Reply With Quote
Are you being intellectually dishonest in the thread le, or did you make a mistake?
It seems to me they are admitting they rely on people who use SNAP, WIC, etc. Not to their employees as your le implies.
“Our businessoperations are subject to numerous risks, factors and uncertainties, domestically and internationally, which are outside our control,” Wal-Mart’s 10-K reads. “Any one, or a combination, of these risks, factors and uncertainties could materially affect our financial performance, our results of operations, including our sales, earnings per share or comparable store sales or comparable club sales and effective tax rate for any period, our business operations, business strategy, plans, goals or objectives.”
Among those risks, the form explains are “changes in the amount of payments made under the Supplement Nutrition Assistance Plan and other public assistance plans, changes in the eligibility requirements of public assistance plans.”
According to the International Business
Are you being intellectually dishonest in the thread le, or did you make a mistake?
It seems to me they are admitting they rely on people who use SNAP, WIC, etc. Not to their employees as your le implies.
I recycled the Daily Caller headline. It's consistent with the quotation from Walmart's SEC filing.
They depend on their CUSTOMERS having govt assistance.
This is DC headline: Wal-Mart admits its reliance on food stamps in gov’t filing for first time
reading failure. you're both quite right.
Thanx for removing those biased glasses. You wouldn't want to turn into a boutons...
crossed wire. I'm sure it never happens to you.
Walmart's low-wage EMPLOYEES across the country depend on many $100Ms of public assistance to get by.
boutons is correct
I don't doubt that this is the case.
is there some way to edit the thread le? edit post toggle isn't getting me there.
How McDonald's and Wal-Mart Became Welfare Queens
According to one study, American fast food workers receive more than $7 billion dollars in public assistance. As it turns out, McDonald's has a “McResource” line that helps employees and their families enroll in various state and local assistance programs. It exploded into the public when arecording of the McResource line advocated that full-time employees sign up for food stamps and welfare.
Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest private sector employer, is also the biggest consumer of taxpayer supported aid. According to Florida Congressman Alan Grayson, in many states, Wal-Mart employees are the largest group of Medicaid recipients. They are also the single biggest group of food stamp recipients. Wal-mart’s "associates" are paid so little, according to Grayson, that they receive $1,000 on average in public assistance. These amount to massive taxpayer subsidies for private companies.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-1...re-queens.html
Not a big deal. At least you didn't create one about $50 LED light bulbs. You guys never let me live that one down.
that turned into a really good thread, actually. thanks for the OP.
Sure he's correct.
That doesn't mean the en lement mentality is correct.
Want things to change? Vote for politicians who will make laws keeping illegal immigrants from taking our jobs. Dissolve the free trade laws and tariff all foreign goods that we can also make or grow so the cost more than what we make them for. Trade with little or no tariffs should on goods that we cannot produce or grow ourselves, or not is sufficient quan y.
It isn't just the poor who are getting poorer and poorer. Almost everyone is. Simply raising minimum wages will cause a cascade effect that will likely produce do no good and inflation will rise too.
I will not entertain an idea that I believe will do no good until after re revive of manufacturing industries. Once we have more jobs vs. the people who want jobs, we can see how natural supply and demand forces will work. Less of a percentage of the population will be working minimum wage jobs once we have more jobs.
Adults take jobs away from high school students, and expect adult wages?
that...
Walmart basically has all courtesy clerks, as wages go. Their cashiers most certainly aren't fast and efficient like other stores. They get what they pay for, and if these people want better pay, then they should go to work elsewhere. If Walmart if all they qualify for, then who's fault is that?
That's what I always tell the clerks. I tell them that they are stupid for scanning my DVDs and that they should go be CEOs instead.
Walmart caters to poor people...that's shocking.
You're being too nice.
Walmart, a very successful for profit corporation's business model relies on indirect transfers from the federal government.
Last edited by Th'Pusher; 03-25-2014 at 07:37 PM.
Yes, it's not just the poor getting poorer, it's everyone. What you seem to be missing is that raising the minimum wage doesn't just adjust the pay for those at the bottom, it adjusts the whole pay scale. 30 years ago the average CEO made roughly 50 times what their bottom level workers made. Now they make roughly 250-300 times what their bottom worker makes. During that same time the average output of the American worker doubled, but their wages stayed the same. It's time for that to change.
Arguing that it will cause inflation is a cop out. Do you think that keeping wages the same will stop inflation, because that is certainly not the case. The increase in wages does not cause a 1:1 correlation on inflation. No matter how you split it, the increase in worker wages creates more consumer spending, where the benefits of that increased consumer spending far outweighs any amount of inflation that would couple it. The US economy is 70%+ consumer spending. When the US worker doesn't have money to spend, the economy does not grow as fast. Conversely, when the Us consumer has more to spend, the economy is able to grow at a faster pace.
Someone is bound to make the "raising the minimum wage will cost jobs" argument. In the short run, and by that I mean immediate and very short short run, you may be right, but over the long run it creates more jobs. Why? Because labor markets don't function that same way most people understand supply and demand. Labor demand is a function of consumer demand. When consumers have more money to spend, the demand for all products rises, and thus employers higher more workers to meet production needs. If the minimum wage was increased tomorrow, and McDonalds or Wal-Mart lay off a large chunk of employees, their shareholder should ask why they were employing so many superfluous workers in the first place.
Lastly, and this is where I really don't understand why people aren't pissed off about large companies that thrive on low wage workers. The Walton brothers make up 3 of the 6 richest people in America. The US taxpayer subsidizes their employees income with welfare and food stamps. The US taxpayers subsidizes their sales because their products are sold largely to people on welfare and food stamps. And yet they are still consistently one of the larger recipients of corporate tax breaks. If paying their employees a living wage cuts into their bottom line, I really don't give a , because they can certainly ing afford to pay their own employees more easily than I can.
Tea party, as s, shills, and defenders of mega-corps, will intimidate Repugs into blocking raising the minimum wage.
Bito. I have stated I OK with raising the minimum wage quite a bit, but slowly over time. It will cause inflation, and my response is not a cop-out. My point is that in the end, minimum wage is still minimum wage, and I don't believe once inflation catches up, that anyone will be any better off. People of all wages will demand increases as well. Your appeared certainty of not causing a 1:1 I think is foolish. I will not claim it will, but I do highly suspect it will be at least close.
You bring up CEO wages. So what. In my mind, that just put you into the catagory of a jealous fool.
CEO's effectively get supply and demand based wages. How can you see that as wrong?
This probably a guy, or the type of guy, that the Repugs' Pro-Business War on Employees screwed by upgrading them to supervisor/manager and killing all their overtime pay
Wal-Mart Manager Speaks out About His Store’s Ugly Reality
President Obama sparked a new round of big business ire this month, directing the Labor Department to reform rules that exclude salaried managers making over $23,660 a year from overtime protections.
That was welcome news for a Wal-Mart assistant manager – granted anonymity due to concerns over retaliation – who told Salon the retail giant exploits managers’ lack of overtime protection by making managers do rank-and-file employees’ work in order to cut costs. (Wal-Mart did not respond to a request for comment last week.) A condensed version of our conversation – on chronic understaffing, firings of strikers, and why he sympathizes with the union-backed non-union workers group OUR Walmart – follows.
The regulatory change that’s been proposed by the president on overtime — how would that change things for you, if that went into law?
That would force Wal-Mart to, one, start to count how much managers are working … The more time I spend at work, the less time I spend with my family … Without compensation for it, it makes no sense to me … My time with my family is worth a lot more.
How many hours a week do you think you’re working now?
Right now, it’s consistently about 48 hours a week. However, when we get toward the holiday season …you’re regularly working 60 hours a week.
How much do you bring home … from doing that?
My yearly salary is $44,000.
What would change in your life if you were covered by overtime protections?
I think I would get more time with my family — and if I didn’t have more time with my family I would definitely have money … to compensate me for time spent away.
Right now, do you think there’s work that Wal-Mart has managers do rather than rank-and-file employees because they don’t have to pay you for overtime?
Absolutely … What the average customer sees in the store is forcing the manager to step out of that manager role, and into that hourly associate role. So you’ll have managers that are cashiering, stocking shelves … We’re trying to take care of our managerial duties too …
[Managers are] not getting proper lunches or getting breaks. There’s no way for Wal-Mart to ensure that we’re getting breaks, because we don’t punch a clock, of course – we don’t track our time.
It’s been suggested by business groups that this kind of regulation would kill jobs … If this kind of regulation went into effect, do you think your store would be hiring more people or fewer people?
You know, I think Wal-Mart’s way is Wal-Mart’s going to hire fewer and fewer people regardless of what decisions are being made …
With the recent Sam’s [Club] restructuring, Wal-Mart, you know, might pull something like that within their actual [management at] Wal-Mart positions …
[Already] there’s a lot of work to be done that’s not being done right now with the amount of people we have.
In management, in the rank-and-file positions, or both?
In both …
As a salaried manager, if I’m [moving] freight all night long, I’m not able to give my associates in the building the attention that they need, or you know, the developmental process … [to] grow within their role within Wal-Mart. You know, it makes the job very hard to do.
How does that affect Wal-Mart customers?
If you have a manager that’s running a cash register, you know that manager is not on the sales floor ensuring that product is on the shelves. You know that manager is not able to respond to customer calls as quickly …
So I think customer service definitely does lack.
Your job as an assistant manager – what do you think is different about it from what people imagine?
When I came into the role, I thought it was going to be that I’m going to handle paperwork, be there for the associates, and help them with issues that may arise with them; I’m going to be the guy that they can come to for answers, I’m going to develop leaders …
There’s not enough time in the day to do it … They don’t have enough people to get the job done. And it shows. It shows on the shelves, in terms of the stock. You know, it shows with the morale of the associates. That definitely has issues …
If you look at companies like Wegman’s or Costco, you know, that staff their stores, and they have high payroll percentages, but they’re still [showing] profits, because they’re getting the product on the shelves …
If you have empty shelves, your baskets aren’t as good. What really matters is: How much does that customer buy going through the register? You know, if the customer comes in with a shopping list of 35 items, and you only have 20, you lost a good portion of that sale … to your compe or …
The company made $17 billion in profit last year. They paid the CEO $18 million … There’s no reason why they can’t pay overtime, they can’t give hours back to associates.
The group OUR Wal-Mart … What have you heard from Wal-Mart corporate or Wal-Mart management about it?
Corporate has been very quiet recently about … OUR Wal-Mart. What they have told everybody is “most of these aren’t Wal-Mart associates” and … “the union sees Wal-Mart
is a big paycheck.”
And you know, I can understand Wal-Mart’s stance on unions, and why they don’t want it. However, I can say I see a lot of validation in these associates’ claims that are part of the organization.
And you know, I think that they’re trying to bring the issues up the best way they can … Sometimes managers don’t hear it, and it’s not because we don’t want to hear it. It’s because we have 65 things going on at one time …
The individual attention is just not there in the stores right now, because … they’re understaffing.
Have you been tasked personally with doing anything to talk to people about OUR Wal-Mart or discourage people from getting involved in OUR Wal-Mart?
No … I’m on the fence.
I’m not going to say that a union is the answer for Wal-Mart; I’m not going to say that it’s not. However …associates should speak up … Those concerns should be able to be handled by people that have the time to handle them …
It’s not fair to the associates to bring a concern to a member of management in their store who doesn’t necessarily have the time to take care of it … If I don’t get my compliance done, that could cost me my job …
The firing of more than 20 people who had gone on strike with OUR Wal-Mart – what’s your view of what motivated that?
My view on that would probably be: They don’t want it to spread. Wal-Mart’s going to say, you know: “Hey, it’s an attendance policy” [being enforced] … The real reason … is that you don’t want that apple spoiling the bunch, as they would say. The last thing you would want to see is associates … speaking out and … organizing and not facing retaliation, so other associates feel more comfortable with it.
When the president or members of the Obama administration do events appearing with Wal-Mart executives or promoting Wal-Mart, do you think that’s a good
move or a bad move?
I think that it would be a good move if Wal-Mart had good intentions …
We can donate a ton of money to everybody out there … That’s something that Wal-Mart should be proud of. But Wal-Mart should take its pride back in taking care of its associates and taking care of its customers …
It’s kind of sad that, you know, you have associates that are struggling right now — especially struggle this time of year — to get 24 hours a week … They didn’t ask to be part-time. A lot of them would love to be full-time …
I think that the associates that are out there voicing their concerns — especially through their organization — I think that they should continue to do so … I think the only way that things are going to change is for the public to start understanding what we’re going through …
I think it’s important for the associates to know that not all managers are monsters. There are some people that are certainly bad managers out there … There are a lot of managers – and I’m, you know, personally speaking to managers at my store and managers at other stores — that are unhappy with the direction that the company’s going. It’s a lot different when you’re working at a store than when you’re sitting behind a desk in Arkansas.
http://www.alternet.org/corporate-ac...age=1#bookmark
lol @ conveniently dismissing the captive BODs. stacked by CEO's for CEO's. Contemporary CEO pay is not even remotely related to supply and demand.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
