
10 punchins

I'm in with at least one person losing an eye.


I'll add a 3 pepper sprayers.
 
2012-11-20 11:45:31 PM  
I don't have any special skills to increase the value of my labor. But gosh darnit, I want to be paid like I do. Stupid entitled people.

Slutter McGee
 
2012-11-20 11:46:32 PM  

gbcinques: FTA,
a Demos study that says that raising the salary of all full-time workers at large retailers to $25,000 per year would lift more than 700,000 people out of poverty, at a cost of only a 1 percent price increase for customers.

Instead of adding the price increase to the customers, why not take it out of the Walton family pay packet. You know who, those five of the top 10 richest Americans.


Just pay your 1% increase and quit blaming others for being successfull.

How come noone ever points out that raising the standard of living only creates inflation as the lowest wage earners will now be able to afford more?

Think of the economy similar to grading on a curve. When we have a lot of poor people, it doesn't take much to make it to a median class to which the pricing of goods will be based. If everyone is median, the curve is shifted upward until prices settle on the new median. At 25000 a year- the lowest payed workers would still be the lowest payed workers- they'd just get to pay more for the inflated goods along with all the rest of us. Rich man charges more in relationship to his costs- gets richer all that quicker.

You can't take a man's wealth through disproportionate taxation- justify it any way you want-- it's still stealing. What you can do is either prevent wealth from moving to quickly into the highest payed earners hands by placing caps on earnings- don't worry about someone stepping up even with those caps in place-- tax derivatives as income if the amount exceeds the recipient's wage income,or mandate that a percentage of one's wealth be circulating within the market place at any given time. You retain wealth by not allowing it to leave our shores, tax the companies hard for taking jobs out of the United States by placing the same tax and tariff burden on their goods as you would any other import, and encourage foreign companies with tax incentives (no import taxes or tariffs) to bring their business to our shores if they are producing the imported goods goods that we normally purchase domestically.
 
2012-11-20 11:48:45 PM  
Threads like these are great for getting trolls and goddamn idiots to come out of the woodwork and yell that these selfish thugs chose to work minimum wage instead of getting a $200 an hour job that's just sitting there for them to take and they should be punished for it. They're also great for filling up ignore lists.
 
2012-11-20 11:49:00 PM  

sid2112: Yeah because those workers had no idea what they were getting into when they SIGNED THE CONTRACT as they were hired by WalMart. I feel so terrible for those poor, duped bastards that wanted nothing more than 20 dollars an hour for doing a job that is worth around 6 dollars an hour. Seriously, my heart is bleeding for the people who got employed, signed a contract that clearly states what the expectations of the job were, and decided to fark off in school instead of actually trying to learn something.

Somewhere a fiddle is playing....


So what happens when Walmart breaks their end of this grand ole bargain? Tough shiat, they're the employee?
 
2012-11-20 11:49:23 PM  

KarmicDisaster: Are we taking Black Friday bets?
Put me down for
6 tramplings
2 deaths
3 stabbins
10 punchins


And a partridge in a pear tree!

What, no shootings?
 
2012-11-20 11:50:23 PM  
No but really fark anyone shopping Thanksgiving night. No matter how you feel about this don't support taking the one of two days off that people get to be with their families.
 
2012-11-20 11:51:40 PM  

clowncar on fire: How come noone ever points out that raising the standard of living only creates inflation as the lowest wage earners will now be able to afford more?


Because the effect is negligible, especially with the cost/labor ratio we have for companies like Wal-Mart. It will cost consumers something like 1% extra or $12/year to raise workers' wages to $12/hr without significantly affecting Wal-Mart's bottom line.

There's already a well written article in the politics tab about it.
Link
 
2012-11-20 11:51:50 PM  
blogs-images.forbes.com
 
2012-11-20 11:57:16 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: Nutsac_Jim: tell them you cant work those hours because you have another job. Walmart never scheduled me
at times I said I wasnt available.

All depends on how accommodating your employer is and how they go about accommodating. You might get lucky and never get scheduled during that time, but on the other hand you might never get scheduled other times to make up for it. If you can't get enough hours to make it worthwhile, why work there?

When I worked for a Walgreens, my manager flat out told me he couldn't accommodate my schedule around a second job because it wouldn't be fair to the other workers.


You divide your day into three 8 hour blocks- that may include weekends. you get a job during block a (dayshift) making it clear you will only be available during block a. Now get a second job, making it clear that you will only be available during blocks b or c. Never will there be a conflict in your schedule.
 
2012-11-20 11:59:50 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Why doesn't the union just open up its own wal-mart competitor and pay everyone 25,000 per year.
I'm sure they could get nice discounts from suppliers that are union shops. They wont even need that 1% price increase. But that 1% more, plenty of people will go there instead.
Then, they can drive wal-mart out of business.


Virtually impossible. Walmart has all their suppliers over a barrel. Walmart is so much of their business they basically get to force suppliers to whatever price point and conditions Walmart demands.

Here's the story of one supplier who said no to Walmart. It "only" cost him 20% of his business.

"every year the price has come down. Every year the content of the product has gone up... at the price I'm selling to you today, I'm not making any money on it. And if we do what you want next year, I'll lose money."
 
2012-11-21 12:03:32 AM  

clowncar on fire: You divide your day into three 8 hour blocks- that may include weekends. you get a job during block a (dayshift) making it clear you will only be available during block a. Now get a second job, making it clear that you will only be available during blocks b or c. Never will there be a conflict in your schedule.


And, if you'd read the rest of the comment, there's not always a guarantee that the your employer gives a flying fark about your schedule. Tell him all you like that you're no available during block a, but if that means you get scheduled for even fewer hours during block b, it really doesn't do you much good.
 
2012-11-21 12:04:44 AM  
I'm always intrigued by these threads where people claim retail workers have no skills. I'd like to see those same people face down two thousand+ annoyed shoppers over the course of a 10+ hour day and somehow manage to a. help them, and b. not punch them all in the face. That takes something called self control.

Also while not 'major skills', counting/handling money (gasp), understanding stock procedures, understanding and regurgitating store policies to clueless shoppers, product knowledge (especially in electronics and other high tech industries), teamwork, customer service, and to some extent security, are all skills one picks up working long term in retail. A lot of people I've worked with in regular offices would be completely lost in a retail setting.

/six years retail
//not one customer complaint
///switching to IT because I dislike people in general
 
2012-11-21 12:05:27 AM  
The only way retail workers will get thanksgiving back is if people will stop being consumer whores, and not shop thanksgiving night or before dawn on black Friday. I don't see that happening.
 
2012-11-21 12:05:36 AM  

ladyfortuna: ///switching to IT because I dislike people in general


Retail will do that to you.
 
2012-11-21 12:06:51 AM  

Coelacanth: AverageAmericanGuy: Such as?

Unless you want to give me a TotalFark subscription, I'm not looking up anything else tonight. Sorry.


So you're making stuff up for the LOLs? You must have something in mind, right? Otherwise you wouldn't have said it.
 
2012-11-21 12:07:57 AM  

PanicMan:
Here's the story of one supplier who said no to Walmart. It "only" cost him 20% of his business.

"every year the price has come down. Every year the content of the product has gone up... at the price I'm selling to you today, I'm not making any money on it. And if we do what you want next year, I'll lose money."


I've read that story a few times. Now that I have a house with a yard, I'm going to buy a Snapper.
 
2012-11-21 12:08:20 AM  
Don't forget the greedy customers, who want the lowest prices.
 
2012-11-21 12:08:25 AM  
The thing is, if they paid their workers an extra $4 an hour, those workers would turn around and spend 3 of those extra dollars at WalMart. You know they would. They're not going to hoard it in an account in the Cayman Islands, where it does nothing to boost the economy.
 
2012-11-21 12:15:40 AM  

clowncar on fire: quit blaming others for being successful.


The Walton children would most likely be average people were it not for their father. Everything they have is because of their parents. They are a dynasty. That's not exactly an achievement worth respect.


clowncar on fire: You can't take a man's wealth through disproportionate taxation- justify it any way you want-- it's still stealing.


Sam Walton was given the environment to start his business and allow it to flourish because of the stability and economic opportunity the United States provided. No matter how boot strap-y he was, he depended on the people, the institutions and the infrastructure around him.

One of the tenants of progressive taxation says that you should pay back into that system if you become exceedingly successful. It isn't just that you can afford it - it is also to ensure that the system continues to be stable and robust, which is critical for the health of your company.

Many people who are worth more than a couple of million dollars who use terms such as "stealing" and "redistribution" when referring to taxes are hoarders. Being part of the 1% club isn't enough. No amount of wealth will every satisfy them. And they will come up with every excuse in the book to justify why they shouldn't give back to the system.

What do you call a man and his company who take and take and refuse to give back?
 
2012-11-21 12:18:06 AM  
So, I'm kinda torn on this one... on one hand, I'm for the workers. Thanksgiving Day ought to be sacred enough that everyone has it off, or to some extent. I think most grocery stores are open some, and gas stations... but to force workers to come in at ungodly hours to work a National holiday is ridiculous.

Then, I'm somewhat on the Walmart side, and that is this is business. And if Walmart isn't open, someone else is. And if the workers don't like it, then get a different job that isn't a shiatty retail schlep-chore. I'm sure there are plenty of people that would like that job.
 
2012-11-21 12:19:12 AM  

Dinjiin: The Walton children would most likely be average people were it not for their father. Everything they have is because of their parents. They are a dynasty. That's not exactly an achievement worth respect.


I missed the part where they asked you to respect them? If I'm a Walton, I don't give two farks what you think about me. Serious.
 
2012-11-21 12:19:54 AM  

rikkitikkitavi: So, I'm kinda torn on this one... on one hand, I'm for the workers. Thanksgiving Day ought to be sacred enough that everyone has it off, or to some extent. I think most grocery stores are open some, and gas stations... but to force workers to come in at ungodly hours to work a National holiday is ridiculous.

Then, I'm somewhat on the Walmart side, and that is this is business. And if Walmart isn't open, someone else is. And if the workers don't like it, then get a different job that isn't a shiatty retail schlep-chore. I'm sure there are plenty of people that would like that job.


You have brought the voice of reason to this thread.
 
2012-11-21 12:23:23 AM  
The real giggles come from reading that sites thread. They take themselves seriously!
 
2012-11-21 12:24:27 AM  

Summoner101: sid2112: Yeah because those workers had no idea what they were getting into when they SIGNED THE CONTRACT as they were hired by WalMart. I feel so terrible for those poor, duped bastards that wanted nothing more than 20 dollars an hour for doing a job that is worth around 6 dollars an hour. Seriously, my heart is bleeding for the people who got employed, signed a contract that clearly states what the expectations of the job were, and decided to fark off in school instead of actually trying to learn something.

Somewhere a fiddle is playing....

So what happens when Walmart breaks their end of this grand ole bargain? Tough shiat, they're the employee?


Show one instance where they have done that, just one. You won't find it because it never happened!
 
2012-11-21 12:27:02 AM  
If you worked as hard at learning a skill as you do demanding more stuff just because, you might be better off.
 
2012-11-21 12:29:23 AM  

sid2112: Summoner101: sid2112: Yeah because those workers had no idea what they were getting into when they SIGNED THE CONTRACT as they were hired by WalMart. I feel so terrible for those poor, duped bastards that wanted nothing more than 20 dollars an hour for doing a job that is worth around 6 dollars an hour. Seriously, my heart is bleeding for the people who got employed, signed a contract that clearly states what the expectations of the job were, and decided to fark off in school instead of actually trying to learn something.

Somewhere a fiddle is playing....

So what happens when Walmart breaks their end of this grand ole bargain? Tough shiat, they're the employee?

Show one instance where they have done that, just one. You won't find it because it never happened!


One instance ever? Well that was easy.
 
2012-11-21 12:29:27 AM  

PanicMan: Nutsac_Jim: Why doesn't the union just open up its own wal-mart competitor and pay everyone 25,000 per year.
I'm sure they could get nice discounts from suppliers that are union shops. They wont even need that 1% price increase. But that 1% more, plenty of people will go there instead.
Then, they can drive wal-mart out of business.

Virtually impossible. Walmart has all their suppliers over a barrel. Walmart is so much of their business they basically get to force suppliers to whatever price point and conditions Walmart demands.

Here's the story of one supplier who said no to Walmart. It "only" cost him 20% of his business.

"every year the price has come down. Every year the content of the product has gone up... at the price I'm selling to you today, I'm not making any money on it. And if we do what you want next year, I'll lose money."


But it was the 20% that was going to cost him everything.
 
2012-11-21 12:31:17 AM  

Summoner101: sid2112: Summoner101: sid2112: Yeah because those workers had no idea what they were getting into when they SIGNED THE CONTRACT as they were hired by WalMart. I feel so terrible for those poor, duped bastards that wanted nothing more than 20 dollars an hour for doing a job that is worth around 6 dollars an hour. Seriously, my heart is bleeding for the people who got employed, signed a contract that clearly states what the expectations of the job were, and decided to fark off in school instead of actually trying to learn something.

Somewhere a fiddle is playing....

So what happens when Walmart breaks their end of this grand ole bargain? Tough shiat, they're the employee?

Show one instance where they have done that, just one. You won't find it because it never happened!

One instance ever? Well that was easy.


You know what? Have fun.
 
2012-11-21 12:32:05 AM  

superdude72: They're not going to hoard it in an account in the Cayman Islands, where it does nothing to boost the economy.


The rate of savings and investment for people at or below the median income is close to zero. As soon as a dollar comes in, it goes out. If they have any equity, it is in a home they reside in.

It takes money to make money. Usually, you park it in investments for decades and allow it to grow. You have to have spare income to do that, which means you're talking middle class and above. The higher you go, the more money you see diverted to investments, and the more it grows.

At some point, your investments return more money than you can reasonably spend before you die. These are the people who are supposed to seed trickle-down economics. But how can it trickle down if it is locked for decades? And if the kids have any smarts, they'll take that inheritance and lock it away in investments as well.

I'd bet that if Wal-Mart bumped their starting FTE salary to $25K and made most employees full-time, you'd see an immediate benefit to the economy, especially in economically depressed areas where Wal-Mart stores are more common.
 
2012-11-21 12:32:18 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: JosephFinn: AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.

Which I'm sure is a delight to the people at WalMart working poverty-level wages with no insurance coverage & forced and unpaid overtime. But hey, 5% of almost nothing!

Beggars can't be choosers.


And maybe we shouldn't have entire industries of beggars? Maybe?
 
2012-11-21 12:32:41 AM  

buzzcut73: PanicMan:
Here's the story of one supplier who said no to Walmart. It "only" cost him 20% of his business.

"every year the price has come down. Every year the content of the product has gone up... at the price I'm selling to you today, I'm not making any money on it. And if we do what you want next year, I'll lose money."

I've read that story a few times. Now that I have a house with a yard, I'm going to buy a Snapper.


I wish I could buy a snapper. Instead, I married one. What the fark was I thinking!
 
2012-11-21 12:32:56 AM  

LemSkroob: good, good. I love war.

/May both sides lose.


That is usually how war works.
 
2012-11-21 12:33:52 AM  

Propain_az: buzzcut73: PanicMan:
Here's the story of one supplier who said no to Walmart. It "only" cost him 20% of his business.

"every year the price has come down. Every year the content of the product has gone up... at the price I'm selling to you today, I'm not making any money on it. And if we do what you want next year, I'll lose money."

I've read that story a few times. Now that I have a house with a yard, I'm going to buy a Snapper.

I wish I could buy a snapper. Instead, I married one. What the fark was I thinking!


Uh... you weren't?
 
2012-11-21 12:36:01 AM  

rikkitikkitavi: If I'm a Walton, I don't give two farks what you think about me. Serious.


Nor would I expect them to. But they shouldn't be surprised when the war of the classes target them as public enemy #1. To the Progressives, they are the poster children for why inheritance taxes should have more teeth.
 
2012-11-21 12:38:36 AM  

Summoner101: Propain_az: buzzcut73: PanicMan:
Here's the story of one supplier who said no to Walmart. It "only" cost him 20% of his business.

"every year the price has come down. Every year the content of the product has gone up... at the price I'm selling to you today, I'm not making any money on it. And if we do what you want next year, I'll lose money."

I've read that story a few times. Now that I have a house with a yard, I'm going to buy a Snapper.

I wish I could buy a snapper. Instead, I married one. What the fark was I thinking!

Uh... you weren't?


Deep. Very deep.
 
2012-11-21 12:39:46 AM  

Dinjiin: superdude72: They're not going to hoard it in an account in the Cayman Islands, where it does nothing to boost the economy.

The rate of savings and investment for people at or below the median income is close to zero. As soon as a dollar comes in, it goes out. If they have any equity, it is in a home they reside in.

It takes money to make money. Usually, you park it in investments for decades and allow it to grow. You have to have spare income to do that, which means you're talking middle class and above. The higher you go, the more money you see diverted to investments, and the more it grows.

At some point, your investments return more money than you can reasonably spend before you die. These are the people who are supposed to seed trickle-down economics. But how can it trickle down if it is locked for decades? And if the kids have any smarts, they'll take that inheritance and lock it away in investments as well.

I'd bet that if Wal-Mart bumped their starting FTE salary to $25K and made most employees full-time, you'd see an immediate benefit to the economy, especially in economically depressed areas where Wal-Mart stores are more common.


fark that! The whole point is to destroy shiat. Get with the program!
 
2012-11-21 12:41:22 AM  

Dinjiin: rikkitikkitavi: If I'm a Walton, I don't give two farks what you think about me. Serious.

Nor would I expect them to. But they shouldn't be surprised when the war of the classes target them as public enemy #1. To the Progressives, they are the poster children for why inheritance taxes should have more teeth.


I'm generally not in favor of taxing the same money twice, or thrice. It was taxed when it was earned. And any earnings on that invested income has been taxed. Simply changing hands, from one generation to the next shouldn't be taxable. At all. Period. If Bank of America taxed you a percentage just to move your money or hold onto it and not spend it, then you'd be biatching up a storm. What makes you think the government gets that right to tax money that's already been taxed?
 
2012-11-21 12:42:30 AM  

rikkitikkitavi: Dinjiin: rikkitikkitavi: If I'm a Walton, I don't give two farks what you think about me. Serious.

Nor would I expect them to. But they shouldn't be surprised when the war of the classes target them as public enemy #1. To the Progressives, they are the poster children for why inheritance taxes should have more teeth.

I'm generally not in favor of taxing the same money twice, or thrice. It was taxed when it was earned. And any earnings on that invested income has been taxed. Simply changing hands, from one generation to the next shouldn't be taxable. At all. Period. If Bank of America taxed you a percentage just to move your money or hold onto it and not spend it, then you'd be biatching up a storm. What makes you think the government gets that right to tax money that's already been taxed?


Why do you hate black people?
 
2012-11-21 12:42:30 AM  
I'm so tired of Walmart workers crying and whining about low wages. If you think you're so good at stacking toilet paper, go find someone that will pay you more to do it. IMO, none of the workers at my local Wally World are worth a squat. They know nothing. They push buttons and stack stuff. Big effing deal. No one is forced to work at Walmart. We really don't need the ability to make a "living wage" at an extremely low skilled job. If Americans get any dumber, there won't be an America for much longer.
 
2012-11-21 12:43:21 AM  
Store management is pretty low paid too. It's like the lower-middle vs. the working class.
 
2012-11-21 12:43:44 AM  

peeledpeas: I'm so tired of Walmart workers crying and whining about low wages. If you think you're so good at stacking toilet paper, go find someone that will pay you more to do it. IMO, none of the workers at my local Wally World are worth a squat. They know nothing. They push buttons and stack stuff. Big effing deal. No one is forced to work at Walmart. We really don't need the ability to make a "living wage" at an extremely low skilled job. If Americans get any dumber, there won't be an America for much longer.


fark YOU! You racist sonofabiatch!
 
2012-11-21 12:44:33 AM  

Propain_az:

Why do you hate black people?


wait... wha?
 
2012-11-21 12:45:29 AM  

Propain_az: Summoner101: Propain_az: buzzcut73: PanicMan:
Here's the story of one supplier who said no to Walmart. It "only" cost him 20% of his business.

"every year the price has come down. Every year the content of the product has gone up... at the price I'm selling to you today, I'm not making any money on it. And if we do what you want next year, I'll lose money."

I've read that story a few times. Now that I have a house with a yard, I'm going to buy a Snapper.

I wish I could buy a snapper. Instead, I married one. What the fark was I thinking!

Uh... you weren't?

Deep. Very deep.


That's what she said!

NOT!
 
2012-11-21 12:47:26 AM  

rikkitikkitavi: I'm generally not in favor of taxing the same money twice, or thrice. It was taxed when it was earned. And any earnings on that invested income has been taxed. Simply changing hands, from one generation to the next shouldn't be taxable. At all. Period. If Bank of America taxed you a percentage just to move your money or hold onto it and not spend it, then you'd be biatching up a storm. What makes you think the government gets that right to tax money that's already been taxed?


There is no way your supposed scenario wouldn't end with an entrenched and decadent aristocracy thrown down violently by angry peasants.
The government has the right to tax money as it pleases because it's the entire reason the money exists as a vehicle for trade.
 
2012-11-21 12:47:56 AM  

Summoner101: Propain_az: Summoner101: Propain_az: buzzcut73: PanicMan:
Here's the story of one supplier who said no to Walmart. It "only" cost him 20% of his business.

"every year the price has come down. Every year the content of the product has gone up... at the price I'm selling to you today, I'm not making any money on it. And if we do what you want next year, I'll lose money."

I've read that story a few times. Now that I have a house with a yard, I'm going to buy a Snapper.

I wish I could buy a snapper. Instead, I married one. What the fark was I thinking!

Uh... you weren't?

Deep. Very deep.

That's what she said!

NOT!


oh snap. You've exposed my small penis to the world.

www.reddit.com/r/tinydick
 
2012-11-21 12:48:28 AM  

peeledpeas: I'm so tired of Walmart workers crying and whining about low wages. If you think you're so good at stacking toilet paper, go find someone that will pay you more to do it. IMO, none of the workers at my local Wally World are worth a squat. They know nothing. They push buttons and stack stuff. Big effing deal. No one is forced to work at Walmart. We really don't need the ability to make a "living wage" at an extremely low skilled job. If Americans get any dumber, there won't be an America for much longer.


and this, dear friends, is a prime example of America getting dumber.

Thank you for that wonderful demonstration and an insight into the mind of a callus little prick.
 
2012-11-21 12:48:38 AM  

rikkitikkitavi: Dinjiin: rikkitikkitavi: If I'm a Walton, I don't give two farks what you think about me. Serious.

Nor would I expect them to. But they shouldn't be surprised when the war of the classes target them as public enemy #1. To the Progressives, they are the poster children for why inheritance taxes should have more teeth.

I'm generally not in favor of taxing the same money twice, or thrice. It was taxed when it was earned. And any earnings on that invested income has been taxed. Simply changing hands, from one generation to the next shouldn't be taxable. At all. Period. If Bank of America taxed you a percentage just to move your money or hold onto it and not spend it, then you'd be biatching up a storm. What makes you think the government gets that right to tax money that's already been taxed?


Considering inheritance would be considered a gift, any inheritance above 13,000 dollars would be taxable.

/Really, any time money changes hands, it's taxed if it meets a certain threshold. This isn't new.
 
2012-11-21 12:50:12 AM  

Dinjiin: I'd bet that if Wal-Mart bumped their starting FTE salary to $25K and made most employees full-time, you'd see an immediate benefit to the economy, especially in economically depressed areas where Wal-Mart stores are more common.


I don't think investors like it when you do things that reduce profit.
 
2012-11-21 12:50:38 AM  

rikkitikkitavi: Dinjiin: rikkitikkitavi: If I'm a Walton, I don't give two farks what you think about me. Serious.

Nor would I expect them to. But they shouldn't be surprised when the war of the classes target them as public enemy #1. To the Progressives, they are the poster children for why inheritance taxes should have more teeth.

I'm generally not in favor of taxing the same money twice, or thrice. It was taxed when it was earned. And any earnings on that invested income has been taxed. Simply changing hands, from one generation to the next shouldn't be taxable. At all. Period. If Bank of America taxed you a percentage just to move your money or hold onto it and not spend it, then you'd be biatching up a storm. What makes you think the government gets that right to tax money that's already been taxed?


You might want to take a gander at what those well known Commie Founders of this nation thought of the estate tax, as well as that pesky Ebbil Socialist Adam Smith:

"A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fullness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural."
 
2012-11-21 12:51:58 AM  

Ambivalence: peeledpeas: I'm so tired of Walmart workers crying and whining about low wages. If you think you're so good at stacking toilet paper, go find someone that will pay you more to do it. IMO, none of the workers at my local Wally World are worth a squat. They know nothing. They push buttons and stack stuff. Big effing deal. No one is forced to work at Walmart. We really don't need the ability to make a "living wage" at an extremely low skilled job. If Americans get any dumber, there won't be an America for much longer.

and this, dear friends, is a prime example of America getting dumber.

Thank you for that wonderful demonstration and an insight into the mind of a callus little prick.


We should bring back the draft. Make all able-bodied young adults work at Wal-Mart for 6 months. Then at least people who look down on others would know what they're talking about.
 
2012-11-21 12:53:19 AM  

rikkitikkitavi: Dinjiin: rikkitikkitavi: If I'm a Walton, I don't give two farks what you think about me. Serious.

Nor would I expect them to. But they shouldn't be surprised when the war of the classes target them as public enemy #1. To the Progressives, they are the poster children for why inheritance taxes should have more teeth.

I'm generally not in favor of taxing the same money twice, or thrice. It was taxed when it was earned. And any earnings on that invested income has been taxed. Simply changing hands, from one generation to the next shouldn't be taxable. At all. Period. If Bank of America taxed you a percentage just to move your money or hold onto it and not spend it, then you'd be biatching up a storm. What makes you think the government gets that right to tax money that's already been taxed?


This is why I don't use Bank of America. Similarly, no one is subjecting fortunes not made in the United States by non-US-citizens to be doubly taxed either. You can renounce your citizenship, make your fortune in Mexico, and not have to deal with Uncle Sam STEALING the money your children inherit.

It might be a bit more difficult without infrastructure to move your products, with officials you need to bribe, an illiterate labor force, and Zetas extorting you for protection. But what better way to show what a Randian Superhero you are than by doing things the hard way.
 
2012-11-21 12:59:14 AM  

Summoner101: sid2112: Summoner101: sid2112: Yeah because those workers had no idea what they were getting into when they SIGNED THE CONTRACT as they were hired by WalMart. I feel so terrible for those poor, duped bastards that wanted nothing more than 20 dollars an hour for doing a job that is worth around 6 dollars an hour. Seriously, my heart is bleeding for the people who got employed, signed a contract that clearly states what the expectations of the job were, and decided to fark off in school instead of actually trying to learn something.

Somewhere a fiddle is playing....

So what happens when Walmart breaks their end of this grand ole bargain? Tough shiat, they're the employee?

Show one instance where they have done that, just one. You won't find it because it never happened!

One instance ever? Well that was easy.

Where in the contract does it say he won't be hit by a cart? I was speaking of the contract! Try again.
 
2012-11-21 01:00:50 AM  
Think about it this way, libs: Walmart is effectively paying more per worker, but the government is taking the increase and redistributing it to the workers in the form of poorly managed health care... In 2014... So why aren't these people out of poverty now that they have thousands in free health care covered by Uncle Sam?
 
2012-11-21 01:02:45 AM  

sid2112: Summoner101: sid2112: Summoner101: sid2112: Yeah because those workers had no idea what they were getting into when they SIGNED THE CONTRACT as they were hired by WalMart. I feel so terrible for those poor, duped bastards that wanted nothing more than 20 dollars an hour for doing a job that is worth around 6 dollars an hour. Seriously, my heart is bleeding for the people who got employed, signed a contract that clearly states what the expectations of the job were, and decided to fark off in school instead of actually trying to learn something.

Somewhere a fiddle is playing....

So what happens when Walmart breaks their end of this grand ole bargain? Tough shiat, they're the employee?

Show one instance where they have done that, just one. You won't find it because it never happened!

One instance ever? Well that was easy.
Where in the contract does it say he won't be hit by a cart? I was speaking of the contract! Try again.


Really, it was my fault for thinking you'd take this seriously.
 
2012-11-21 01:07:41 AM  

Summoner101: sid2112: Summoner101: sid2112: Summoner101: sid2112: Yeah because those workers had no idea what they were getting into when they SIGNED THE CONTRACT as they were hired by WalMart. I feel so terrible for those poor, duped bastards that wanted nothing more than 20 dollars an hour for doing a job that is worth around 6 dollars an hour. Seriously, my heart is bleeding for the people who got employed, signed a contract that clearly states what the expectations of the job were, and decided to fark off in school instead of actually trying to learn something.

Somewhere a fiddle is playing....

So what happens when Walmart breaks their end of this grand ole bargain? Tough shiat, they're the employee?

Show one instance where they have done that, just one. You won't find it because it never happened!

One instance ever? Well that was easy.
Where in the contract does it say he won't be hit by a cart? I was speaking of the contract! Try again.

Really, it was my fault for thinking you'd take this seriously.


Yes, it was your fault. This is Fark, ya dumbass.
/How's your Mom doing anyway? Give her my best! Because I gave her my best the last time I saw her!
 
2012-11-21 01:11:22 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Coelacanth: AverageAmericanGuy: Such as?

Unless you want to give me a TotalFark subscription, I'm not looking up anything else tonight. Sorry.

So you're making stuff up for the LOLs? You must have something in mind, right? Otherwise you wouldn't have said it.


Take it or leave it.
 
2012-11-21 01:14:40 AM  

Wise_Guy: Coelacanth: AverageAmericanGuy: Such as?

Unless you want to give me a TotalFark subscription, I'm not looking up anything else tonight. Sorry.

It's called backing your own argument.


I've kind of noticed that it's become a sport here to call me out on my postings here.

Either believe it or not.
 
2012-11-21 01:15:59 AM  
Fire them all.

let government take care of them

That is what liberals want anyway.
 
2012-11-21 01:17:34 AM  

Propain_az: Summoner101: sid2112: Summoner101: sid2112: Summoner101: sid2112: Yeah because those workers had no idea what they were getting into when they SIGNED THE CONTRACT as they were hired by WalMart. I feel so terrible for those poor, duped bastards that wanted nothing more than 20 dollars an hour for doing a job that is worth around 6 dollars an hour. Seriously, my heart is bleeding for the people who got employed, signed a contract that clearly states what the expectations of the job were, and decided to fark off in school instead of actually trying to learn something.

Somewhere a fiddle is playing....

So what happens when Walmart breaks their end of this grand ole bargain? Tough shiat, they're the employee?

Show one instance where they have done that, just one. You won't find it because it never happened!

One instance ever? Well that was easy.
Where in the contract does it say he won't be hit by a cart? I was speaking of the contract! Try again.

Really, it was my fault for thinking you'd take this seriously.

Yes, it was your fault. This is Fark, ya dumbass.
/How's your Mom doing anyway? Give her my best! Because I gave her my best the last time I saw her!


You saw my mom...? I guess that explains your marital issues. How's that VD medication working out for ya? Was it curable or do you still have to deal with outbreaks?

/mom works in a VD clinic
 
2012-11-21 01:21:19 AM  

Propain_az: peeledpeas: I'm so tired of Walmart workers crying and whining about low wages. If you think you're so good at stacking toilet paper, go find someone that will pay you more to do it. IMO, none of the workers at my local Wally World are worth a squat. They know nothing. They push buttons and stack stuff. Big effing deal. No one is forced to work at Walmart. We really don't need the ability to make a "living wage" at an extremely low skilled job. If Americans get any dumber, there won't be an America for much longer.

fark YOU! You racist sonofabiatch!


Racist? WTF?


Ambivalence: peeledpeas: I'm so tired of Walmart workers crying and whining about low wages. If you think you're so good at stacking toilet paper, go find someone that will pay you more to do it. IMO, none of the workers at my local Wally World are worth a squat. They know nothing. They push buttons and stack stuff. Big effing deal. No one is forced to work at Walmart. We really don't need the ability to make a "living wage" at an extremely low skilled job. If Americans get any dumber, there won't be an America for much longer.

and this, dear friends, is a prime example of America getting dumber.

Thank you for that wonderful demonstration and an insight into the mind of a callus little prick.



You're welcome. Keep ignoring the bigger picture.
 
2012-11-21 01:56:43 AM  
tenpoundsofcheese (farkied: It ain't cheese): They have the basic necessities.

Thanks to Medicaid and food stamps. Which you Randroid pukes would be very happy to see abolished.
 
2012-11-21 02:04:19 AM  

Richard Johnson: I do my best to stay the hell out of WallyWorld as I can. I don't think that I have been inside one in 3 years.


Well their low pay costs you money whether you shop there or not. WalMart is a rich corporate welfare queen to the tune of at least $3.6 Billion every year.
 
2012-11-21 02:08:06 AM  

tjfly: Think about it this way, libs: Walmart is effectively paying more per worker, but the government is taking the increase and redistributing it to the workers in the form of poorly managed health care... In 2014... So why aren't these people out of poverty now that they have thousands in free health care covered by Uncle Sam?


What the eff am I even reading?

Are you trying to claim that Obamacare (not effective until 2014) is the reason that poverty still exists in America in 2012?
 
2012-11-21 02:14:10 AM  
BTW there's a nice article over on the politics tab dealing with pay inequality and such, and coming down on the side of the poorly paid. Fark, it's from The American Conservative
 
2012-11-21 02:16:13 AM  

peeledpeas: you think you're so good at stacking toilet paper, go find someone that will pay you more


Costco would pay them more. And provide good benefits. Alas there's not that many around so kinda hard to get a job in and also their turnover is lower than Walmart's, which further ads to the difficulty of getting a job there.
 
2012-11-21 02:33:21 AM  
As a UFCW slave (some of you may know how I feel about THEM) I will posit that it has to be among the worst of unions, & that they would hide their involvement. Walmartyrs would be on a double losing end of the deal. While WallyWorld does treat their employees like shiat, their managers have more respect for their employees than my current drivers do. And yes, I have a cushy state job. (Sligo Bow)
 
2012-11-21 02:33:43 AM  

Summoner101: Still relevant:

[www.theconnextion.com image 500x500]


Even more relevant: Link
 
2012-11-21 02:39:57 AM  

gbcinques: FTA,
a Demos study that says that raising the salary of all full-time workers at large retailers to $25,000 per year would lift more than 700,000 people out of poverty, at a cost of only a 1 percent price increase for customers.

Instead of adding the price increase to the customers, why not take it out of the Walton family pay packet. You know who, those five of the top 10 richest Americans.


THIS! The 1% continue to live in excess beyond your wildest dreams, from the toil of the underpaid and overworked.
 
2012-11-21 02:44:35 AM  
As soon as you're born they make you feel small By giving you no time instead of it all Till the pain is so big you feel nothing at all A working class hero is something to be A working class hero is something to be

They hurt you at home and they hit you at school They hate you if you're clever and they despise a fool Till you're so farking crazy you can't follow their rules A working class hero is something to be A working class hero is something to be

When they've tortured and scared you for twenty odd years Then they expect you to pick a career When you can't really function you're so full of fear A working class hero is something to be A working class hero is something to be

Keep you doped with religion and sex and TV And you think you're so clever and classless and free But you're still farking peasants as far as I can see A working class hero is something to be A working class hero is something to be

There's room at the top they are telling you still But first you must learn how to smile as you kill If you want to be like the folks on the hill A working class hero is something to be A working class hero is something to be

If you want to be a hero well just follow me If you want to be a hero well just follow me
Working Class Hero ------John Lennon
 
2012-11-21 02:44:51 AM  
which pits low-wage workers against greedy management and owners

By which you mean "union backed people being exploited in an effort to get protection money in to the union coffers"

That's ALL this is about. The unions want to get their hands on more money. That's it.
 
2012-11-21 02:54:14 AM  

People_are_Idiots: Summoner101: Still relevant:

[www.theconnextion.com image 500x500]

Even more relevant: Link


I generally like Penn & Teller, but that was a horribly made video. They contradict the horrible pay by citing average Walmart FULL-time pay when many of their workers are PART-time. Then they go on to say those PART-time workers were on government assistance anyway so it doesn't count. It does because Walmart has steadily increased it's PART-time employment so the workers it hires either remain on assistance or are forced on to assistance. Maybe if Penn did a little more research he would've realized some of his criticisms of the doc were bullshiat.

Even the schedule one was bullshiat and was essentially nit picking to address the point. Yea, employers set employee schedules. Good job Penn. His point was that they switch employees shifts too often from day to nights with little employee input. Yea Penn, sometimes employers work with employees to schedule shifts more beneficial to the employee and doesn't fark them sideways.
 
2012-11-21 03:01:16 AM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: What's wrong with the executives earning 1% less if it means your lowest paid staff member earns a living wage?


Well, what happens is they have to raise prices. The world has seen that this business model works spectacularly. If Wal Mart no longer USES this business model, there will be 1000 Walmart Wannabes ABLE to get the billions in capital to put the same business model into operation elsewhere.

When companies compete on price, price is what matters. The new walmart clones will make money, Walmart doesent and shrinks, the no longer needed employees will either be out of work, or now at the new stores without any longevity or stability.

/besides life isnt that simple. if you cut CEO compensation 1 percent, that comes to 181,000 dollars per year, a GHASTLY amount for 1 percent. however split amongst 2.1 million employees, that comes to an increase of 9 cents a year for each employee. So if you cut it 99 percent, it comes to $8.53 extra per employee per year. How does that provide a living wage to anyone?
 
2012-11-21 03:03:23 AM  

I sound fat: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: What's wrong with the executives earning 1% less if it means your lowest paid staff member earns a living wage?

Well, what happens is they have to raise prices. The world has seen that this business model works spectacularly. If Wal Mart no longer USES this business model, there will be 1000 Walmart Wannabes ABLE to get the billions in capital to put the same business model into operation elsewhere.

When companies compete on price, price is what matters. The new walmart clones will make money, Walmart doesent and shrinks, the no longer needed employees will either be out of work, or now at the new stores without any longevity or stability.

/besides life isnt that simple. if you cut CEO compensation 1 percent, that comes to 181,000 dollars per year, a GHASTLY amount for 1 percent. however split amongst 2.1 million employees, that comes to an increase of 9 cents a year for each employee. So if you cut it 99 percent, it comes to $8.53 extra per employee per year. How does that provide a living wage to anyone?


It's the thought that counts.
 
2012-11-21 03:05:25 AM  

rikkitikkitavi: I'm generally not in favor of taxing the same money twice, or thrice. It was taxed when it was earned. And any earnings on that invested income has been taxed. Simply changing hands, from one generation to the next shouldn't be taxable. At all. Period. If Bank of America taxed you a percentage just to move your money or hold onto it and not spend it, then you'd be biatching up a storm. What makes you think the government gets that right to tax money that's already been taxed?


Moving money from bank to bank does not alter whose hand is owner. Willing money to your heirs *is* a change in hand. And the tax collector is always there to take his cut when it does. That is how society works.

Furthermore, society has a vested interest in preventing dynasties. Money is power and power corrupts absolutely. We do not need a plutocracy. And as history has shown, it is very ugly and disruptive to society when the people rise against them.

OTOH, the word "guillotine" rolls off the tongue so very well. It is a shame that we do not get a chance to use it more often.
 
2012-11-21 03:22:14 AM  
I work there due to losing my decent paying job during the bubble collapse. It's pretty much as bad as anyone portrays. It's not a bad job in itself but profits go up not down. They throw out just enough of a bone in order for outsiders to say maybe they're not THAT bad. We're constantly hit up for donations for this and that for the sole reason of Walmart being able to say store XXX donated YYY to special cause ZZZ. The kind of PR compaign they like to present the public with. Walmart loves their associates and you. /puke

Nothing is ever going to change. You got people living paycheck to paycheck and looking at handouts of help fill in the gaps. You think this person is going to risk their job to send a message? No. Maybe somewhere somehow there'll be enough walkouts that Walmart has to publiclly address it to save face but have no illusions that they'll losen up the coffers in this process. It's a 100% greed machine that pretty much runs on automation and there's really no way to pull the plug. Anything they use to respond will be the absolute bare minimum that is needed for it to be forgotten until it comes back around next year. They're already trying to bribe workers to work their full Black Friday schedule with an extra 10% off one transaction. They still be making a profit off it it.
 
2012-11-21 03:26:37 AM  

p51d007: Since this is a somewhat liberal site, I'm sure to get flamed by this, but anyway....

People who work for Walmart, Target, or any other RETAIL store....well, suck it up!
You are working a RETAIL store! If people didn't come into those stores on Thanksgiving,
or 4am on black Friday, you would be able to stay home. The fault isn't the retailer, it
is the lazy a&& consumer who wants (or thinks they will get) a bargain.
If they didn't show up, the store wouldn't be open!
Also, yes, the economy is (if you live in real-ville) DOWN THE TOILET, so that might be
the reason you are working a low wage or minimum wage job. Now, if you are the countless
drones that are working low/minimum wage jobs, and you are at least in your 20's, you have
to stop and have someone toss a bucket of ice water in your face. Why? Because you
need to evaluate your life. How did you screw up your life, that you are only QUALIFIED to
be a minimum wage employee with little or NO skills in anything other than "do you want
fries with that". As the judge in Caddyshack said "the world needs ditch diggers".
When you were in high school, I'll just bet you were uber cool, skipping school, getting high
daily, girls falling all over you, getting kicked out of school for fighting....yeah, how cool are
you now? The rest of us, STUDIED, went to college (I paid my own way), and got a good
job, that allows us the freedom of having nights, holidays & weekends off!
So, suck it up, and take it in the butt....you have no one to complain to, but yourself!


In other words, people beneath your lofty perch deserve what they get. The "ditch diggers" don't deserve a living wage. Gotcha.

I love how some people allow their own success in life to create arrogance of this nature. It's like they really, really, believe that the pie is big enough for everyone to have a slice of pie as big as their own, and if everyone tried really, really, hard, and never ran into any bad luck, then there would be no need for janitors or pizza delivery guys or retail sales clerks and everyone would have jobs that paid well and allowed them to go out on weekends and holidays.

/actually, I don't love it. Arrogance is stupid.
 
2012-11-21 03:28:57 AM  

Summoner101: People_are_Idiots: Summoner101: Still relevant:

[www.theconnextion.com image 500x500]

Even more relevant: Link

I generally like Penn & Teller, but that was a horribly made video. They contradict the horrible pay by citing average Walmart FULL-time pay when many of their workers are PART-time. Then they go on to say those PART-time workers were on government assistance anyway so it doesn't count. It does because Walmart has steadily increased it's PART-time employment so the workers it hires either remain on assistance or are forced on to assistance. Maybe if Penn did a little more research he would've realized some of his criticisms of the doc were bullshiat.

Even the schedule one was bullshiat and was essentially nit picking to address the point. Yea, employers set employee schedules. Good job Penn. His point was that they switch employees shifts too often from day to nights with little employee input. Yea Penn, sometimes employers work with employees to schedule shifts more beneficial to the employee and doesn't fark them sideways.


At my workplace they do the same if not worse, at a UNION job. Right now we are downsizing and yet the company is hiring a boatload of part-timers, and messing around with the full-timers hours. I myself work a swing shift as a full-timer, working night 4 days, and morning 1 day. Constant harassment, Laziness paying off... and yet anytime a holiday comes around, we get forced to work it. Heck, one of the employees LEFT this company to work at Walmart.
 
2012-11-21 03:47:02 AM  

randomjsa: That's ALL this is about. The unions want to get their hands on more money. That's it.


Better them than the executives really. Granted if it was up to me I'd just have the SEC suspend all trading on Walmart stock until they resolve their issues. And give them two weeks to do it. If they don't? So much for being a public company. Being a public company is a privilege, if you act in a manner not befitting the privilege, you lose it.
 
2012-11-21 03:48:31 AM  

p51d007: Since this is a somewhat liberal site, I'm sure to get flamed by this, but anyway....

People who work for Walmart, Target, or any other RETAIL store....well, suck it up!
You are working a RETAIL store! If people didn't come into those stores on Thanksgiving,
or 4am on black Friday, you would be able to stay home. The fault isn't the retailer, it
is the lazy a&& consumer who wants (or thinks they will get) a bargain.
If they didn't show up, the store wouldn't be open!
Also, yes, the economy is (if you live in real-ville) DOWN THE TOILET, so that might be
the reason you are working a low wage or minimum wage job. Now, if you are the countless
drones that are working low/minimum wage jobs, and you are at least in your 20's, you have
to stop and have someone toss a bucket of ice water in your face. Why? Because you
need to evaluate your life. How did you screw up your life, that you are only QUALIFIED to
be a minimum wage employee with little or NO skills in anything other than "do you want
fries with that". As the judge in Caddyshack said "the world needs ditch diggers".
When you were in high school, I'll just bet you were uber cool, skipping school, getting high
daily, girls falling all over you, getting kicked out of school for fighting....yeah, how cool are
you now? The rest of us, STUDIED, went to college (I paid my own way), and got a good
job, that allows us the freedom of having nights, holidays & weekends off!
So, suck it up, and take it in the butt....you have no one to complain to, but yourself!


cache.vevo.com
 
2012-11-21 03:57:15 AM  

clowncar on fire: Think of the economy similar to grading on a curve. When we have a lot of poor people, it doesn't take much to make it to a median class to which the pricing of goods will be based. If everyone is median, the curve is shifted upward until prices settle on the new median. At 25000 a year- the lowest payed workers would still be the lowest payed workers- they'd just get to pay more for the inflated goods along with all the rest of us. Rich man charges more in relationship to his costs- gets richer all that quicker.


Your logic is impeccable. However, you're not logicating the right thing.

Inflation simply doesn't work that way. Inflation is based solely on the amount of currency available for use to purchase goods. When you increase the amount of currency in an economy, you get inflation, as buyers have more money and retailers can charge more. However, this only works if there is a fixed amount of goods. Increased monetary supply will simply have no impact on things like salt, which sells pretty much the same no matter what the economy is like. There will not be an increased demand for salt simply because people have more to spend.

By paying the workers, you are not increasing the amount of currency in an economy, you are merely "redistributing" (I know that's a bad word) the currency, and it all eventually trickles back up anyhow. As long as supply remains steady to match the increased demand (as it will on the cheap Chinese-made crap Wal-Mart sells), then excessive inflation (as in, beyond what we consider "normal") won't occur.
 
2012-11-21 03:59:15 AM  
I don't know what's with all the assumptions that people who work low paying jobs are idiots. I work as a supervisor at Rite Aid. I make a little over a dollar above minimum wage. I also have a Bachelors degree in psychology, a Masters degree in social work, AND my social work professional license in NY state. Someone in my position should be working somewhere with a starting salary of 40k. Luckily, I just got a new job that I'll be starting soon, but the economy is so bad that it's not even one that requires an LMSW. It's a site supervisor job at residential housing for adults with developmental disabilities, and will likely pay around 29k to start.
So what's my point? Don't look down at everyone that works retail. The economy is hard and only so many job positions are available. That person stocking shelves may be more educated than you.
 
2012-11-21 04:00:20 AM  
Minimum wage was never intended to support a family. It was introduced by unions as a way to get rid of the cheap labor that was driving down their wages. Someone worth $7 an hour isn't going to be hired under an $8 an hour minimum wage, even if normally it might make good sense to hire two unskilled people at $7 rather than one skilled person at $15. The end result is that the poor and uneducated can't get jobs and end up in gangs or on welfare instead, while union employees are being paid 20-30% more than they're actually worth and US industry is going broke or moving overseas.

In regards to Walmart, those jobs paying $8 an hour involve no education or job experience to speak of, and are typically filled by workers who switch jobs constantly and have no imagination. They don't deserve to be paid more. Walmart is a lot better than flipping burgers, and if you have an education you can go into management, which pays pretty well. Or you can just go out and invent your own job - you can make significantly better than Walmart pay just doing yard work and odd jobs, if you're actually hard-working and self-motivated. In my case, I'm partially handicapped, but I taught myself web design and programming starting from age 15 or so, and at this point I can make $40-$50 an hour as a consultant.
 
2012-11-21 04:16:21 AM  
My town and I always buy the cheapest, doesn't matter if the product was made by not paying people enough or if the source suffered a lot. Our Walmart is like the only place we all shop in. If Walmart ever goes out of business, we'd all shop at the next cheapest store. It's not just Walmart that resorts to cheap labor, Apple and other big time companies get rich because they know how to create good things for the cheapest possible price. Why should us consumers be worried about by things like employees' wages, or how the products were made? As consumers, we're not obligated to think about those things, our priority is to get the best deals for the lowest price, especially in this horrid economy. Personally, I don't feel like playing Mr. Detective and ask "Did the pigs, chickens, and worms suffer before they got turned into this sausage?" or "Were the workers at least age 18 when they made these clothes?" whenever I go shopping. I'm no superhero, I'm no detective, I'm just a simple guy who refuses to buy stuff made expensive just because they have some foreign brand name slapped on them.

Nobody is forced to work for Walmart. Before you sign up for any job, they tell you how much you'll get paid and all the terms. In the end, it's up to you whether or not you'll take what they offer or not. If you sign up for it, then you can't really complain. If you don't like the pay, then just quit. Maybe if a lot of employees quit, they'd get the message that "Oh, we're not paying them enough!". Doing it while in the middle of a job is very unprofessional. It's like taking the business hostage just because all of a sudden, you don't like what you signed up for. Now if they do something that's not part of the contract you signed and it's affecting you negatively, then that's the time to protest or even sue them.

Most of the things that can be bought from Walmart are just the same if you were to buy them from other shops. For example, clothes, shoes, computer games, food. The clothes are not expensive Versace or whatever brand named luxury fashion, but they provide comfort. The shoes they sell provide the right amount of protection and comfort as well. Toys, computer games, and others offer the same thing. Food like "Great Value" branded meatballs, fish, chicken, burgers, and others taste the same as the more expensive ones. They even have their own cheese puff brand and it tastes just as good as Cheetos. The only time when food or other products being sold by Walmart would pale in comparison to the branded stuff is when the big name items use different ingredients that are more expensive or distinct. For example, although the "Great Value" meatballs are tasty enough (subjective), it still will never compare to the meatballs made by upscale Italian restaurants because they can use the best and most expensive ingredients.

People say "You get what you pay for!", but when I compare Walmart to more expensive stores, the only difference I see is the lack of big time brand names at Walmart. Everything else is just as good as the more expensive versions or at least functional and serviceable enough. So what if the piece of clothing you bought from Walmart doesn't have the Versace logo on it? So what if the shoes you bought aren't from Nike or Adidas? So what if the cheese puffs you bought aren't called Cheetos? Well, it's up to people to decide for themselves: Pay for the brand name or pay less for the same thing without the brand name.
 
2012-11-21 04:23:08 AM  

j0ndas: Minimum wage was never intended to support a family. It was introduced by unions as a way to get rid of the cheap labor that was driving down their wages. Someone worth $7 an hour isn't going to be hired under an $8 an hour minimum wage, even if normally it might make good sense to hire two unskilled people at $7 rather than one skilled person at $15. The end result is that the poor and uneducated can't get jobs and end up in gangs or on welfare instead, while union employees are being paid 20-30% more than they're actually worth and US industry is going broke or moving overseas.


I'm very curious about this whole "worth" thing you are speaking of. You spoke of a person "worth" $7/hour.

There are two ways of looking at this. One, a person is of so little skill that their work only adds $7/hr to the company's net worth. This is the "supply side" way of looking at it.

The other way of looking at it is that you need particular work done that, like it or not, requires a human being to perform. This job simply cannot be completely automated with current technology. You need a person to make judgements based on available data, if it is something so simple as "put these boxes here until the pallet is full, then put the remaining boxes here", or so complex as "take this sheet and fill these orders from all around the warehouse, box them and package them correctly and place the correct address label on each one, then weigh each and affix the appropriate tags."

So, since you don't just need a human, you need that human to be alive, it would logically follow that that human must be paid enough money that he or she can purchase adequate food and shelter, and possibly medical treatment as needed. If you are asking a human to give up at least 9, but actually 10-11 hours per day (8-hr shift plus 1 hr. break plus 1 hr. getting ready and 1/2 hour each way for commuting) for five days per week. This is a good bit of someone's time, and it follows that they deserve fair compensation for it.

Wal-Mart relies on the taxpayers to fund their shortcomings in the form of food stamps and WIC and Medicaid. They do not fairly compensate their employees for their work, and they expect employees to do such idiotic things as show up to work at 10PM but not clock in until 11:55 because they kindly stayed an hour over twice earlier in the week at the request of management and if they clocked in at 10, they would get overtime. But they are also only considered a "part-time" employee, as their position is a "part-time" position, no matter that they are always scheduled 40 hrs, so they are not eligible for benefits.
 
2012-11-21 04:33:33 AM  

GreenSun: Nobody is forced to work for Walmart. Before you sign up for any job, they tell you how much you'll get paid and all the terms. In the end, it's up to you whether or not you'll take what they offer or not. If you sign up for it, then you can't really complain


See, this is what so many people actually believe, but it is simply not true. No one has stuck a gun to my sister's head and "forced" her to work at Wal-Mart. It's simply pretty much the only job available in this town, because since Wal-Mart put in, several other small businesses went out of business.

And yes, my sister was given "terms" of her employment. Terms including "if you work 32+ hours per week, you are a full-time employee and you get benefits." Terms including "if you work more than your scheduled shift at the request of management, you will receive time-and-a-half overtime. Terms including "you will not be required to show up at work without being on the clock."

Don't act like you know more than other people about something like this. Wal-Mart is not honoring their own agreements, and this is why most of the employees are upset. They have every right to be. Wal-Mart executive management knows that their employees are dependent on their jobs and can't "just quit". They know how much of an upheaval it is to an entire family's schedule if Mom quits and since the family has only one car and Mom suddenly is working at a different time they have to make new arrangements to get the kids to school.

Wal-Mart takes advantage of people in these kinds of situations, and makes craploads of money off of them. I'm sorry, but whatever line you've been fed about Wal-Mart employees is a bunch of bull, and if you would make a stab at a little bit of empathy, you might understand things a bit better and not sound so arrogant and uninformed.
 
2012-11-21 04:58:21 AM  

hubiestubert: Again, for all the folks who have a bug up their tochises about unions, I ask this:

Do you support Chambers of Commerce? Do you support industry associations? Do you support lobbying by industries? Do you support business owners freedom to call upon their Congresscritters?

If you do, then by extension, you should be supporting unions doing EXACTLY the same thing. Freedom of association. Freedom to pursue redress and file suit. Freedom to negotiate through intermediaries who know the law and who represent your interests. THAT is what unions do. They are a collective bargaining unit, representing a group of folks. Much like industry lobbying, and much like industry associations looking out for the interests of their constituent businesses.

Nothing more. And nothing less. If you support the right of owners to discuss with one another how their industries should proceed, then you should likewise be supporting the right of workers to do the same. Especially since the freedom of association is the freedom to assemble and the freedom to seek redress, and has been upheld by the Supreme Court already. If you like the Constitution, and you like the freedom of speech, and the freedom to assemble, then you should be likewise be in support of unions representing the interests of laborers who are busy working for a living.


Well put Hubie.
 
2012-11-21 05:07:13 AM  

Vector R: Ned Resnikoff at MSNBC flagged a leaked internal document (first obtained by HuffPo) that revealed that base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour (or $16,000 per year), with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

Long ago and far away, I was one of those flogged and underpaid drones (employee unit #XJ43061, if you must know). I started out at $8 an hour FT, and that made for a marginally acceptable living with someone else around to share expenses with. A few months in, while chatting with a sweetheart in softlines whose only fault was a massive overbite and a harsh hand dealt from time and poverty. It turned out she'd been there a number of years, and her pay wasn't even equal to mine.

As someone who has BT;DT - yes, the working conditions ARE that bad. It's better than nothing, but it's so degrading and soul-crushing, and is the sort of job that just keeps you awake at night long after you've thrown that farking vest somewhere out of sight. /CSB

/Walmart was so bad I started smoking
//Good luck, striking workers!
///Fark Black Friday


My wife worked at Walmart for 13 years, and when she left she was making just over $13/hr. She watched guys who worked there less time, do the same job and make more than her, even though her reviews were better and she never missed work. We also have no children, so they couldn't use the old "Guys get more because they don't go out on Maternity leave"-excuse.

Walmart is a soul-crushing, heartless, divisive and exploitative corporate entity, and they need to take better care of their employees. Period. We've getting by without my wife's income for over a year now, and while it would be nice to have more money in the bank, I'd prefer to scrape by than have her work for Walmart ever again.
 
2012-11-21 05:25:08 AM  
CSB time.
I worked a month and a half seasonal position at Wal-Mart while I was attending college part-time. I had evening classes on Tuesday and Thursday, and not only was that listed on my application, but I brought it up again in the interview just to be certain. I was hired, and did my job well. The second week, I was scheduled to work evenings on both Tuesday and Thursday. I spoke with the personnel manager who was in charge of the scheduling, and she told me that there was nothing she could do about it. I spoke to the store manager, and within half an hour my schedule was changed. The next week rolls around, and I'm AGAIN scheduled on Tuesday and Thursday evening. I spoke to the personnel manager again, and she told me she couldn't fix it. I spoke to the store manager, and my schedule was fixed again. Finally after that, I stopped being scheduled on nights I couldn't work, but was passed over for a permanent hiring for a guy who royally screwed up changing a display (he put more expensive televisions there before changing the price, so 3 tvs were sold at $150 that should have cost $250). Fast forward 7 years, and I'm out of the Air Force. It's harder finding a job than I expected, so I apply at Wal-Mart to get at least some income while I hunt for a better opportunity. I get turned down even though I'm willing to work for the normal starting pay with wide open availability. I ask a friend who works management at a store in a different area to check things out for me, and it turns out the fat whore of a personnel manager had left a note in my employee profile that I was a trouble-maker and unreliable.
/CSB
 
2012-11-21 05:25:31 AM  
One day I'll see if any of the fox/rush/boortz fanboys can explain in rational terms why it's OK for Fred Phelps to spew his hate speech on first amendment grounds, but when it's a union suddenly it's a perfectly legitimate tactic for the courts to restrict free speech & assembly rights. Til then all I hear is a constant stream of 'job creator' derp
 
2012-11-21 05:27:28 AM  
There's no fair assesment of wages. You think the person working at Walmart doesn't work as hard as someone doing higher paying blue collar labor like construction or factory work? Of course they do and they put up with just as much misery as the other jobs that pay twice as much or more. There's just a norm that's been set up by who knows what that says these people over here should get pay less than those people over there even though they're both doing just regular run-of-the-mill non-skilled labor. The irony is that it's probably Walmart that sets the standard for other big chain businesses.

It's just simply putting profits before eveything and seeing anything that dips into the profits as a threat and it will probably be this countries undoing considering in the last 2-3 years poeople have started to become disenfranchised with the way this country is ran by corperations that exploit and conive their way into bigger and bigger profits every year. Try to imagine what it would be like 10 or 20 years down the road seeing how things have escalated in just the last 5 years.
 
2012-11-21 05:34:55 AM  

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: I'm confused; nowhere in the article does it explain that these people were FORCED to take these jobs without knowing what the wage was. I men, that had to be case, right? Otherwise...


You're probably also the same guy who insists that nobody can get a job in today's job market, thanks to Obama, right?
 
2012-11-21 05:46:30 AM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: What's wrong with the executives earning 1% less if it means your lowest paid staff member earns a living wage?


Well, according to someone in my Facebook feed...

Note: All of this was from a discussion about how "Papa" John could pay for health insurance for all of his employees for less than 1% of his profits.

"Ok, so lets take all the money you have and give it to a bum on the street, because you dont need it. And your computer, phone, and any other luxuries you have."

and...

"The people that work there, work there of their own free will. The get what they are contracted for. If they want a better life then they need to work towards a future that provides them the things they want of their own hard work. These kind of jobs are at the low end of the pay scale for a reason. The labor rate and benefits they provide are equal to the skill level that is required to do it."

and...

"People need to grow up and take responsibility for their actions and their lives. If they want a better job with better pay and benefits they need to get off their ass and work hard to that end! That might require some sacrifice like going to school and getting an education in a skill that is marketable to provide a better life!"

There was of course no answer when questioned about where the time and money for school would come from when the person is working 50+ hours a week and still counting pennies at the end of the month. Nor was there a response regarding what happens when everyone has a "marketable skill" and nobody wants to clean toilets or collect garbage anymore.

In answer to "Would you pay 15 cents more for a pizza if it meant that the workers who made and delivered that pizza could have health insurance?"...

"Would I pay .15 cents more, I dont know. I buy what I like at the lowest cost. It is the same reason I shop at Wal-mart. The founders of Papa John's deserve what they earned!"

Then he just quoted the entire text of the About page on the Papa John's website. Still not sure what was the point of that quote.
 
2012-11-21 05:48:38 AM  

p51d007: Since this is a somewhat liberal site, I'm sure to get flamed by this, but anyway....

People who work for Walmart, Target, or any other RETAIL store....well, suck it up!
You are working a RETAIL store! If people didn't come into those stores on Thanksgiving,
or 4am on black Friday, you would be able to stay home. The fault isn't the retailer, it
is the lazy a&& consumer who wants (or thinks they will get) a bargain.
If they didn't show up, the store wouldn't be open!
Also, yes, the economy is (if you live in real-ville) DOWN THE TOILET, so that might be
the reason you are working a low wage or minimum wage job. Now, if you are the countless
drones that are working low/minimum wage jobs, and you are at least in your 20's, you have
to stop and have someone toss a bucket of ice water in your face. Why? Because you
need to evaluate your life. How did you screw up your life, that you are only QUALIFIED to
be a minimum wage employee with little or NO skills in anything other than "do you want
fries with that". As the judge in Caddyshack said "the world needs ditch diggers".
When you were in high school, I'll just bet you were uber cool, skipping school, getting high
daily, girls falling all over you, getting kicked out of school for fighting....yeah, how cool are
you now? The rest of us, STUDIED, went to college (I paid my own way), and got a good
job, that allows us the freedom of having nights, holidays & weekends off!
So, suck it up, and take it in the butt....you have no one to complain to, but yourself!


i860.photobucket.com

He used the term "Real-ville". Dead give away he is a limbaugh ditto head Get him boys!
 
2012-11-21 05:51:32 AM  

Richard Johnson: I do my best to stay the hell out of WallyWorld as I can. I don't think that I have been inside one in 3 years.


It was actually the best benefit of my career spawning promotion 4 1/2 years ago. Walmart is only a 'We couldn't find it anywhere else' thing now. The only thing we've consistently bought at Walmart was diapers and pullups for my 4 year old because the name brands are absolutely ridiculous in pricing, and sometimes aren't as good as the crappy brand at WalMart, which is contrary to everything else about their products. We used to go 3 or 4 times a week when we were on a shoestring. Now it's a couple of weeks between visits for my wife, and moths for myself. Once my daughter is out of pullups, I plan to almost never go there.
 
2012-11-21 05:56:41 AM  

InflamedGonads: He used the term "Real-ville". Dead give away he is a limbaugh ditto head Get him boys!


I'm favorited!ing the @#$%.
 
2012-11-21 05:58:52 AM  

GreenSun: Most of the things that can be bought from Walmart are just the same if you were to buy them from other shops. For example, clothes, shoes, computer games, food.


Except that WalMart has contracts with manufacturers to sell lower quality versions of their products at WalMart. When I used to buy underwear and socks there, I saw it all the time. UNderwear would wear out in no time, the socks a little longer, and this was with the same brands I buy elsewhere. Since I stopped going to WalMart, the shelf life of these thing shas at least doubled. I would also have the tag fall off of my underwear, revealing another tag underneath with a totally different materials list on it. A shaittier combination of rayon and cotton, or whatever underwear is made out of. This seems to be so that when you bought it, it would appear to be made of better materials, but it was also technically stil labeled correctly with the actual material count, that one was just buried.

Also, you can check out a documentary called Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price
. I still haven't gotten around to watching it, but my brother in law has, and he said that it was rather eye-opening.
 
2012-11-21 06:02:39 AM  
I think Wal-Mart gets an inordinate amount of hate most of the time. In this case, they're well-deserving of it.

Let these people enjoy Thanksgiving with their families douchebags, open at 5am if you want on Friday...but give the workers one farking day off.
 
2012-11-21 06:03:54 AM  

MmmmBacon: We've getting by without my wife's income for over a year now, and while it would be nice to have more money in the bank, I'd prefer to scrape by than have her work for Walmart ever again.


Yep. A few times when money has been tight, or when my wife got laid off at the beginning of the recession, before she got a new job, she has entertained the idea of working there for awhile, until we get caught up, or just to make extra money for the holidays, whatever. I got through the scary times and tried to find other ways to make the money work. I just couldn't handle her working there if we were anything but destitute. I'd rather postpone Christmas for 2-3 months, and then make it a small one, than have her work there a week.
 
2012-11-21 06:04:53 AM  

slayer199: I think Wal-Mart gets an inordinate amount of hate most of the time. In this case, they're well-deserving of it.

Let these people enjoy Thanksgiving with their families douchebags, open at 5am if you want on Friday...but give the workers one farking day off.


I dont know, when I worked a crap job, I LOVED working holidays. double pay. its important to poor folks.
 
2012-11-21 06:06:56 AM  
And speaking of that, have you people ever WORKED for a mom and pop retailer? They normally pay worse than walmart, certainly dont have benefits, and cost society money on purchases.

lets not talk about advancement opportunities....

/but hey, lets protect mom and pop from big evil walmart that saves everyone money that they are able to spend -- get this -- IN THE COMMUNITY on other things.
 
2012-11-21 06:08:21 AM  

Jgok: Nor was there a response regarding what happens when everyone has a "marketable skill" and nobody wants to clean toilets or collect garbage anymore.


Of all the stuff that gets brought up in these arguments, THIS is the most overlooked, yet the most important part, IMHO. The few times it DOES get brought up, it's like the entire Internet comes to a screeching halt. I'm waiting for the day that someone answers it, but I know I'll have to wait even longer for someone to even come close to sounding like they've even thought through whatever it is that they're saying.
 
2012-11-21 06:13:17 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.


Wow. I just had to reply to this to say what an asshole you are. And you certainly don't represent the average American guy, you blatant troll.

/you got me.
 
2012-11-21 06:16:18 AM  

I sound fat: And speaking of that, have you people ever WORKED for a mom and pop retailer? They normally pay worse than walmart, certainly dont have benefits, and cost society money on purchases.

lets not talk about advancement opportunities....

/but hey, lets protect mom and pop from big evil walmart that saves everyone money that they are able to spend -- get this -- IN THE COMMUNITY on other things.


I've worked in a couple of different fields for small business owners. I got paid well, I enjoyed my bosses, and I actually felt like my health and well being mattered. Show me a WalMart manager who invites employees to their house for Christmas, hell show me a WalMart that has a Christmas party where the employees not only get dinner and drink but presents form their bosses, and not only that, but presents that actually take the recipient into consideration. My bosses knew me, they cared about me and treated me(And other employees) like family.

Yeah, you get that with WalMart all right...
 
2012-11-21 06:24:15 AM  

madgonad: My niece works at Wal*Mart at the deli counter. She is 30 years old, unmarried, with a two year-old. Why yes, she is on food stamps and Medicaid - why do you ask?


Because your niece is a slut and irresponsibly got knocked up and the baby is probably biracial anyway so it's also a guaranteed leech on our American society as well.

/Spewing the older generation's attitude, sorry.
//I voted republican since '88 until '08.
///Got a girl knocked up in college, we stuck together, made it thanks to social programs like WIC, etc. at the time.
////Now considered to be "middle class small business owner"....still will never forget those frequent moments of "How can I pay for this can of infant formula?!?" And sympathize with those fo through
 
2012-11-21 06:32:33 AM  

p51d007: The rest of us, STUDIED, went to college (I paid my own way), and got a good
job, that allows us the freedom of having nights, holidays & weekends off!


I went to college and had to do a stint in retail after school. I had good grades, studied, and still was one of the drones.

Why? No one was hiring. Not even for entry level jobs. I've even had office work experience and did an internship.

Fun Fact: Not all of the drones are toothless high school drop outs. There are a lot of retail people that did go to college. There are also those who served in the military. They do the job to put food on the table and pay the bills. Many of them (where I worked) tried to not go on food stamps or on assistance. They didn't want to suck on the government teat.
 
2012-11-21 06:33:32 AM  

Mikey1969: Jgok: Nor was there a response regarding what happens when everyone has a "marketable skill" and nobody wants to clean toilets or collect garbage anymore.

Of all the stuff that gets brought up in these arguments, THIS is the most overlooked, yet the most important part, IMHO. The few times it DOES get brought up, it's like the entire Internet comes to a screeching halt. I'm waiting for the day that someone answers it, but I know I'll have to wait even longer for someone to even come close to sounding like they've even thought through whatever it is that they're saying.


Then the offered pay for people willing to do such a task goes up until people start filling these positions. Supply and Demand.

Check out the factory jobs out there. A lot of them pay VERY well. They are also incredibly BORING. That's why certain occupations get paid better than others. They HAVE to offer higher pay to attract people to do it.
 
2012-11-21 06:42:36 AM  

Wretschko: Mikey1969: Jgok: Nor was there a response regarding what happens when everyone has a "marketable skill" and nobody wants to clean toilets or collect garbage anymore.

Of all the stuff that gets brought up in these arguments, THIS is the most overlooked, yet the most important part, IMHO. The few times it DOES get brought up, it's like the entire Internet comes to a screeching halt. I'm waiting for the day that someone answers it, but I know I'll have to wait even longer for someone to even come close to sounding like they've even thought through whatever it is that they're saying.

Then the offered pay for people willing to do such a task goes up until people start filling these positions. Supply and Demand.

Check out the factory jobs out there. A lot of them pay VERY well. They are also incredibly BORING. That's why certain occupations get paid better than others. They HAVE to offer higher pay to attract people to do it.


Or the owners figure out they can have the goods manufactured overseas for pennies on the dollar and even factoring in shipping will still make a bigger profit. Do they give a damn that the people they've put out of work can't afford to feed themselves? Why should they? Their dividends went up a couple pennies per share.
 
2012-11-21 06:52:52 AM  

entitygm: One day I'll see if any of the fox/rush/boortz fanboys can explain in rational terms why it's OK for Fred Phelps to spew his hate speech on first amendment grounds, but when it's a union suddenly it's a perfectly legitimate tactic for the courts to restrict free speech & assembly rights. Til then all I hear is a constant stream of 'job creator' derp


Wish to know the difference? Fred Phelps probably got permission to do so wherever he is. The protesters, if on the Wal-mart parking lot, are violating Wal-Mart policy of No Soliciting. Y'know those Salvation Army guys/gals that stand in front? They get permission. The teabaggers? They got permission. OWS? They didn't get permission in a lot of areas (I recall some did, and overstayed). These protests? No permission. My guess is if that Wal-Mart grows a back bone, the protesters will at least be forcibly removed, and at worst arrested.
 
2012-11-21 07:10:32 AM  

p51d007: The rest of us, STUDIED, went to college (I paid my own way), and got a good
job, that allows us the freedom of having nights, holidays & weekends off!
So, suck it up, and take it in the butt....you have no one to complain to, but yourself!


Interesting implication that education automatically equates to a non-retail job, especially considering I received my IB diploma with high marks in all subjects, I received my 4 year college diploma (3.71 GPA) and completed a two-year certificate program in only one year (3.7 GPA), and had 5+ years of experience in my field (with excellent annual reviews). And yet, when the economy tanked, I was laid off and couldn't find any job for a year within the state in which I resided. In fact, I didn't receive a single call or email with an invitation to an interview for three months and I was sending out anywhere from 10-30 applications A DAY. I finally did find a job, but that required moving to another state. That job was a full-time retail position.

TL;DR - highly educated persons do work in hourly retail positions because, sometimes, it's the only work available. Their choices are 'menial' hourly jobs or starving/facing eviction/etc.
 
2012-11-21 07:16:40 AM  

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: I'm confused; nowhere in the article does it explain that these people were FORCED to take these jobs without knowing what the wage was. I men, that had to be case, right? Otherwise...


They want the job they feel entitled to instead of the job they agreed to. Pretty standard really.
 
2012-11-21 07:17:15 AM  

aevorea: p51d007: The rest of us, STUDIED, went to college (I paid my own way), and got a good
job, that allows us the freedom of having nights, holidays & weekends off!
So, suck it up, and take it in the butt....you have no one to complain to, but yourself!

Interesting implication that education automatically equates to a non-retail job, especially considering I received my IB diploma with high marks in all subjects, I received my 4 year college diploma (3.71 GPA) and completed a two-year certificate program in only one year (3.7 GPA), and had 5+ years of experience in my field (with excellent annual reviews). And yet, when the economy tanked, I was laid off and couldn't find any job for a year within the state in which I resided. In fact, I didn't receive a single call or email with an invitation to an interview for three months and I was sending out anywhere from 10-30 applications A DAY. I finally did find a job, but that required moving to another state. That job was a full-time retail position.

TL;DR - highly educated persons do work in hourly retail positions because, sometimes, it's the only work available. Their choices are 'menial' hourly jobs or starving/facing eviction/etc.


I failed to mention that those weekends and holidays that were earned? Those actually came about because of union members that fought for them decades ago. But hey, you hit that homerun from third base so you get a nice participation trophy.
 
2012-11-21 07:21:29 AM  

JosephFinn: AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.

Which I'm sure is a delight to the people at WalMart working poverty-level wages with no insurance coverage & forced and unpaid overtime. But hey, 5% of almost nothing!


More than they pay at Target. I think TFA keeps forgetting who it is yelling about. That is why it is the lowest common denominator. I don't shop at Wal-Mart (not bc I am a snob-Ann Arbor is a town of snobs lol) but I am pretty much meh at this point. Take it up with the gubment, who still thinks we live in 1960 and should somehow make less. Best of luck to them, though, and it would be great if they got a wage increase as it would hopefully compel others to do so as well.
 
2012-11-21 07:31:58 AM  
I also have a Bachelors degree in psychology, a Masters degree in social work, AND my social work professional license in NY state. Someone in my position should be working somewhere with a starting salary of 40k.

Jadedgrl: I also have a Bachelors degree in psychology, a Masters degree in social work, AND my social work professional license in NY state.


Since they skipped the economic development part of your studies and you seem to be under the impression that skill set is worth more than $10 an hour, I would like to offer you employment as a fluffer on my new film. You will learn a valuable lesson in self worth. Hell, if you are efficient i might even retain your services personally.
 
2012-11-21 07:33:29 AM  

sinschild: They want the job they feel entitled to instead of the job they agreed to. Pretty standard really.


Actually, you're rather misinformed if you believe this. I don't know of any who agreed to work 40 hours a week as a "part-time" employee with no benefits. I don't know of any who agreed to come in at their scheduled time and then sit for two hours outside in the parking lot in order that they not get overtime after being asked by management to stay late and help out a couple of times earlier in the week. I don't know of any of them that agreed to work "Security" on Thanksgiving Day, outside of their normally scheduled shift.

Pretty standard, really.
 
2012-11-21 07:35:12 AM  

kimmygibblershomework: Take it up with the gubment, who still thinks we live in 1960 and should somehow make less.


Well, when the corporations are the ones buying the gubment through their highly paid lobbyists, it just doesn't work that way.
 
2012-11-21 07:37:38 AM  

sinschild: Since they skipped the economic development part of your studies and you seem to be under the impression that skill set is worth more than $10 an hour, I would like to offer you employment as a fluffer on my new film.


Define "worth". I see several people using it in this thread, but I've yet to see anyone define it in the way that they think they are using it.
 
2012-11-21 07:38:01 AM  

ox45tallboy: sinschild: They want the job they feel entitled to instead of the job they agreed to. Pretty standard really.

Actually, you're rather misinformed if you believe this. I don't know of any who agreed to work 40 hours a week as a "part-time" employee with no benefits. I don't know of any who agreed to come in at their scheduled time and then sit for two hours outside in the parking lot in order that they not get overtime after being asked by management to stay late and help out a couple of times earlier in the week. I don't know of any of them that agreed to work "Security" on Thanksgiving Day, outside of their normally scheduled shift.

Pretty standard, really.


Since they had to know the store is open 24hrs a day and that there would need to be extra help on T'day/Blackfriday who do they think would be working those shifts?
 
2012-11-21 07:39:35 AM  
Jesus Christ with the Derp this morning.
 
2012-11-21 07:39:46 AM  
My thoughts:

If Walmart didn't want unions in thier stores all they had to do was treat their employees like human farking beings. That doesn't necessarily mean paying everyone $20 an hour (I've been on well-paying soul crushing jobs). It means not forcing people to work unpaid OT and middle management that has a farking clue how to treat its employees. Most of the workers (at least here in the South) would have been ok with the shiatty pay (with room for raises and advancement) if they where just treated fairly and civil.

Summoner101:

How about they get paid enough so they don't soak up welfare, SNAP, and Medicaid benefits?


Bears repeating. It seems logical to me. How they hell Walmart gets away with this and STILL get tax breaks is beyond me. No, they are not under any obligation to offer health care to thier employees. But if I where a city or county looking into letting Walmart open in my community with the hope that it will take some of the citizens off the dole, I'd think long and hard about forking over a tax break that only cost me more in the long run.

And let these poor dumb bastards break bread with their families on Thanksgiving! One farking day won't break Walmart! Is there no end to how much farking over the Waltons will do to turn a buck? Politics and religion aside, Chic-fil-A is closed one day a week and makes a metric ass ton of money. So you're telling me Walmart can't manage to close for one extra day a YEAR?
 
2012-11-21 07:39:55 AM  
I'm generally not a fan of unions. I think that most of them do only what's best for the union and not for the workers. But, I sincerely hope that this shuts Wal-Mart down hard. If the workers want to unionize and want to bargain for decent pay and decent conditions, that is their right. I haven't been in one of their wretched stores for years and this crap just reinforces my distaste for their business practices.
 
2012-11-21 07:44:31 AM  

Wretschko: Mikey1969: Jgok: Nor was there a response regarding what happens when everyone has a "marketable skill" and nobody wants to clean toilets or collect garbage anymore.

Of all the stuff that gets brought up in these arguments, THIS is the most overlooked, yet the most important part, IMHO. The few times it DOES get brought up, it's like the entire Internet comes to a screeching halt. I'm waiting for the day that someone answers it, but I know I'll have to wait even longer for someone to even come close to sounding like they've even thought through whatever it is that they're saying.

Then the offered pay for people willing to do such a task goes up until people start filling these positions. Supply and Demand.

Check out the factory jobs out there. A lot of them pay VERY well. They are also incredibly BORING. That's why certain occupations get paid better than others. They HAVE to offer higher pay to attract people to do it.


This was actually one of the original factors for why Ford paid such a good wage. Henry Frod found that work on an assembly line was so boring that people would just up and walk off the line. He found that in the long run it was cheaper to pay the higher wage to avoid both stopping the line and having to train more people who would just end up walking away. But what did Henry Ford know about business, right?
 
2012-11-21 07:46:18 AM  

CujoQuarrel: Since they had to know the store is open 24hrs a day and that there would need to be extra help on T'day/Blackfriday who do they think would be working those shifts?


Well, my sister figured she'd be working. She just didn't figure she would be tagged for "security", told that she was supposed to "keep people from cutting in line and fighting and stuff" but given no training or even policy statements as to how she should go about doing this. She also did not expect to be scheduled for 45 hours, as management is rather insistent that she is a "part-time" employee and thus not eligible for benefits although she has been scheduled less than 40 hours only twice in the past ten months. She also figured she might get some overtime or holiday pay, but as it turns out, management is supposed to send people home early on other shifts in order to prevent overtime, and get everyone else to "pitch in" and cover the labor shortage on those shifts.

Don't try to excuse Wal-Mart's labor policies. You're entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.
 
2012-11-21 07:47:27 AM  
Only physical store I will shop at is Walmart now.
Rest will be online.

Fakr you, peons. Don't like working at Walmart? Get a better job, morons.
 
2012-11-21 07:49:14 AM  

teeny: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: KarmicDisaster: Are we taking Black Friday bets?
Put me down for
6 tramplings
2 deaths
3 stabbins
10 punchins

I'm in with at least one person losing an eye.

I'll add a 3 pepper sprayers.


Good thinking. Totally spaced those out. Spray and then grab the stuff and get in line.
 
2012-11-21 07:51:17 AM  

ox45tallboy: CujoQuarrel: Since they had to know the store is open 24hrs a day and that there would need to be extra help on T'day/Blackfriday who do they think would be working those shifts?

Well, my sister figured she'd be working. She just didn't figure she would be tagged for "security", told that she was supposed to "keep people from cutting in line and fighting and stuff" but given no training or even policy statements as to how she should go about doing this. She also did not expect to be scheduled for 45 hours, as management is rather insistent that she is a "part-time" employee and thus not eligible for benefits although she has been scheduled less than 40 hours only twice in the past ten months. She also figured she might get some overtime or holiday pay, but as it turns out, management is supposed to send people home early on other shifts in order to prevent overtime, and get everyone else to "pitch in" and cover the labor shortage on those shifts.

Don't try to excuse Wal-Mart's labor policies. You're entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.


Which 'Facts' am I making up

But does she at least get a Taser? Now that would be fun.

"I'm sorry ma'am but you cut line. Zaaappppp!!!!!!
 
2012-11-21 07:56:09 AM  
cdn.thesandtrap.com

28.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-11-21 08:00:14 AM  

CujoQuarrel: ox45tallboy: CujoQuarrel: Since they had to know the store is open 24hrs a day and that there would need to be extra help on T'day/Blackfriday who do they think would be working those shifts?

Well, my sister figured she'd be working. She just didn't figure she would be tagged for "security", told that she was supposed to "keep people from cutting in line and fighting and stuff" but given no training or even policy statements as to how she should go about doing this. She also did not expect to be scheduled for 45 hours, as management is rather insistent that she is a "part-time" employee and thus not eligible for benefits although she has been scheduled less than 40 hours only twice in the past ten months. She also figured she might get some overtime or holiday pay, but as it turns out, management is supposed to send people home early on other shifts in order to prevent overtime, and get everyone else to "pitch in" and cover the labor shortage on those shifts.

Don't try to excuse Wal-Mart's labor policies. You're entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

Which 'Facts' am I making up

But does she at least get a Taser? Now that would be fun.

"I'm sorry ma'am but you cut line. Zaaappppp!!!!!!


Wal-Mart considers the employees expendable here. If the employee does anything at all, even touches a customer as the customer is punching them, they will be fired. They probably give them no training on purpose so that they can take no liability. One heck of a sucky job, and I'm tired of subsidizing the WalMart employees with my tax dollars to the tune of 2 billion per year.
 
2012-11-21 08:04:46 AM  

CONSUME

 
2012-11-21 08:12:40 AM  

KarmicDisaster: Wal-Mart considers the employees expendable here. If the employee does anything at all, even touches a customer as the customer is punching them, they will be fired. They probably give them no training on purpose so that they can take no liability. One heck of a sucky job, and I'm tired of subsidizing the WalMart employees with my tax dollars to the tune of 2 billion per year.


Thank you. Much better put than what I was about to say.
 
2012-11-21 08:22:17 AM  

Summoner101: Too Pretty For Prison: AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.

but, but, but that's not FAIR! Sure, I have no skills and can only stack boxes on a shelf - but I'm ENTITLED to have a 65" TV, a new car, a large house, every available cable channel, and a cell phone for my 6 year old. I DEMAND you pay me more!!!

How about they get paid enough so they don't soak up welfare, SNAP, and Medicaid benefits?


Yeah right, like any of you libtards give a shiat about the cost of welfare programs.
 
2012-11-21 08:26:47 AM  

Gentoolive: Yeah right, like any of you libtards give a shiat about the cost of welfare programs.


They take money away from all the government-funded abortions.
 
2012-11-21 08:33:24 AM  

ox45tallboy: sinschild: Since they skipped the economic development part of your studies and you seem to be under the impression that skill set is worth more than $10 an hour, I would like to offer you employment as a fluffer on my new film.

Define "worth". I see several people using it in this thread, but I've yet to see anyone define it in the way that they think they are using it.


If you can make a man hungry, you can make him worth whatever you want to. Adam Smith would cry if he saw what we've done to Capitalism.
 
2012-11-21 08:37:02 AM  

rumpelstiltskin: ox45tallboy: sinschild: Since they skipped the economic development part of your studies and you seem to be under the impression that skill set is worth more than $10 an hour, I would like to offer you employment as a fluffer on my new film.

Define "worth". I see several people using it in this thread, but I've yet to see anyone define it in the way that they think they are using it.

If you can make a man hungry, you can make him worth whatever you want to. Adam Smith would cry if he saw what we've done to Capitalism.


I would love to know how many Free Marketeers have read Adam Smith's The Theory of Moral Sentiments
 
2012-11-21 08:43:36 AM  

JosephFinn: Trafficguy2000:

Dont worry obamacare will save them!

The insurance exchanges, to be sure, are a good start.



Yes, they'll get a subsidy from the government when they buy their own insurance. Walmart will help them out by cutting everyone to 28 hours a week so that they aren't required to provide them insurance themselves. Which do you think people making $8 an hour need more, health insurance or those 12 hours a week of lost wages (30% of their income)?

In the healthcare plan's defense, apparently a lot of them already don't get 40 hours.
 
2012-11-21 08:45:27 AM  

Vector R: Ned Resnikoff at MSNBC flagged a leaked internal document (first obtained by HuffPo) that revealed that base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour (or $16,000 per year), with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

Long ago and far away, I was one of those flogged and underpaid drones (employee unit #XJ43061, if you must know). I started out at $8 an hour FT, and that made for a marginally acceptable living with someone else around to share expenses with. A few months in, while chatting with a sweetheart in softlines whose only fault was a massive overbite and a harsh hand dealt from time and poverty. It turned out she'd been there a number of years, and her pay wasn't even equal to mine.

As someone who has BT;DT - yes, the working conditions ARE that bad. It's better than nothing, but it's so degrading and soul-crushing, and is the sort of job that just keeps you awake at night long after you've thrown that farking vest somewhere out of sight. /CSB

/Walmart was so bad I started smoking
//Good luck, striking workers!
///Fark Black Friday


Amen. I worked at Wal-Mart for a single season, 1997. Conditions are really bad, Management varies from incompetent to moronic. Ever seen a moronic manager lead a "YAY WAL MART!" chant at the start of the day? There's a movie about a Day in the Life of North Korea where the workers do the exact same thing. No shiat, it's so comically Authoritarian Communist it's hilarious.

The worst part is the unreliable hours. The pay blows but the inability to ensure a certain amount of hours a week is criminal. Need 35? You'll get between 10-15. Only need 10-15? You'll routinely be given 45 without benefits, of course. Managers are only part of the problem, the biggest problem is some moron in Corporate HR or, god forbid, an executive who has a bright idea and forces you to implement it.

At my store they monitored you. I was folding clothes in men's one day and chatting with a co-worker doing the same and they paged me over the PA system. They paged me to tell me that I wasn't doing any work and to stop talking. I quit the next day, which happened to be Black Friday. fark Wal-Mart and you know what? fark all retail.
 
2012-11-21 08:50:06 AM  

CujoQuarrel: Which 'Facts' am I making up


I apologize. I should have noticed that sinschild was the one who posted the incorrect information. You replied to my reply to him, and I just didn't check who I was replying to.
 
2012-11-21 08:50:43 AM  
Minimum wage is just fine where it is. In fact, Wal-Mart pays a decent wage. The only problem is that the fast-food joints and Wal-Marts of the world should be staffed by high schoolers and chronic fark-ups. There should be plenty of higher wage, higher skill jobs out there. There ain't. If there are 100 jobs available, and only 10 of them are decent paying jobs, then you can't say that the other 90 people just "work harder and get a better job". How do you force employers to pay a living wage for semi-skilled labor, and pay a good wage for skilled labor? Hell if I know. 5% unemployment would be a start, but it wouldn't solve the problem by itself.
 
2012-11-21 08:52:52 AM  

Bisu: In the healthcare plan's defense, apparently a lot of them already don't get 40 hours.


My sister (and many others at the Wal-Mart she works at) suffer from the opposite problem. Her position is considered "part-time" so that they do not have to give her full-time benefits such as 401K contributions and health insurance, but she has been scheduled for less than 40 hours only twice in the past ten months. She has brought this up, but the replies she gets from management are basically, "You are in a part-time position."
 
2012-11-21 09:00:10 AM  

ox45tallboy: Bisu: In the healthcare plan's defense, apparently a lot of them already don't get 40 hours.

My sister (and many others at the Wal-Mart she works at) suffer from the opposite problem. Her position is considered "part-time" so that they do not have to give her full-time benefits such as 401K contributions and health insurance, but she has been scheduled for less than 40 hours only twice in the past ten months. She has brought this up, but the replies she gets from management are basically, "You are in a part-time position."


This is the type of bullshiat that should be addressed by a union. If the employer isn't playing fair, a single employee is typically unable to draw any concessions, much less prevail over the employer without taking them to court, a nasty and expensive undertaking.

The other stuff about wages is much less persuasive, but this kind of employment law skirting is very convincing. And in the course of fighting for proper scheduling, other thorns like wages can also be addressed.
 
2012-11-21 09:01:28 AM  

TopoGigo: Minimum wage is just fine where it is. In fact, Wal-Mart pays a decent wage. The only problem is that the fast-food joints and Wal-Marts of the world should be staffed by high schoolers and chronic fark-ups. There should be plenty of higher wage, higher skill jobs out there. There ain't. If there are 100 jobs available, and only 10 of them are decent paying jobs, then you can't say that the other 90 people just "work harder and get a better job". How do you force employers to pay a living wage for semi-skilled labor, and pay a good wage for skilled labor? Hell if I know. 5% unemployment would be a start, but it wouldn't solve the problem by itself.


Why do people consider working at Wal-Mart to be "unskilled" labor? Can anyone who hasn't worked at Wal-Mart understand how to use a Telzon for inventory management? Can anyone who hasn't worked stock before understand how to efficiently load a pallet from the stockroom so that the items it contains are all grouped close to one another on the sales floor, but the heavier items are on the bottom? Can anyone who hasn't worked at Wal-Mart walk in and do a Wal-Mart "Associate"'s job with little to no training?

These jobs do take some skills. The employees do put in a hard day's work. A living wage without relying on the government for food stamps and health care to make up for the shortcomings is NOT a lot to ask for.
 
2012-11-21 09:04:22 AM  
I don't see how someone who is free market could be against unions. Unions are the ultimate expression of market theory applied to labor.
 
2012-11-21 09:08:38 AM  

ox45tallboy: These jobs do take some skills. The employees do put in a hard day's work. A living wage without relying on the government for food stamps and health care to make up for the shortcomings is NOT a lot to ask for.


I didn't mean "unskilled" as an insult. I guess what I should say is that the job requires little to no prior skill. Digging a ditch is a skill. Flipping a burger is a skill.

$8 is a living wage in many parts of the country for a single person with a roommate. Minimum wage jobs are for those people. By the time you have a family, you should have worked your way up to a $12 or $14 job. The only problem is those jobs don't exist.

Besides, even if it's a more demanding job than I think, if there were decent jobs out there, nobody would do tht job for $8. Problem solved.
 
2012-11-21 09:11:54 AM  

CPennypacker: I don't see how someone who is free market could be against unions. Unions are the ultimate expression of market theory applied to labor.


It's the whole "applied to labor" part
 
2012-11-21 09:12:16 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: The other stuff about wages is much less persuasive, but this kind of employment law skirting is very convincing.


Well, that's the rub. There is no "law" that says they must offer health insurance to employees, and there is no ""law" that says what a full-time or part-time employee is.
 
2012-11-21 09:16:18 AM  

TopoGigo: Besides, even if it's a more demanding job than I think, if there were decent jobs out there, nobody would do tht job for $8. Problem solved.


If the only other option was "watch your family starve", then most people would work at Foxconn for 15-16 hours a day, 6 or 7 days a week for $400/month and no benefits.

Like you said, the higher-wage jobs just don't exist, and Wal-Mart is systematically running other retailers out of business, thereby further limiting the options. There is less and less competition for employees, so there is no incentive to raise wages. Who are they competing against for the best stockers and cashiers?
 
2012-11-21 09:21:29 AM  

ox45tallboy: TopoGigo: Besides, even if it's a more demanding job than I think, if there were decent jobs out there, nobody would do tht job for $8. Problem solved.

If the only other option was "watch your family starve", then most people would work at Foxconn for 15-16 hours a day, 6 or 7 days a week for $400/month and no benefits.

Like you said, the higher-wage jobs just don't exist, and Wal-Mart is systematically running other retailers out of business, thereby further limiting the options. There is less and less competition for employees, so there is no incentive to raise wages. Who are they competing against for the best stockers and cashiers?


Don't get me wrong. I agree with you that Wal-Mart is wage slavery. I just disagree about why. I don't think Wal-Mart employees are underpaid; I think that there is a dearth of better-paying jobs. That's the problem that needs solving. Again, I don't know how to do that, other than lowering unemployment to increase competition for labor.
 
2012-11-21 09:24:15 AM  
i don't see walmart workers busting their busts while working. i see them on the floor hanging 1 piece and then looking around for a few seconds and then putting up another piece. are cashiers not allowed to grab 2 items at a time if they are small? some of the cashiers work in slow motion. i was shopping with my dad. we had our own orders but some duplicated items. that freaking clerk didn't bother to remember where the bar codes were on items. the clerk just scanned a 6 pack of beer for me after looking for the bar code and my dad has the same item and she looking for the bar code again? low lazy or stupid are they? those seconds she spends dicking around looking for the bar code adds up. after the clerks scans any semi popular item a couple times they should know where the bar code is.

bootstrappy time. i've gone into supermarkets and seen stockers sitting on milk crates while working. in my day we came to work wearing knee pads and back supports. i was in the ucfw union and made $17 an hour in the early 90's stocking supermarket shelves on the graveyard shift. i worked my butt off. if i stocked shelves with 1 hand i'd be out the door. the money was good but i burned out after 2 1/2 years and got nasty to the guy who was both my boss in the store and the union rep. catch-22. he's pissed so i'm fired so i have to complain to him about it. i lose.
 
2012-11-21 09:42:06 AM  

TopoGigo: Don't get me wrong. I agree with you that Wal-Mart is wage slavery. I just disagree about why. I don't think Wal-Mart employees are underpaid; I think that there is a dearth of better-paying jobs. That's the problem that needs solving. Again, I don't know how to do that, other than lowering unemployment to increase competition for labor.


I said this upthread, but I think it needs to be repeated. Like it or not, these jobs require a human being to perform. They simply cannot be automated with today's technology. If a human being is needed, then that human deserves a living wage for their contribution to the business. A ub-par living wage, no matter how "little" one might feel a person contributes, is just inexcusable. Build a robot or train a monkey, just don't expect a human to give up 9-11+ hrs per day (including breaks and commute and "getting ready") for something they cannot survive on.

If everyone "bettered" themselves through education or "bootstraps" or what have you, then who would clean the toilets or empty the trash or stock the shelves? It is silly to think of some jobs as being so "unimportant" although they are in their own way every bit as vital to society as those "better" jobs.

Which would we notice first: Half of the lawyers dropping dead or half of the garbage collectors? Half of the hedge fund managers or half of the janitors? Half of the executives at Wal-Mart taking sick or half of the cashiers?
 
2012-11-21 09:43:28 AM  
Let's be honest, WalMart got themselves in this pickle by being so systematically terrible to their employees. Plenty of other retail establishments will be open on Thanksgiving and on the day after, and on other holidays and times when workers would rather not be working but home with their families - but they are willing to accept it because they need the job and aren't 100% sick of the employer. WalMart has managed to so completely piss off their employees with their abuses (locking them inside at closing to force them to do unpaid work closing the store after hours is a favorite trick) that even low-skill low-paid workers are sick enough of them to make a point like this and probably lose their jobs.
 
2012-11-21 09:48:06 AM  

ox45tallboy: If everyone "bettered" themselves through education or "bootstraps" or what have you, then who would clean the toilets or empty the trash or stock the shelves?


High school kids, alcoholics, part-timers, and chronic fark-ups. You know, the type of people we all imagine are working min-wage jobs anyway. $8 is a living wage for these types of people. If there were plenty of $12 and $14 jobs out in the world, we wouldn't be biatching about Wal-Mart employees getting paid too little, because people with families who were willing to work full time would choose better jobs.
Again, those jobs don't exist anymore, and that's the problem.
 
2012-11-21 09:52:33 AM  

TopoGigo: High school kids, alcoholics, part-timers, and chronic fark-ups. You know, the type of people we all imagine are working min-wage jobs anyway. $8 is a living wage for these types of people.


Do you really believe that the number of the people you have just described is equal to or more than the number of $8/hr. jobs in this country? Do you really believe that employers could handle the turnover expense if they only hired these kinds of people, rather than those who would likely stay with the company more than a few months?
 
2012-11-21 09:53:12 AM  
MaoMart: We exploit cheap communist chinese labor so you don't have to!
 
2012-11-21 09:57:00 AM  

Linux_Yes: MaoMart: We exploit cheap communist chinese labor so you don't have to!


I think the problem right now is the way they are exploiting cheap American labor.
 
2012-11-21 10:00:11 AM  

Porous Horace: Go greedy management! Squeeze those workers! They thought they could just fark around in high school and get away with it? Hah.



you are next, Mr. Harvard. ((
 
2012-11-21 10:02:31 AM  

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: MFAWG: Have you looked for a job lately?

I was told the job situation was fixed. Thanks Obama!



no one, God himself, could fix 30 years of bad decisions in 4 years. nice try, though. some of the roots of the problems we have today go back to the 80's Reagan era. back when you were daddy's little squirt.
 
2012-11-21 10:04:07 AM  

Richard Johnson: I do my best to stay the hell out of WallyWorld as I can. I don't think that I have been inside one in 3 years.



i thought it was MaoMart? (:
 
2012-11-21 10:04:36 AM  

TopoGigo:
Don't get me wrong. I agree with you that Wal-Mart is wage slavery. I just disagree about why. I don't think Wal-Mart employees are underpaid; I think that there is a dearth of better-paying jobs. That's the problem that needs solving. Again, I don't know how to do that, other than lowering unemployment to increase competition for labor.


I'll argue that they're underpaid. Even if we let prices remain the same, even if we assume the 1% price increase it would take to allow WM to pay it's full time scrubs 25K a year would ruin everything, WM makes about 16B a year. So who's generating those earnings? What's a stockboy's contribution to that? (Actually, we should be talking about gross earnings if we want to ask what the stockboy contributes, rather than netting out GSA. But I'll do it this way, just to make clear that, even if the CEO is worth a zillion dollars, there's still plenty of money that's being generated.)
We don't worry about that too much. Instead, we say the stockboy is "worth" what we can hire him for. He's not worth what he contributes; he's worth what I can get him to work for, which isn't much. The reason it's not much is because he's poor, and he doesn't have any leverage to bargain for based on what he contributes.
We're funny. The only time we talk about what workers contribute is when we talk about productivity increases. And what's funny about that is, as workers become more productive, we don't say the worker is worth more. We say the guy who developed the technology or the process that makes the worker more productive is worth more. Often, we even claim the worker is worth less.
Saying someone is "worth" what he can get someone else to pay him for his time is sociopathic. What someone is worth is, he's worth feeding. He's worth allowing to see a doctor. He's worth allowing to have a family. Walmart doesn't pay people based on either their contribution to the company or what their worth.
 
2012-11-21 10:05:17 AM  

madgonad: My niece works at Wal*Mart at the deli counter. She is 30 years old, unmarried, with a two year-old. Why yes, she is on food stamps and Medicaid - why do you ask?



its cause MaoMart loves her.
 
2012-11-21 10:06:21 AM  

ox45tallboy: TopoGigo: High school kids, alcoholics, part-timers, and chronic fark-ups. You know, the type of people we all imagine are working min-wage jobs anyway. $8 is a living wage for these types of people.

Do you really believe that the number of the people you have just described is equal to or more than the number of $8/hr. jobs in this country?

No, hell no I don't. That is a huge problem. That's exactly what I've been saying. Too many jobs pay $8, $9, and $9.50 with too few paying a living wage. Semi-skilled and skilled workers who can show up to work on a regular basis should be making in the $14 range. Cooks, secretaries, journeyman tradesmen, and a whole host of jobs that I can't think of right now. Probably cashiers at Wal-Mart should be making $10 or $11. Your average stockboy or McDonald's worker? $8 is fine for them. And if it isn't, the supply/demand would increase those wages accordingly. All it takes is low unemployment, a willingness on the part of the consumer to pay a little more for good service and American-made products (or at least products made in foreign countries where the workers were paid living wages), and at least one other thing that I don't know.

Do you really believe that employers could handle the turnover expense if they only hired these kinds of people, rather than those who would likely stay with the company more than a few months?

Maybe. Supply and demand would determine that, if there weren't so much more supply of labor than demand for it.
 
2012-11-21 10:06:48 AM  

EmmaLou: As a taxpayer, i don't feel like i should foot the bill for Walmart employees that have to be on welfare just to get by even though they work. Pay your people a living wage for fark's sake.



they're American. they have the Freedom to exploit their employees and the Government. aint' Freedom great!
 
2012-11-21 10:07:09 AM  

rumpelstiltskin: Walmart doesn't pay people based on either their contribution to the company or what their worth.


Well put.
 
2012-11-21 10:10:39 AM  

Lsherm: drewsclues: Best advice: Don't shop on Thanksgiving.

Amen to this. Actually, don't shop on Black Friday, either.


Black Friday is the best time for Anthropoligists to study the American in their natural habitat.

much useful data can be obtained in a relatively short period of time.
 
2012-11-21 10:12:54 AM  

ox45tallboy: Linux_Yes: MaoMart: We exploit cheap communist chinese labor so you don't have to!

I think the problem right now is the way they are exploiting cheap American labor.



well, it is a win win if you can exploit both sides of the market. they call it Freedom.
 
2012-11-21 10:13:12 AM  
rumpelstiltskin:

Careful. There are already plenty of people saying min-wagers live too fat. If you want to pay people what it costs them to live, you'll have CEO's deciding how they should live. Sounds a little like slavery, in a way.

In general, I agree with what you're saying. I just think that there is a place in the economy for high school kids, lazy farks who just need enough money for beer and Halo, alkies who can barely show up to work, etc. They are generally not worth $14. As long as there actually is a road to improvement, then let them improve themselves. Where we are today, though, there is no road to improvement; there's a huge bridge out between $8ville and living-wagetown.
 
2012-11-21 10:15:11 AM  

TopoGigo: Where we are today, though, there is no road to improvement; there's a huge bridge out between $8ville and living-wagetown.


And let's not even broach the subject of the distance from there to "middle class".
 
2012-11-21 10:15:43 AM  
Once again I will point out that the REAL revolution will occur when Walmart employees can no longer afford to shop at WalMart
 
2012-11-21 10:16:04 AM  

CPennypacker: I don't see how someone who is free market could be against unions. Unions are the ultimate expression of market theory applied to labor.



i know how. they're programmed by Talk Radio and FUX News (owned by our crony capitalist corporate friends) to believe that companies/owners should be able to do as they please and workers should tow the line and don't have any rights to organize.

only business owners have the right to organize and petition our government for laws that benefit them at the worker's expense.

they call it Freedom/Liberty.
 
2012-11-21 10:24:09 AM  

Linux_Yes: they call it Freedom/Liberty.


I can drop a deuce on a loaf of pumpernickel and call it "haute cuisine", but that don't mean it ain't a sh*t sandwich.
 
2012-11-21 10:38:16 AM  

Too Pretty For Prison: AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.

but, but, but that's not FAIR! Sure, I have no skills and can only stack boxes on a shelf - but I'm ENTITLED to have a 65" TV, a new car, a large house, every available cable channel, and a cell phone for my 6 year old. get off food stamps, afford private insurance instead of Medicaid, and move out of public housing. I DEMAND you pay me more!!!


FTFY, douchebag. Why do you want your tax money to subsidize some mouthbreather instead of making 5 of the 10 richest Americans forgo that second sports franchise? Especially if it's only going to cost you an extra 15 cents for that bag of Cheetos and gallon jug of hand lotion.
 
2012-11-21 10:43:02 AM  

phyrkrakr: Too Pretty For Prison: AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.

but, but, but that's not FAIR! Sure, I have no skills and can only stack boxes on a shelf - but I'm ENTITLED to have a 65" TV, a new car, a large house, every available cable channel, and a cell phone for my 6 year old. get off food stamps, afford private insurance instead of Medicaid, and move out of public housing. I DEMAND you pay me more!!!

FTFY, douchebag. Why do you want your tax money to subsidize some mouthbreather instead of making 5 of the 10 richest Americans forgo that second sports franchise? Especially if it's only going to cost you an extra 15 cents for that bag of Cheetos and gallon jug of hand lotion.


You know the reason for that. If they couldn't biatch about the welfare queens that are buying three Cadillacs a day so they can sell crack on their off hours from birthing babies and part time at the WalMart, then who would they feel superior too?

/Also, living in mom's basement like that means the hand lotion budget is pretty high
 
2012-11-21 10:51:12 AM  

Linux_Yes: Black Friday is the best time for Anthropoligists to study the American in their natural habitat.


*Shoves Linux_Yes to the ground*

*Grabs the last $99 Panasornic 72" TV*
 
2012-11-21 10:51:12 AM  

EmmaLou: As a taxpayer, i don't feel like i should foot the bill for Walmart employees that have to be on welfare just to get by even though they work. Pay your people a living wage for fark's sake.


Okay, let's end welfare. Problem solved.

Here's a solution to those who think walmarts wages are too low: don't shop at Walmart. They are able to offer dirt cheap prices because they have a very low cost structure. A primary component of that is the low wages they pay.

The workers still have a right to strike if they want. They also have the right to quit if they think Walmart is not compensating them adequately for their efforts.
 
2012-11-21 10:54:35 AM  

TomD9938: Nutsac_Jim: Why doesn't the union just open up its own wal-mart competitor

It's up to some other party to build the business.

I feel for these people though and support their effort to make things better for themselves. Hopefully it doesnt blow up in their face.

I dont feel for the kids who are just learning how to show up at a job on time and make enough for their phone and the occassional dime bag, but the older ones who arent employable elsewhere.

I dont know what to tell them other than you got a shiatty hand at birth and possibly made things worse along the way through some of your own actions and now this is your lot in life.

I'd try to pool resources with a friend/friends to rent a home together on a bus-line, have the tubes tied and put a TV antenna on the roof. 

In the mean-time, take all the hours you can stand and make the best of those 20 cent raises.

Good luck.


Exactly this.
 
2012-11-21 11:01:37 AM  

Sergeant Grumbles: The government has the right to tax money as it pleases because it's the entire reason the money exists as a vehicle for trade.


patently false

hubiestubert: You might want to take a gander at what those well known Commie Founders of this nation thought of the estate tax, as well as that pesky Ebbil Socialist Adam Smith:


Jefferson voted to repeal the first Estate tax legislation. The pursuit of property (wealth) is a fundamental tenant to the American foundation. And no, the government can't just take it from you because you'd died.
 
2012-11-21 11:08:26 AM  

Debeo Summa Credo: EmmaLou: As a taxpayer, i don't feel like i should foot the bill for Walmart employees that have to be on welfare just to get by even though they work. Pay your people a living wage for fark's sake.

Okay, let's end welfare. Problem solved.

Here's a solution to those who think walmarts wages are too low: don't shop at Walmart. They are able to offer dirt cheap prices because they have a very low cost structure. A primary component of that is the low wages they pay.

The workers still have a right to strike if they want. They also have the right to quit if they think Walmart is not compensating them adequately for their efforts.


I agree. Don't shop at wal-mart. That place has got to be one of the circles of hell. I bet crackers and toya and tire cleaner are dirt cheap in hell too.
 
2012-11-21 11:22:09 AM  

Debeo Summa Credo: EmmaLou: As a taxpayer, i don't feel like i should foot the bill for Walmart employees that have to be on welfare just to get by even though they work. Pay your people a living wage for fark's sake.

Okay, let's end welfare. Problem solved.

Here's a solution to those who think walmarts wages are too low: don't shop at Walmart. They are able to offer dirt cheap prices because they have a very low cost structure. A primary component of that is the low wages they pay.

The workers still have a right to strike if they want. They also have the right to quit if they think Walmart is not compensating them adequately for their efforts.


I choose not to go there because I don't want to travel for an hour and deal with miserable traffic (to turn now into impossible traffic), land whales and their offspring blocking the aisles, waiting forever in line and a generally depressing experience. End result is the same.
 
2012-11-21 11:23:42 AM  

rikkitikkitavi: Sergeant Grumbles: The government has the right to tax money as it pleases because it's the entire reason the money exists as a vehicle for trade.

patently false

hubiestubert: You might want to take a gander at what those well known Commie Founders of this nation thought of the estate tax, as well as that pesky Ebbil Socialist Adam Smith:

Jefferson voted to repeal the first Estate tax legislation. The pursuit of property (wealth) is a fundamental tenant to the American foundation. And no, the government can't just take it from you because you'd died.


From The Economist, circa 2010:

With Thomas Jefferson taking the lead in the Virginia legislature in 1777, every Revolutionary state government abolished the laws of primogeniture and entail that had served to perpetuate the concentration of inherited property. Jefferson cited Adam Smith, the hero of free market capitalists everywhere, as the source of his conviction that (as Smith wrote, and Jefferson closely echoed in his own words), "A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fullness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural." Smith said: "There is no point more difficult to account for than the right we conceive men to have to dispose of their goods after death."

The states left no doubt that in taking this step they were giving expression to a basic and widely shared philosophical belief that equality of citizenship was impossible in a nation where inequality of wealth remained the rule. North Carolina's 1784 statute explained that by keeping large estates together for succeeding generations, the old system had served "only to raise the wealth and importance of particular families and individuals, giving them an unequal and undue influence in a republic" and promoting "contention and injustice." Abolishing aristocratic forms of inheritance would by contrast "tend to promote that equality of property which is of the spirit and principle of a genuine republic."

Others wanted to go much further; Thomas Paine, like Smith and Jefferson, made much of the idea that landed property itself was an affront to the natural right of each generation to the usufruct of the earth, and proposed a "ground rent" - in fact an inheritance tax - on property at the time it is conveyed at death, with the money so collected to be distributed to all citizens at age 21, "as a compensation in part, for the loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property."

Even stalwart members of the latter-day Republican Party, the representatives of business and inherited wealth, often emphatically embraced these tenets of economic equality in a democracy. I've mentioned Herbert Hoover's disdain for the "idle rich" and his strong support for breaking up large fortunes. Theodore Roosevelt, who was the first president to propose a steeply graduated tax on inheritances, was another: he declared that the transmission of large wealth to young men "does not do them any real service and is of great and genuine detriment to the community at large.''

In her debate in Delaware yesterday, the Republican Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell asserted that the estate tax is a "tenet of Marxism." I'm not sure how much Marx she has read, but she might want to read the works of his fellow travelers Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Herbert Hoover, and Theodore Roosevelt before her next debate.


You might want to rethink Jefferson on this: Because his opposition to an estate tax was because he wanted something a sight more radical...

In a letter to James Madison, Thomas Jefferson suggested that all property be redistributed every fifty years, because "the earth belongs in usufruct to the living."
 
2012-11-21 11:32:12 AM  

hubiestubert: You might want to rethink Jefferson on this:


Right, and you're going to distribute that collected wealth and land to 21 year old citizens. I don't think so. It was a bad idea then, it's a bad idea today.
 
2012-11-21 11:40:39 AM  

hubiestubert: In a letter to James Madison, Thomas Jefferson suggested that all property be redistributed every fifty years, because "the earth belongs in usufruct to the living."



And it appears that by 1823, Jefferson had changed his tune somewhat, "The laws of civil society, indeed, for the encouragement of industry, give the property of the parent to his family on his death, and in most civilized countries permit him even to give it, by testament, to whom he pleases."

As well, "The General Government is incompetent to legislate on the subject of inheritances."
 
2012-11-21 11:43:13 AM  
i9.photobucket.com
 
kab
2012-11-21 11:48:58 AM  
ITT: folks clinging desperately to trickle down economics, despite it simply not working in practice.
 
kab
2012-11-21 11:51:19 AM  

Linux_Yes: Black Friday is the best time for Anthropoligists to study the American in their natural habitat.


And the best time to troll the shiat out of shoppers, for the lulz.
 
2012-11-21 11:55:46 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: JosephFinn: AverageAmericanGuy: base pay at Walmart's Sam's Place stores can be as low as $8 an hour, with wage increases in increments as low as 20 or 40 cents per hour.

To put it another way, the raises are between 2.5% and 5%, in line with most other industries.

Which I'm sure is a delight to the people at WalMart working poverty-level wages with no insurance coverage & forced and unpaid overtime. But hey, 5% of almost nothing!

Beggars can't be choosers.


People willing to work shouldn't have to be beggars and definitely shouldn't have the likes of you calling them that. Because WalMart pays poverty level wages, its workforce must get foodstamps and other safety net programs just to get by. Which we all then pay for. In other words, Walmart is shifting its moral obligations onto all of us taxpayers as our burden. AND they and their partners in crime have shifted the conversation so much that they can pretend it's not even their moral obligation to start with.
 
2012-11-21 11:59:18 AM  

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: Not the point at all.


Uh, it was exactly the point. Way to dodge the issue entirely, but hey, at least you get to feel like you're better than somebody in the world.
 
2012-11-21 12:02:00 PM  
So I guess it'll be too much to ask that this strike be the one that forces WalMart to close its doors.

/go Team Strikers!
 
2012-11-21 12:08:03 PM  

rikkitikkitavi: patently false


So I'll flag you in piss yellow with the moniker "Taxes are Theft."
Agree? Disagree? I really don't have the time to word-wrangle with folks who don't understand the social contract and refuse to pay for the privilege of civilization.
 
2012-11-21 12:09:04 PM  

GreenSun: It's like taking the business hostage just because all of a sudden, you don't like what you signed up for.


3.5/10
 
2012-11-21 12:09:13 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: clowncar on fire: You divide your day into three 8 hour blocks- that may include weekends. you get a job during block a (dayshift) making it clear you will only be available during block a. Now get a second job, making it clear that you will only be available during blocks b or c. Never will there be a conflict in your schedule.

And, if you'd read the rest of the comment, there's not always a guarantee that the your employer gives a flying fark about your schedule. Tell him all you like that you're no available during block a, but if that means you get scheduled for even fewer hours during block b, it really doesn't do you much good.


It's cute that he thinks he'll be able to call the shots like that though.
 
2012-11-21 12:14:27 PM  

peeledpeas: We really don't need the ability to make a "living wage" at an extremely low skilled job. If Americans get any dumber, there won't be an America for much longer.


You provide the perfect example of a dumbed-down American with that bolded statement.

Please, go fark yourself with a rusty pitchfork. You are everything that is wrong with this nation.
 
2012-11-21 12:21:57 PM  

Anonymocoso: Japan and Australia are commie poofs who did not start illegal wars like real men do.

Real men spend money on finding non-existent weapons of mass destruction. Not on that fairy minimum wage.


Yeah, 2003 was a rough year...grow up.
 
2012-11-21 12:28:10 PM  

I sound fat: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: What's wrong with the executives earning 1% less if it means your lowest paid staff member earns a living wage?

Well, what happens is they have to raise prices. The world has seen that this business model works spectacularly. If Wal Mart no longer USES this business model, there will be 1000 Walmart Wannabes ABLE to get the billions in capital to put the same business model into operation elsewhere.

When companies compete on price, price is what matters. The new walmart clones will make money, Walmart doesent and shrinks, the no longer needed employees will either be out of work, or now at the new stores without any longevity or stability.

/besides life isnt that simple. if you cut CEO compensation 1 percent, that comes to 181,000 dollars per year, a GHASTLY amount for 1 percent. however split amongst 2.1 million employees, that comes to an increase of 9 cents a year for each employee. So if you cut it 99 percent, it comes to $8.53 extra per employee per year. How does that provide a living wage to anyone?


Where in the world does the raising prices crap come from? Walmart exists to maximize profits, not maintain a profit margin. If they could make more money, they would. If they thought raising prices would get them more money, they'd be doing that right now. It's got nothing to do with their costs. They're raising profits as high as possible, without regard to costs.
 
2012-11-21 12:36:40 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: rikkitikkitavi: patently false

So I'll flag you in piss yellow with the moniker "Taxes are Theft."
Agree? Disagree? I really don't have the time to word-wrangle with folks who don't understand the social contract and refuse to pay for the privilege of civilization.


wow, your conclusion was reached by a rather lengthy leap of assumption. i wholeheartedly agree with paying a fair share in taxes on earnings to support the government, etc. etc. i do NOT subscribe to the notion that every time money changes hands in the form of gifts, donations, philanthropies, inheritances, etc. that the govt is entitled to a cut. once i've earned my dollar, the remaining 88% or thereabouts are mine to do with as i see fit, free from any further taxing. taxes are not necessarily theft. redundant, duplicitive and excessive taxes are theft. not to mention inefficient, yet another discussion.

if that is refusal to "pay for civilization" then color me yellow. otherwise STFU.
 
2012-11-21 12:53:59 PM  

rikkitikkitavi: Dinjiin: rikkitikkitavi: If I'm a Walton, I don't give two farks what you think about me. Serious.

Nor would I expect them to. But they shouldn't be surprised when the war of the classes target them as public enemy #1. To the Progressives, they are the poster children for why inheritance taxes should have more teeth.

I'm generally not in favor of taxing the same money twice, or thrice. It was taxed when it was earned. And any earnings on that invested income has been taxed. Simply changing hands, from one generation to the next shouldn't be taxable. At all. Period. If Bank of America taxed you a percentage just to move your money or hold onto it and not spend it, then you'd be biatching up a storm. What makes you think the government gets that right to tax money that's already been taxed?


When you buy something with money, it's taxed. When you are paid money, it's taxed. When the rich pay themselves, well that's sacred and we can't expect them to pay taxes on money that's already taxed, even though everyone else has to.
 
2012-11-21 01:08:10 PM  

Nintenfreak: When you buy something with money, it's taxed. When you are paid money, it's taxed. When the rich pay themselves, well that's sacred and we can't expect them to pay taxes on money that's already taxed, even though everyone else has to.


FALSE!

I'm not taxed when I buy something. The seller of goods is taxed to do his business. It's the fee to do business. A purchaser is not taxed.

If I give money away, it's not taxed. If I donate money to a philanthropy or a church, it's not taxed (in fact I get to deduct that from my taxable income), but if I give my own money, which I've already been taxed on, to my kids (which I already do in the form of housing, food, clothing, and other goods) then I get taxed on it.

You just hate successful people that have something to give.
 
2012-11-21 01:10:06 PM  

rikkitikkitavi: Nintenfreak: When you buy something with money, it's taxed. When you are paid money, it's taxed. When the rich pay themselves, well that's sacred and we can't expect them to pay taxes on money that's already taxed, even though everyone else has to.

FALSE!

I'm not taxed when I buy something. The seller of goods is taxed to do his business. It's the fee to do business. A purchaser is not taxed.

If I give money away, it's not taxed. If I donate money to a philanthropy or a church, it's not taxed (in fact I get to deduct that from my taxable income), but if I give my own money, which I've already been taxed on, to my kids (which I already do in the form of housing, food, clothing, and other goods) then I get taxed on it.

You just hate successful people that have something to give.


Yours is a dizzying intellect
 
2012-11-21 01:11:01 PM  

Your Zionist Leader: Yours is a dizzying intellect


Have you read the tax code? And you call me dizzying?
 
kab
2012-11-21 01:13:01 PM  

rikkitikkitavi: I'm not taxed when I buy something.


At a state level you most certainly can be.
 
2012-11-21 01:40:37 PM  

rikkitikkitavi: If I donate money to a philanthropy or a church, it's not taxed


Those are what we call exceptions. They are excepted because of the work they do. Your kids don't count as a charity.

Generally, money is taxed when it comes into possession of a separate legal entity. While claimed as dependents, your children don't really count as such. Inheritances are a different matter. They need to be taxed on that income. It's no longer yours and neither you nor your money is being taxed again.
 
2012-11-21 02:22:49 PM  
This thread got a little stale before but my points still stand.


1. No one forces you to work at walmart, dont like your job get another one.
2. These workers cant afford to lose a paycheck, most of their money goes to bills and the holiday season is even harder on these types
3. Saying to why walked out on your job during one of the busiest times and got fired is a hard interview question to answer
 
2012-11-21 02:25:48 PM  

tbhouston: This thread got a little stale before but my points still stand.


1. No one forces you to work at walmart, dont like your job get another one.
2. These workers cant afford to lose a paycheck, most of their money goes to bills and the holiday season is even harder on these types
3. Saying to why walked out on your job during one of the busiest times and got fired is a hard interview question to answer


So getting rich by putting your employees in the situation where they have to decide if they want to eat or be treated like a human being is a-ok?
 
2012-11-21 02:29:55 PM  

tbhouston: This thread got a little stale before but my points still stand.


1. No one forces you to work at walmart, dont like your job get another one.
2. These workers cant afford to lose a paycheck, most of their money goes to bills and the holiday season is even harder on these types
3. Saying to why walked out on your job during one of the busiest times and got fired is a hard interview question to answer


Some people can't get another job. Otherwise they would.
 
2012-11-21 02:39:51 PM  

tbhouston: This thread got a little stale before but my points still stand.


About as well as a one legged dog, but you just keep trying to stand it back up...
 
2012-11-21 02:55:23 PM  

Hickory-smoked: smitty04: Ask the Hostess how much their union has done for them.

Yes, ask them.


You're asking us to believe those commies at Forbes?
 
2012-11-21 03:00:45 PM  

tbhouston: This thread got a little stale before but my points still stand.


1. No one forces you to work at walmart, dont like your job get another one.
2. These workers cant afford to lose a paycheck, most of their money goes to bills and the holiday season is even harder on these types
3. Saying to why walked out on your job during one of the busiest times and got fired is a hard interview question to answer


1. If there are no other jobs in the area that you can find, the imperative to feed yourself and/or your family amounts to forcing you to take this job, and Wal-Mart knows it.
2. I can support them being willing to risk the only paycheck they have a shot at if it means a chance at a better future and getting some damn respect.
3. This one, sadly, I agree with. All you can hope for is that the person doing the interview has also been in a similar situation.
 
2012-11-21 03:16:40 PM  
Legal prostitution would solve a lot of America's problems.
 
2012-11-21 04:17:39 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: rikkitikkitavi: If I donate money to a philanthropy or a church, it's not taxed

Those are what we call exceptions. They are excepted because of the work they do. Your kids don't count as a charity.

Generally, money is taxed when it comes into possession of a separate legal entity. While claimed as dependents, your children don't really count as such. Inheritances are a different matter. They need to be taxed on that income. It's no longer yours and neither you nor your money is being taxed again.


Fundamentally disagree. It is mine. And I'll give it to whom I deem fit. It needn't be taxed. In fact, some studies have shown that taxing it does more harm than good for the economy. But neither here nor there, we disagree.
 
2012-11-21 04:34:49 PM  

The My Little Pony Killer: peeledpeas: We really don't need the ability to make a "living wage" at an extremely low skilled job. If Americans get any dumber, there won't be an America for much longer.

You provide the perfect example of a dumbed-down American with that bolded statement.

Please, go fark yourself with a rusty pitchfork. You are everything that is wrong with this nation.


Tell me you're not so stupid that you can't even begin to comprehend my point. If the labor market becomes flush with easy to do, low skilled jobs that pay well enough for people to buy McMansions, where in the fark will the motivation come from for people to better educate themselves for the higher skilled jobs? If I can have a McMansion and a Chrysler LeBehemoth and all the goodies I want doing a job that a trained chimp could do, why would I want to subject myself to higher education? Bigger picture. Look at it. It's right there.
 
2012-11-21 05:27:21 PM  
Tell me you're not so stupid that you can't even begin to comprehend my point. If the labor market becomes flush with easy to do, low skilled jobs that pay well enough for people to buy McMansions, where in the fark will the motivation come from for people to better educate themselves for the higher skilled jobs? If I can have a McMansion and a Chrysler LeBehemoth and all the goodies I want doing a job that a trained chimp could do, why would I want to subject myself to higher education? Bigger picture. Look at it. It's right there.


Do you really not see the difference between "living wage" and "buying an over-sized house and vehicle" and any number of other luxuries? Are you really that stupid?

These types of jobs don't pay you enough to stay healthy and then retire and enjoy some very basic pleasantries in life after you've put in 40 years of work. There's a huge farking difference and you should take 30 minutes out of your life and really think that through and come to terms with how you can possibly justify a job in which every single one of us depends on to be done yet doesn't afford the people doing it the basics.

I hope you can, because otherwise you're a horrible, unintelligent and selfish person with absolutely no grasp of reality. We're not demanding some communist paradise make-work situation where everyone who simply shows up gets a job and every single detail the same as someone who has a hard to learn skill or a hard to fill job.

The situation is farked for a lot of people and I can't even begin to imagine what concessions would have to be made if I had to provide for a family on a double minimum wage type income.
 
2012-11-21 05:49:23 PM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: [i9.photobucket.com image 220x284]


Only if it's also "See Her Nekkid Day"... gotta have some compensation for not getting stuff cheap.
 
2012-11-21 05:50:00 PM  

rikkitikkitavi: Fundamentally disagree. It is mine. And I'll give it to whom I deem fit. It needn't be taxed. In fact, some studies have shown that taxing it does more harm than good for the economy. But neither here nor there, we disagree.


The French Revolution disagrees with you. It's the ultimate outcome of zero inheritance and gift taxes, an entrenched, unempathetic aristocracy holding all the wealth thrown down by violent peasants with nothing to lose.
 
2012-11-21 06:21:03 PM  

Arumat: tbhouston: This thread got a little stale before but my points still stand.


1. No one forces you to work at walmart, dont like your job get another one.
2. These workers cant afford to lose a paycheck, most of their money goes to bills and the holiday season is even harder on these types
3. Saying to why walked out on your job during one of the busiest times and got fired is a hard interview question to answer

1. If there are no other jobs in the area that you can find, the imperative to feed yourself and/or your family amounts to forcing you to take this job, and Wal-Mart knows it.
2. I can support them being willing to risk the only paycheck they have a shot at if it means a chance at a better future and getting some damn respect.
3. This one, sadly, I agree with. All you can hope for is that the person doing the interview has also been in a similar situation.


To be entirely fair, I don't know many retail managers that would hold walking off a job at Walmart against a prospective employee if everything else about them seemed good.

People who understand that Walmart is a terrible place to work also understand why people do it but don't begrudge them when they eventually reach the end of their rope and just let go. It also helps to realize that the hiring process for someone of the caliber that Walmart employs is not exactly complex. These are (generally) not the type of people that show up in a suit bearing a resume. When I am hiring unskilled labor I will typically only check one reference and even then it's just to make sure they aren't totally bullsh*tting me. The bulk of the decision rides on the behavior and attitude of the person sitting in front of me.
 
2012-11-21 07:59:50 PM  

daveinsurgent: Tell me you're not so stupid that you can't even begin to comprehend my point. If the labor market becomes flush with easy to do, low skilled jobs that pay well enough for people to buy McMansions, where in the fark will the motivation come from for people to better educate themselves for the higher skilled jobs? If I can have a McMansion and a Chrysler LeBehemoth and all the goodies I want doing a job that a trained chimp could do, why would I want to subject myself to higher education? Bigger picture. Look at it. It's right there.

Do you really not see the difference between "living wage" and "buying an over-sized house and vehicle" and any number of other luxuries? Are you really that stupid?

These types of jobs don't pay you enough to stay healthy and then retire and enjoy some very basic pleasantries in life after you've put in 40 years of work. There's a huge farking difference and you should take 30 minutes out of your life and really think that through and come to terms with how you can possibly justify a job in which every single one of us depends on to be done yet doesn't afford the people doing it the basics.

I hope you can, because otherwise you're a horrible, unintelligent and selfish person with absolutely no grasp of reality. We're not demanding some communist paradise make-work situation where everyone who simply shows up gets a job and every single detail the same as someone who has a hard to learn skill or a hard to fill job.

The situation is farked for a lot of people and I can't even begin to imagine what concessions would have to be made if I had to provide for a family on a double minimum wage type income.


The question though is this: What is the "Living Wage" in all the US? What is poverty in CA is rich in TX.
 
2012-11-21 08:00:52 PM  

JosephFinn: Which I'm sure is a delight to the people at WalMart working poverty-level wages with no insurance coverage & forced and unpaid overtime. But hey, 5% of almost nothing!


Sounds like a good reason to improve oneself and get the hell out of WalMart. But whadduhIno.
 
2012-11-21 08:05:51 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: The French Revolution disagrees with you. It's the ultimate outcome of zero inheritance and gift taxes, an entrenched, unempathetic aristocracy holding all the wealth thrown down by violent peasants with nothing to lose.


i.imgur.com
 
2012-11-21 08:20:09 PM  

People_are_Idiots: The question though is this: What is the "Living Wage" in all the US? What is poverty in CA is rich in TX.


That is not completely accurate and the reality is much more complicated. Even within Texas an $8.00 per hour job in Mineral Wells or Vidor will do you just fine. I mean, you still live in Mineral Wells or Vidor but at least you have a little jingle in your pocket after paying rent, buying food and whatever other costs you feel you can afford.

That same job won't get you into a studio apartment in Austin much less buy you frivolous things like food, water and electricity.
 
2012-11-21 08:28:32 PM  

Man On Pink Corner: Sergeant Grumbles: The French Revolution disagrees with you. It's the ultimate outcome of zero inheritance and gift taxes, an entrenched, unempathetic aristocracy holding all the wealth thrown down by violent peasants with nothing to lose.

[i.imgur.com image 576x478]


I'm really not sure what this has to do with anything...?
 
2012-11-21 08:37:10 PM  

A Shambling Mound: People_are_Idiots: The question though is this: What is the "Living Wage" in all the US? What is poverty in CA is rich in TX.

That is not completely accurate and the reality is much more complicated. Even within Texas an $8.00 per hour job in Mineral Wells or Vidor will do you just fine. I mean, you still live in Mineral Wells or Vidor but at least you have a little jingle in your pocket after paying rent, buying food and whatever other costs you feel you can afford.

That same job won't get you into a studio apartment in Austin much less buy you frivolous things like food, water and electricity.


$8 an hour can't get you a paper bag in the middle of the street in CA.
 
2012-11-21 08:58:30 PM  
The question though is this: What is the "Living Wage" in all the US? What is poverty in CA is rich in TX.


But... that really isn't the question. Not yet. You think it is, but you're mistaken. You're right that it is a question, but it's not the one you have to get answered. That question, I'm sorry to say, is "Do people deserve a living wage for performing basic, but nonetheless useful jobs"?

The answer, to me, is an obvious "yes", but there's no shortage of dipshiats who have no clue how much luck was involved in forging their 'self-made' success and how unlikely they are to actually repeat it if they had been given a different, perhaps even slightly, set of conditions. On top of that are the ones that actually believe they are going to achieve some level of "wealth" in their lifetime (and think that $100k/year is actually "wealthy" - and so they're afraid of taxes on the "wealthy"). It's just sad to see how many people don't get that a massive redistribution of wealth would result in an increase for most people - themselves included. There are so few people who would actually suffer a loss, it's very unlikey you have met one, let alone are one.

I make $85k a year and wouldn't even know where to start to list off all the luck that went in to getting me here.
 
2012-11-21 09:00:04 PM  

Man On Pink Corner: Sounds like a good reason to improve oneself and get the hell out of WalMart. But whadduhIno.


1.) Define "improve oneself". Do you mean take some night classes? With what money? And what time?

2.) So, you're saying then that those that cannot "improve themselves" deserve to be treated this way by Wal-Mart. and don't deserve a living wage or health insurance.

3.) Have you thought about the fact that if EVERYONE "improved themselves", no one would be stocking groceries or cashiering at Wal-Mart?
 
2012-11-21 09:04:34 PM  

TopoGigo: ox45tallboy: If everyone "bettered" themselves through education or "bootstraps" or what have you, then who would clean the toilets or empty the trash or stock the shelves?

High school kids, alcoholics, part-timers, and chronic fark-ups. You know, the type of people we all imagine are working min-wage jobs anyway. $8 is a living wage for these types of people. If there were plenty of $12 and $14 jobs out in the world, we wouldn't be biatching about Wal-Mart employees getting paid too little, because people with families who were willing to work full time would choose better jobs.
Again, those jobs don't exist anymore, and that's the problem.


They exist but they're often seasonal or subject to being laid off or even outsourced. But yeah, it's not like 50 years ago where you could start a job out of highschool and expect to work there your entire adult work life while steadily making more money which eventually led to a nice retirement. Those days are long gone and it will come back and bite us in the ass eventually as more people nearing retirement age will have to rely on assistance because they weren't able to build up a big pension and savings. Even if you started out at a place like Walmart 30-40 years ago and grandfathered in to make you immune to their bootstrapy policies I can guarantee you that finding some way to get rid of you has been discussed behind closed doors. If the uppers think you compensated too well you're going to have a target on your back. I personally have seen this at my Walmart and this is the kind of world we're living in today.
 
2012-11-21 09:04:45 PM  

daveinsurgent: The answer, to me, is an obvious "yes"


Very well put. Success and arrogance tend to go hand in hand.

Most people also don't realize that prosperity actually trickles up, as the lower classes will keep spending their money until it gets to the upper classes. The upper classes don't spend money, they save it or invest it - neither one of which pump cash directly into the economy the way that spending it does.

The money will eventually work its way to the top in pretty much any type of economic situation other than totalitarianism, and even then it does if you consider the state to be "the top". Prosperity happens when the money makes lots and lots of stops along the way.
 
2012-11-21 09:07:43 PM  

daveinsurgent: The question though is this: What is the "Living Wage" in all the US? What is poverty in CA is rich in TX.


But... that really isn't the question. Not yet. You think it is, but you're mistaken. You're right that it is a question, but it's not the one you have to get answered. That question, I'm sorry to say, is "Do people deserve a living wage for performing basic, but nonetheless useful jobs"?

The answer, to me, is an obvious "yes", but there's no shortage of dipshiats who have no clue how much luck was involved in forging their 'self-made' success and how unlikely they are to actually repeat it if they had been given a different, perhaps even slightly, set of conditions. On top of that are the ones that actually believe they are going to achieve some level of "wealth" in their lifetime (and think that $100k/year is actually "wealthy" - and so they're afraid of taxes on the "wealthy"). It's just sad to see how many people don't get that a massive redistribution of wealth would result in an increase for most people - themselves included. There are so few people who would actually suffer a loss, it's very unlikey you have met one, let alone are one.

I make $85k a year and wouldn't even know where to start to list off all the luck that went in to getting me here.


No, that's not a question I want answered, since I'm not hiring. My question is What should be considered a "Living wage?"
 
2012-11-21 09:16:50 PM  

SuperDuper28: They exist but they're often seasonal or subject to being laid off or even outsourced. But yeah, it's not like 50 years ago where you could start a job out of highschool and expect to work there your entire adult work life while steadily making more money which eventually led to a nice retirement. Those days are long gone and it will come back and bite us in the ass eventually as more people nearing retirement age will have to rely on assistance because they weren't able to build up a big pension and savings. Even if you started out at a place like Walmart 30-40 years ago and grandfathered in to make you immune to their bootstrapy policies I can guarantee you that finding some way to get rid of you has been discussed behind closed doors. If the uppers think you compensated too well you're going to have a target on your back. I personally have seen this at my Walmart and this is the kind of world we're living in today.


My question to TopoGigo was whether or not he felt that the number of teenagers, alcoholics, and general f*ck-ups was equal to or in excess of the number of low-paying, menial jobs. I do not believe it is.

Because of this, and the fact that employee turnover costs make hiring the above listed individuals less preferable, it seems that many responsible individuals wind up taking low-paying, menial jobs, and many in our society seem to believe that because of this, the employee (who, because he or she is responsible, is actually rather valuable to the employer) is only "worth" a substandard wage, and it is somehow their "fault" if they find themselves in this sort of occupation and their "responsibility" to somehow improve their lot, even though they are already doing good work and providing a valuable service to the employer.

The only way to break this line of thinking is to give the corporations that treat their employees a wake-up call as a hit to their bottom line. Wal-Mart will barely even notice reduced sales due to reduced staffing on Black Friday Thanksgiving, but they WILL notice all of the bad publicity. A few incidents on par with the past few years (pepper spray, fist fights and gun brandishing, greeter trampled to death, etc.) and the media will blame it all on striking employees, which will call attention to Wal-Mart's bad behavior. Already many people are starting to see that the union didn't kill Hostess, the private equity firms did (meaning many are becoming sympathetic to workers being treated like sh*t), and I honestly believe that a few sympathetic news stories centering around individuals and how they have been treated by the company will do some major damage to the brand.
 
2012-11-21 09:19:37 PM  

People_are_Idiots: No, that's not a question I want answered, since I'm not hiring. My question is What should be considered a "Living wage?"


Just to throw a number out there, why not use a multiple of the "poverty index" which is currently being used to determine eligibility for government assistance in purchasing insurance under Obamacare? It is already indexed based on residence.

Say 1.5 or 2 x the poverty level.
 
2012-11-21 09:52:48 PM  
That's the idiots guide to a biased look at Walmart. Its not the idiots guide to anything else except how stupid uneducated people are.
 
2012-11-21 10:08:08 PM  
No, that's not a question I want answered, since I'm not hiring. My question is What should be considered a "Living wage?"

It's a question that a society has to answer and act accordingly on. The fact you think you don't need/want to answer it is puzzling. You aren't the one to answer it any more than you are the one to answer "Should we go to war with [x] country?". It affects you. It affects your neighbour, or your kids, or someone you meet on the street. It affects your chances of being robbed, violently. Just like the war affects you, some way, some how. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean anything. I guess you can say, shucks, I don't want to participate - fine, sure, whatever, but within your lifetime I think it is a pretty safe bet that we are going to see some very drastic, possibly violent and destructive events unfold as a result of the "answer" to questions like the one I asked. I'm not saying the answer to the question you're concerned with isn't important, just that it has no meaning unless you actually believe, and society believes, that people deserve to be paid a livable wage for an honest days work.

Capitalism has failed. It has not created worldwide wealth and prosperity attainable to anyone who wants to put their sweat and blood in to it like it claims. I don't think you can actually dispute that anymore. The entire system is broken. The real "the" question to me is: can we fix it with incremental, iterative change? Or are we going to continue on fiddling until some more epic, destructive collapse of power comes along as history has told us happens time and time again? Human quality of life now only improves as a function of profitability, as a side-effect of growth-based wealth creation. Productivity of workers has continued to increase while wages stagnate and a very select few amass fortunes that no human could ever spend. The system inherently does this. It isn't some grand conspiracy: the system has many stable states, but at its inception only one was perceived. It still claims to be in this state, but it has moved to anothe stable state that involves the continued extraction of wealth from the many in to the hands of the few. I have no idea how to fix it, I have no idea if there even exists a reasonable alternative - there may not, in which case some of our goals created in the spirit of a universal set of human rights are destined to be unobtainable. I don't want that to be true, I want to be able to say, "a person doesn't need to earn more in a day than others do in a year; more in a year than others do in their lives" and not be thought of some radical, freedom-hating commie. I think it stands, to good reason, that we should have both a minimum and a maximum wage and the difference between them ought to be reasonable enough to entice people to work hard, but not so much that it lends to the kind of money hording and socio-economic inequalities we have presently, and that the minimum is enough for a person to live on without having to endure hunger, pain or any other thing that represents a deficit in basic human needs.
 
2012-11-21 10:35:42 PM  

steamingpile: That's the idiots guide to a biased look at Walmart. Its not the idiots guide to anything else except how stupid uneducated people are.


Do you now or have you in the recent past worked for Wal-Mart?

Well, now that you've read the article, consider yourself informed.
 
2012-11-21 10:38:16 PM  

daveinsurgent: No, that's not a question I want answered, since I'm not hiring. My question is What should be considered a "Living wage?"

It's a question that a society has to answer and act accordingly on. The fact you think you don't need/want to answer it is puzzling. You aren't the one to answer it any more than you are the one to answer "Should we go to war with [x] country?". It affects you. It affects your neighbour, or your kids, or someone you meet on the street. It affects your chances of being robbed, violently. Just like the war affects you, some way, some how. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean anything. I guess you can say, shucks, I don't want to participate - fine, sure, whatever, but within your lifetime I think it is a pretty safe bet that we are going to see some very drastic, possibly violent and destructive events unfold as a result of the "answer" to questions like the one I asked. I'm not saying the answer to the question you're concerned with isn't important, just that it has no meaning unless you actually believe, and society believes, that people deserve to be paid a livable wage for an honest days work.


The problem with a "living wage" idea is ,as I mentioned, location. What is considered poverty in one place is wealth in another. I know people in California living paycheck to paycheck at 2-300k salary, while I'm cruising at 50-60k a year. Someone in Detroit might consider a house luxury, where in Ohio a house is a necessity. A person in Mexico would consider $20 able to pay rent, feed kids for a month, and afford surgery... where in England it's enough to buy breakfast. There's no way to determine a "living wage" unless exceptions can be made to lowering or raising it as needed per state and city.

Capitalism has failed. It has not created worldwide wealth and prosperity attainable to anyone who wants to put their sweat and blood in to it like it claims. I don't think you can actually dispute that anymore. The entire system is broken. The real "the" question to me is: can we fix it with incremental, iterative change? Or are we going to continue on fiddling until some more epic, destructive collapse of power comes along as history has told us happens time and time again? Human quality of life now only improves as a function of profitability, as a side-effect of growth-based wealth creation. Productivity of workers has continued to increase while wages stagnate and a very select few amass fortunes that no human could ever spend. The system inherently does this. It isn't some grand conspiracy: the system has many stable states, but at its inception only one was perceived. It still claims to be in this state, but it has moved to anothe stable state that involves the continued extraction of wealth from the many in to the hands of the few. I have no idea how to fix it, I have no idea if there even exists a reasonable alternative - there may not, in which case some of our goals created in the spirit of a universal set of human rights are destined to be unobtainable. I don't want that to be true, I want to be able to say, "a person doesn't need to earn more in a day than others do in a year; more in a year than others do in their lives" and not be thought of some radical, freedom-hating commie. I think it stands, to good reason, that we should have both a minimum and a maximum wage and the difference between them ought to be reasonable enough to entice people to work hard, but not so much that it lends to the kind of money hording and socio-economic inequalities we have presently, and that the minimum is enough for a person to live on without having to endure hunger, pain or any other thing that represents a deficit in basic human needs.

It depends on which form of capitalism you talk about there too. Social-market capitalism failed years ago with communism, as did Mercantilism. Mixed Capitalism is failing because of the shift from a balance to Social-Market. The only one that might work better is Free-market capitalism (which, despite what one thinks, hasn't been tried save -maybe- in Texas). The problem is too many people want their "freebies" from the backs of people. If all goes as the state would like, the good doctors would be driving in Pintos, while the bad doctors still have a job. Everyone in the labor force would make the same amount, and all things bought would be regulated heavily. Imagine 1984 without the smoking.
 
2012-11-21 11:01:24 PM  

People_are_Idiots: The problem is too many people want their "freebies" from the backs of people.


I disagree. I think people just want a living wage in exchange for contributing 40-45 hrs. per week to society. Whether that be as a janitor or an assembly line worker or a stocker at Wal-Mart, they feel that they are contributing to our society and deserve a reasonable lifestyle in exchange for their time and effort. People are beginning to see that citizens of other countries such as Sweden and Germany are achieving this, and they wonder what is wrong with our country that it has so much wealth, but the standard of living for so many of its citizens is far below that of many other countries.

I don't think that anyone would argue that people that work "harder" (whether that be through spending more hours, or working a more demanding job, or one that requires an investment in education) should be compensated more. However, the fact is, we're not providing a reasonable living for many of the individuals such as janitors or stockers or cashiers on which the functioning of our society depends. They're not at the forefront, making breakthroughs that make everyone's life easier; they are the people that help maintain the standard of living we have come to expect. Their jobs really are important, and if they choose to do these jobs, they deserve to be compensated for them.

Which would you notice first: if half of the garbage collectors disappeared, or half of the lawyers? Half of the hospital orderlies, or half of the health insurance executives? Half of the public transit workers, or half of the lobbyists? Half of the grocery store cashiers, or half of the private equity executives who own the food companies?
 
2012-11-21 11:06:50 PM  

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: I'm confused; nowhere in the article does it explain that these people were FORCED to take these jobs without knowing what the wage was. I men, that had to be case, right? Otherwise...


And therefore, they should only work that wage forever and ever, till the end of time. Even asking for one cent more should get them fired...no, EXECUTED!

/STOP. BLAMING. THE WORKERS.
 
2012-11-21 11:11:46 PM  

theenez: Wal-mart workers are figthing to get more from those that shop at Wal-mart. I am still unclear why anyone has a problem with this. Many more Fark Duh moments to come


Because they don't deserve a living wage! They work at WAL-MART!

/Yes, that is what the argument has boiled down to.
 
2012-11-21 11:13:53 PM  

Summoner101: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: EmmaLou: As a taxpayer, i don't feel like i should foot the bill for Walmart employees that have to be on welfare just to get by even though they work. Pay your people a living wage for fark's sake.

This. It's obscene that we live in a developed nation and many of our full-time workers can survive on their wages alone. There's something very, very wrong with a society where you can work full-time and not break even.

What compounds the problem is that people have come to some agreement that unions are unnecessary because of state/federal laws except many of the anti-labor business practices Walmart employs would take a union to combat.


That, and once the unions are out of the way, down go the state/federal laws, and we're back to the turn of last century again.
 
2012-11-21 11:16:28 PM  

Vector R: As someone who has BT;DT - yes, the working conditions ARE that bad. It's better than nothing, but it's so degrading and soul-crushing, and is the sort of job that just keeps you awake at night long after you've thrown that farking vest somewhere out of sight.


See, the thing is, we're at a tipping point. If enough people decide that starving is better than working where they are...especially if they all come to that realization at the same time...then there might be some real change effected.
 
2012-11-21 11:21:11 PM  
clowncar on fire: You can't take a man's wealth through disproportionate taxation- justify it any way you want-- it's still stealing.

So, now paying someone a living wage, so they don't need the tax dollars you already aren't paying them either way = "disproportionate taxation"?
 
2012-11-21 11:22:20 PM  

Propain_az: rikkitikkitavi: So, I'm kinda torn on this one... on one hand, I'm for the workers. Thanksgiving Day ought to be sacred enough that everyone has it off, or to some extent. I think most grocery stores are open some, and gas stations... but to force workers to come in at ungodly hours to work a National holiday is ridiculous.

Then, I'm somewhat on the Walmart side, and that is this is business. And if Walmart isn't open, someone else is. And if the workers don't like it, then get a different job that isn't a shiatty retail schlep-chore. I'm sure there are plenty of people that would like that job.

You have brought the voice of reason to this thread.


No, he's brought the fallacy of the mean to this thread.
 
2012-11-21 11:23:35 PM  

IlGreven: And therefore, they should only work that wage forever and ever, till the end of time. Even asking for one cent more should get them fired...no, EXECUTED!

/STOP. BLAMING. THE WORKERS.


The Republican Party pays individuals to insert "conservative thinking" onto message boards. Is it possible that the anti-worker sentiments prevalent in threads on this subject and the recent Hostess bankruptcy threads may be related to this? I mean, the vitriol is of an unusually harsh nature, even for the politics tab, and flies in the face of convincing hard evidence.

I'm not just seeing this on Fark, I'm also seeing it on other sites that don't favor one side or the other, and it is to be expected on the right-wing blogs. How in the world do people look at the verified reports of the way Wal-Mart treats its workers, and believe it is the workers' fault for "agreeing" to be treated this way? Do they believe Wal-Mart workers actually agreed to these conditions? Do they believe the Wal-Mart employees reporting this kind of treatment are lying? I don't get it.
 
2012-11-21 11:24:39 PM  

Summoner101: sid2112: Summoner101: sid2112: Yeah because those workers had no idea what they were getting into when they SIGNED THE CONTRACT as they were hired by WalMart. I feel so terrible for those poor, duped bastards that wanted nothing more than 20 dollars an hour for doing a job that is worth around 6 dollars an hour. Seriously, my heart is bleeding for the people who got employed, signed a contract that clearly states what the expectations of the job were, and decided to fark off in school instead of actually trying to learn something.

Somewhere a fiddle is playing....

So what happens when Walmart breaks their end of this grand ole bargain? Tough shiat, they're the employee?

Show one instance where they have done that, just one. You won't find it because it never happened!

One instance ever? Well that was easy.


It's a Triangle Shirtwaist waiting to happen...in every city in the nation.
 
2012-11-21 11:25:15 PM  

IlGreven: /Yes, that is what the argument has boiled down to.


When you distill it down to its most basic form, every argument of this type can be summed up "You weren't born rich."

Can't get a good job? Get an education.
Can't afford an education? Should have worked harder in school and gotten scholarships or internships.
Went to a bad school system and missed out? You should have been born rich!
 
2012-11-21 11:28:38 PM  

IlGreven: That, and once the unions are out of the way, down go the state/federal laws, and we're back to the turn of last century again.


You mean, like this year's official Republican Party platform position of abolishing the minimum wage on American soil?
 
2012-11-21 11:29:15 PM  

ox45tallboy: IlGreven: And therefore, they should only work that wage forever and ever, till the end of time. Even asking for one cent more should get them fired...no, EXECUTED!

/STOP. BLAMING. THE WORKERS.

The Republican Party pays individuals to insert "conservative thinking" onto message boards. Is it possible that the anti-worker sentiments prevalent in threads on this subject and the recent Hostess bankruptcy threads may be related to this? I mean, the vitriol is of an unusually harsh nature, even for the politics tab, and flies in the face of convincing hard evidence.

I'm not just seeing this on Fark, I'm also seeing it on other sites that don't favor one side or the other, and it is to be expected on the right-wing blogs. How in the world do people look at the verified reports of the way Wal-Mart treats its workers, and believe it is the workers' fault for "agreeing" to be treated this way? Do they believe Wal-Mart workers actually agreed to these conditions? Do they believe the Wal-Mart employees reporting this kind of treatment are lying? I don't get it.


It's dangerous to post alone. Take this.

1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-11-21 11:31:54 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: When you distill it down to its most basic form, every argument of this type can be summed up "You weren't born rich."

Can't get a good job? Get an education.
Can't afford an education? Should have worked harder in school and gotten scholarships or internships.
Went to a bad school system and missed out? You should have been born rich!


Other people are hungry, and willing to endure the type of abuse you currently endure, therefore it is morally acceptable for Wal-Mart to treat you this way and you should be thankful for the salary they deem fit to bestow upon you. Farking ingrates. Wal-Mart employees need to learn their place! They can't be allowed to think they are as good as real Americans! The whole social order would fall apart!
 
2012-11-21 11:37:26 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: It's dangerous to post alone. Take this.


Ha! Aluminum does NOTHING to block the G-rays! If you would have done your research, you would know with the latest technology used by the CIA and the GOP-controlled U.N. who really runs FEMA, a Faraday cage capable of preventing access by the mind control devices requires a steel mesh over ceramic with a copper bare earth ground!

Amateur!
 
2012-11-21 11:38:20 PM  

ox45tallboy: AverageAmericanGuy: It's dangerous to post alone. Take this.

Ha! Aluminum does NOTHING to block the G-rays! If you would have done your research, you would know with the latest technology used by the CIA and the GOP-controlled U.N. who really runs FEMA, a Faraday cage capable of preventing access by the mind control devices requires a steel mesh over ceramic with a copper bare earth ground!

Amateur!


You can't fool me, spook.
 
2012-11-21 11:38:26 PM  

ox45tallboy: GreenSun: Nobody is forced to work for Walmart. Before you sign up for any job, they tell you how much you'll get paid and all the terms. In the end, it's up to you whether or not you'll take what they offer or not. If you sign up for it, then you can't really complain

See, this is what so many people actually believe, but it is simply not true. No one has stuck a gun to my sister's head and "forced" her to work at Wal-Mart. It's simply pretty much the only job available in this town, because since Wal-Mart put in, several other small businesses went out of business.

And yes, my sister was given "terms" of her employment. Terms including "if you work 32+ hours per week, you are a full-time employee and you get benefits." Terms including "if you work more than your scheduled shift at the request of management, you will receive time-and-a-half overtime. Terms including "you will not be required to show up at work without being on the clock."

Don't act like you know more than other people about something like this. Wal-Mart is not honoring their own agreements, and this is why most of the employees are upset. They have every right to be. Wal-Mart executive management knows that their employees are dependent on their jobs and can't "just quit". They know how much of an upheaval it is to an entire family's schedule if Mom quits and since the family has only one car and Mom suddenly is working at a different time they have to make new arrangements to get the kids to school.

Wal-Mart takes advantage of people in these kinds of situations, and makes craploads of money off of them. I'm sorry, but whatever line you've been fed about Wal-Mart employees is a bunch of bull, and if you would make a stab at a little bit of empathy, you might understand things a bit better and not sound so arrogant and uninformed.


...see, if my employer tried to rein me in with "We can fire you at any time" or some such, my first instinct is to save them the trouble and quit. But then, I have no dependents to tether me to a job, either.
 
2012-11-21 11:44:25 PM  

IlGreven: ...see, if my employer tried to rein me in with "We can fire you at any time" or some such, my first instinct is to save them the trouble and quit. But then, I have no dependents to tether me to a job, either.


Precisely. And, by giving a little bit of preference to hiring those with dependents, Wal-Mart can ensure employee loyalty despite horrible treatment. People with kids who work at Wal-Mart simply cannot afford to quit, or they would have done so already.
 
2012-11-21 11:46:20 PM  

ox45tallboy: Sergeant Grumbles: When you distill it down to its most basic form, every argument of this type can be summed up "You weren't born rich."

Can't get a good job? Get an education.
Can't afford an education? Should have worked harder in school and gotten scholarships or internships.
Went to a bad school system and missed out? You should have been born rich!

Other people are hungry, and willing to endure the type of abuse you currently endure, therefore it is morally acceptable for Wal-Mart to treat you this way and you should be thankful for the salary they deem fit to bestow upon you. Farking ingrates. Wal-Mart employees need to learn their place! They can't be allowed to think they are as good as real Americans! The whole social order would fall apart!


There are starving children in Africa that would eat that crap! You better eat it or go hungry!

/Okay, you can sleep to the lullaby of my stomach growling, biatch!
 
2012-11-22 12:25:41 AM  

IlGreven: There are starving children in Africa that would eat that crap! You better eat it or go hungry!


I suggested that my mom send my Brussels Sprouts to the starving kids in Africa once. She was not amused.
 
2012-11-22 08:52:35 AM  
Free-market capitalism (which, despite what one thinks, hasn't been tried save -maybe- in Texas). The problem is too many people want their "freebies" from the backs of people. If all goes as the state would like, the good doctors would be driving in Pintos, while the bad doctors still have a job.

I feel like your response is one part idealism and another part oversimplification.

First of all, the 'state' isn't an actual thinking thing. It truly is a headless entity (despite having a head of state) that doesn't move deliberately towards one particular configuration. Needless to say, it is a complex system full of difficult to model parts - perhaps some that cannot actually be modeled. The "state" doesn't "want" doctors to drive Pintos or to keep bad doctors. Corrupt people within the state may want this, but you can't use corruption as an argument for or against any system because corruption is a result of power and every system you could advocate for will inevitably converge towards a position where few have managed to acquire power over many. In my opinion there is little to be gained by trying to advocate for systems that don't acknowledge this, and the only way we can go forward with progress as a species is to make decisions that deliberately acknowledge this and work through it.

When it comes to free-market capitalism, I have to ask: What is the incentive to better society? Even if you make a fairly compelling argument (and, I think most people now feel like the argument fails to acknowledge decades of history) as to why it would -- this is usually something along the lines of competition makes everyone fight to provide you with better things, so you end up getting to choose from a better and better pool of goods and services and that drives innovation and health and prosperity -- I make the argument that the other configuration, the one we're seeing now, will still happen: competition inherently means winners and losers. In the game of enterprise, winners tend to grow, losers are consumed or absorbed. With each iteration, the barrier to entry becomes greater meaning it's less likely that an honest, hard-working person with a "good idea" will actually be able to take on the winners and enact change. Consider the case of Wal-Mart, where they can operate at a loss for such a long time that they could drive out any small but otherwise competitive business. What this means is that it becomes a game of kings, of titans, where 99.99% of the population of the planet have no way of really participating in the game and can only show up to work.

Now you may say, what is the matter with that so long as our benevolent corporate overlords provide us with a good, slowly increasing in quality, life? I guess nothing, I mean, I don't care about the philosophical aspects of freedom, I can appreciate that all other systems have been disasterous when implemented and as far as the animal kingdom goes we can enjoy a hell of a lot more safety, stablity and peace of mind than any other organsims. But that's not what's happening. While you make accusations that the government, the state, intends to keep bad doctors and pay everyone poorly, the reality is that the absolute definition of a for-profit entity is that it must seek out as much profit as possible. There is absolutely no such thing as a corporation saying "Oh, we've made enough profit already this year." - now how do they do this? They do this by charging as much as they can get away with coontil it prohibatively reduces their sales in such a way that it outweighs the extra profit) as well a reducing their costs: which, for most things either directly or indirectly, is wages. So the system has a completely intrinsic state of stress between trying to charge more and pay people less which means they can't afford to pay more. The only reason the system doesn't come flying apart due to that simple stress (which is entirely placed on those that show up to work and actually produce) is because there are still enough entities in existence that they compete with each other and people quit and go work elsewhere. But this again is competition - which means winners and losers. But that's a separate competition: The winners/losers of the corporate word are not the same thing as the winners/losers of the employed world. Wal-Mart is a corporate "winner" but the people that work there are the employment "losers", and the reason we have Wal-Mart is because people want to pay less for more and we seem to be OK with the idea of treating the people that work there poorly (in a way that we would never want to be treated) - because it's not our problem. It will be, some day, when you're downsized or outsourced or whatever, but it's not your problem now.

I don't adore the state. I don't think the government is infalleable or perfect or even "good". But they lack the one thing that makes me feel they are the lesser of two evils: the profit motive. I think that this is a better starting position, and with the right set of tools: total transparency (open source software through all of government, complete public record of all conversations, and so on), total accountability (more local government, the ability to evict politicans from their positions with ease, no lobbying or money in it), etc. we can achieve something that does a better job. I don't think anyone, no matter how state-aligned, has ever thought that the government should not be afraid of its citizens. It's not a blank cheque, it's not an OK to be wasteful. Those are real issues that need to be addressed, but how can you go from "stop being wasteful" to "make a bunch of profit" and think it's going to benefit you, the average joe?
 
2012-11-23 01:06:56 PM  

Dinjiin: Strike, baby, strike.

Wal-Mart is just one giant bundle of corporate welfare. They often get tax subsidies for opening new stores. Many of their employees qualify for low-income support programs like food stamps, Medicaid, subsidized housing and busing. I doubt the tax subsidies are going anywhere, but I would like to see their employees paid better.


In short, there's a fair number of studies that say we are going to pay for it somewhere. Either in taxes or higher prices.

IMHO, getting people off the government teat and giving them a better lifestyle will help our economy more than cheaper stuff.
 
2012-11-23 01:24:56 PM  

Arumat: CSB time.
I worked a month and a half seasonal position at Wal-Mart while I was attending college part-time. I had evening classes on Tuesday and Thursday, and not only was that listed on my application, but I brought it up again in the interview just to be certain. I was hired, and did my job well. The second week, I was scheduled to work evenings on both Tuesday and Thursday. I spoke with the personnel manager who was in charge of the scheduling, and she told me that there was nothing she could do about it. I spoke to the store manager, and within half an hour my schedule was changed. The next week rolls around, and I'm AGAIN scheduled on Tuesday and Thursday evening. I spoke to the personnel manager again, and she told me she couldn't fix it. I spoke to the store manager, and my schedule was fixed again. Finally after that, I stopped being scheduled on nights I couldn't work, but was passed over for a permanent hiring for a guy who royally screwed up changing a display (he put more expensive televisions there before changing the price, so 3 tvs were sold at $150 that should have cost $250). Fast forward 7 years, and I'm out of the Air Force. It's harder finding a job than I expected, so I apply at Wal-Mart to get at least some income while I hunt for a better opportunity. I get turned down even though I'm willing to work for the normal starting pay with wide open availability. I ask a friend who works management at a store in a different area to check things out for me, and it turns out the fat whore of a personnel manager had left a note in my employee profile that I was a trouble-maker and unreliable.
/CSB


That's the problem working with corporations like this, you get these managers that think they are hot shiat for making 35k a year and act like little dictators over the store.

Given the amount of stores, etc it's really hard to control and get reliable information.

I worked for McDonald's as a teenager and shiat happened all the time. I swear this one fat biatch changed my schedule around a few times to make me come in earlier because I lived nearby. A bunch of other sneaky ass shiat went on as well, along with ignoring some labor laws as well.
 
2012-11-23 11:04:56 PM  

shortymac: In short, there's a fair number of studies that say we are going to pay for it somewhere. Either in taxes or higher prices.

IMHO, getting people off the government teat and giving them a better lifestyle will help our economy more than cheaper stuff.


The money will wind up with the rich people anyhow; the more stops it makes along the way, the better off society in general is.
 
Displayed 369 of 369 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report