The Walmartization Of America

[AA-MCI]

If the pay and benefits for workers at Wal-Mart is so poor, why do people accept jobs there? I mean, is Wal-Mart so big that they have a monopoly on hiring labor that they can supress wages?

[post="176442"][/post]​

Once they drive the existing competition out of business they do.

 

[KCFlyer]

In a word, yes. For many years, Wal-Mart stayed out of big cities. (Does SWA choice of airports ring any bells?) They would go into small towns, or rather to the nearest major highway intersection from that town, and undercut all of the small, Mom-and-Pop businesses that had existed for ages in those towns. As they closed, the people that had worked for those businesses had no choice other than leave town or work at Wal-Mart.

As they had probably never had any benefits at their previous job, what little they got at Wal-Mart seemed huge. But in those days, going to a small-town doctor also cost $5.00 or $10.00.

Today, there is still a large underclass (for want of a better word) that do not have the education or the connections to aspire to something other than a Wal-Mart job. One of the members of this forum has a banner on all his/her posts that says, "I've been down so long that it all looks like up to me." And, when you are in a position that every dime you make goes to putting food on the table and a roof over your head, all of our middle-class sloganeering--Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps; You are the Captain of your destiny: and, You can always get ahead if you just put forth the effort--becomes meaningless. I would bet that those US Airways agents who have been cut to Express wages know what I am talking about. It's really easy for the country club set to sit in judgement on the Wal-Mart set (and before you ask, yes I am a member of the country club set, or was until I got really tired of their BS. I still qualify. I just don't play the game.)

[post="176456"][/post]​

Jim....couldn't help but notice the reference to SWA, which tends to come up eventually when WalMart is discussed. Big difference though. Seems like no other airline wanted to serve places like Midland or Harlingen Texas. Then SWA popularized them and low and behold "commuter" service by the others was started. But then SWA made a move into bigger cities. And here's the difference...Southwest pays a living wage...even to start. Stay with them a while and they pay more than most of the major airlines do. A guy staying with WalMart for 20 years is being paid maybe $12 an hour, and still has pathetic health care benefits - and had to wait two years to get them. Plus, many of the early on SWA employees retired millionaires. Think ANY Walmart employees outside the executive suite has retired as a millionaire?

IMHO, WalMart has HURT this country, not just by moving into the suburban neighborhoods. They are on a quest to keep costs low, well, except for those in the executive suite...the CEO owns the Kansas City Royals, but has found that the WalMart way of cutting costs to the bone doesn't work too well with a major league baseball team. And that quest has resulted in the use of sweatshop labor in parts of the world where that's still legal. And when a "quality" manufacturer make the mistake of trying to expand by getting into WalMart, they kill their reputation for quality. Levi's is a good example...Levi's wanted into WalMart, but Walmart didn't like what they had to pay to get their jeans in their stores. So, Levi's send a lot of production offshore - the result, lower quality jeans. Sure, they were cheap, but when the seams start to split after a couple of years, the term "cheap" takes on a whole new meaning. I remember when I was a teenager in the 70's, those jeans used to outlast me. Ain't that way any more. And someone who bought a pair of Levi's at a Walmart that crapped out after a year might see them for a higher price at the Gap, but they won't buy them because of the WalMart cheap jeans experience that they had.

And, as has been mentioned earlier...Walmart took out life insurance policies on their employees...not to benefit the family of the Walmart worker who left the world, but to pad the corporate bottom line. I don't believe Walmart even offers life insurance to their employees.

Things can change...30 years ago, the American auto industry was derided because of the "planned obsolecence of their product. American's demanded that they build a car that matched the quality of the imports. Detroit responded. Today, consumers willingly accept the "planned obsolecence" of inferior merchandise that is sold at a WalMart. I don't shop at WalMart if I can help it, but last June, I was supposed to dance in a dad's dance at my daughters dance recital. My tennis shoes were a little worse for wear, and with only an hour before we had to be at the recital, I ran up to Walmart and bought a pair of Starter tennis shoes. Paid $20. 3 months later, the things are coming apart. I guess I'd rather pay $50 for a pair of shoes that will last me a couple of years than $80 over the course of a year for crappy tennis shoes.

 

[LiveInAHotel]

I'm surprised Wal-Mart has not created their own airline. They have brought down the retail business by treating their employees like slaves (not trying to offend anyone). So why not start Wal-Mart Airways and they can help all of these greedy CEO's bring down what is left of the airline industry. :down: :down: :down:

 

[jimntx]

Jim....couldn't help but notice the reference to SWA, which tends to come up eventually when WalMart is discussed. Big difference though. Seems like no other airline wanted to serve places like Midland or Harlingen Texas.

KC, don't get me wrong. I'm not putting down SWA. I was just noting that in the early days of both, they created a market by serving a customer base that no one else wanted or cared about. The real difference in Wal-Mart and SWA though lies in the way they treat their employees. Would you not agree?

Levi's is a good example...Levi's wanted into WalMart, but Walmart didn't like what they had to pay to get their jeans in their stores. So, Levi's send a lot of production offshore - the result, lower quality jeans.

It isn't "a lot" of their production, it is ALL of their production. Early this year, Levi Strauss closed their last two plants in the U.S. One was in San Antonio. I think the other was somewhere in California. Levi's, which for years were the quintessential symbol of America to most of the world, are no longer manufactured in the U.S.

My tennis shoes were a little worse for wear, and with only an hour before we had to be at the recital, I ran up to Walmart and bought a pair of Starter tennis shoes. Paid $20. 3 months later, the things are coming apart. I guess I'd rather pay $50 for a pair of shoes that will last me a couple of years than $80 over the course of a year for crappy tennis shoes.

[post="176476"][/post]​

Fortunately, I had a loving grandfather who taught me early on that "You get what you pay for"--particularly when it comes to footwear. He always told me that it was better to have 3 pairs of good shoes than 20 pairs of cheap shoes. And, he shined a pair of shoes every time he took them off from wearing them for a day. When he died in 1964, he still had wearable shoes in the closet that he had bought in the 1920's. (As men, we also have the advantage that our shoe styles don't change that much. )

When I was still flying, some of the younger male flight attendants couldn't believe that I would wear a pair of shoes on the a/c that I had bought for $150. Of course, I still have those shoes. In the same period of time, they probably bought 10 pairs of $30 shoes. Who saved money?

 

[JS]

And THAT's what we all need to do.

I can't help but think of an article a few months back about Costco. Costco is the polar opposite of Sam's Club (Walmart)...they showed a profit, but Wall Street was critical of them because they paid their employees a decent wage (cashiers who have been there a while make $25 an hour), and their medical coverage is excellent. WalMart is a Wall Street darling, but they were critical of Costco, saying that they could show stronger profits if they didn't treat their employees so well. That did it for me...I cut up the Sam's card and joined Costco.

[post="176161"][/post]​

No wonder Wall Street didn't like Costco. $25 an hour? To be a cashier? In Kansas? That is ridiculous overpaying.

 

[NWA/AMT]

No wonder Wall Street didn't like Costco. $25 an hour? To be a cashier? In Kansas? That is ridiculous overpaying.

[post="177420"][/post]​

Yet, not when you consider the revenue they help generate for Costco.

 

[LiveInAHotel]

I wonder if Garfield1966 has applied with Wal-Mart? Since he was fired from AA!

 

[KCFlyer]

No wonder Wall Street didn't like Costco. $25 an hour? To be a cashier? In Kansas? That is ridiculous overpaying.

[post="177420"][/post]​

JS...Costco is profitable. They pay their employees a decent wage and provide excellent benefits. Their prices are quite competitive with Sams Clubs.

Now...my economic theory is that that "overpaid" cashier might just go spend some money on a new car from a local car dealer. He might go buy a new house from a local builder. He might go take the family to dinner at a local restaurant once a week. He won't go to the local (taxpayer funded) health department for basic medical care. He won't be applying for (taxpayer funded) food stamps. In short, he'll rely less on government assitance and provide more to the local economy. But all Wall Street cares about is superior profits, without a thought to the costs associated with those profits.

 

[local 12 proud]

and just to add one thing more kc, a happy content employee will in most cases produce a happy content customer. southwest figured that one out years ago when other carriers were losing money and welding the doors shut.

 

[jimntx]

KCFlyer and local 12 proud, it is obvious to me that both of you must be Communists with connections to Al Qaeda. The only thing important in life is maximization of stockholder value! Well, to be exact, maximization of the value of stocks I hold. Employee satisfaction or ability to pay bills or to feed their families is an obvious Democratic ploy to raise taxes and destroy America! I'm reporting both of you!!!!! :angry: :angry: :angry: ( )

 

[AA-MCI]

KCFlyer and local 12 proud, it is obvious to me that both of you must be Communists with connections to Al Qaeda. The only thing important in life is maximization of stockholder value! Well, to be exact, maximization of the value of stocks I hold. Employee satisfaction or ability to pay bills or to feed their families is an obvious Democratic ploy to raise taxes and destroy America! I'm reporting both of you!!!!! :angry: :angry: :angry: ( )

[post="177548"][/post]​

Hey, don't forget me! If not thinking like that is being a commie then I want to be a commie too!

 

[local 12 proud]

Challenging the WalMarting of America
PLENTY IS WRONG WITH THE WAL-MART PICTURE

Dec 8, 2003

A drama is taking place about the future, not just of America's economy, but the global marketplace. A metaphor for this drama is the role that Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, plays. Since its founding by Sam Walton in 1962, it has grown to be larger than the economies of 170 nations.

By rigorous cost containment and careful attention to detail, it has forced suppliers to be competitive and more effective. It has given Americans lower prices, and some experts even say has held down inflation. What could be wrong with this picture? Well, plenty.

First of all, there are the costs to communities. It appears that communities lose far more jobs with Wal-Mart than they gain. Depending upon that community and whether or not those jobs lost are unionized, the jobs that they do get are $2 to $10 an hour less than those destroyed. Much of the opposition is to the impact that Wal-Mart has on the fabric of the communities it operates in, often at the outskirts of town, drawing away from the vitality of the main street where businesses, slowly, are strangled.

The impact can even be devastating for its suppliers, as detailed in a cover story in this month's Fast Company magazine, discussing the impact on Huffy Bikes and Vlasic Pickles, where companies end up being squeezed and often cannibalizing themselves. Finally, there are grave questions about the treatment of workers in the factories around the world that supply Wal-Mart.

There appears to be a corrosive impact on Wal-Mart itself: It is not just anti-union, but blatantly so, firing workers who are sympathetic to unions. There is illegal coercion of their own employees who may be interested in unions, and illegal roadblocks to people who would organize.

Last June in the Wall Street Journal, there was a story about Wal-Mart firing workers earning $9.50/hour just because they were at the upper end of Wal-Mart's already low pay scale.

There is strong evidence that the corporate culture that knows every detail of its supply chain refuses to correct abuses that have been widely reported in its own operation.

Last year in Oregon, a jury found that company managers had coerced hundreds of employees to work overtime without compensation, as Wal-Mart managers were tampering with time cards, and forcing employees to work off the clock. This appears not to be an isolated example. Already Wal-Mart has settled overtime suits in Colorado and New Mexico, and there are more than 40 other cases pending across the country.

Equally as distressing was the raid this fall of 61 Wal-Mart stores where it appears they were contracting with companies to clean their stores who systematically used illegal immigrants. These employees were cheated out of overtime by these companies that often failed to pay their taxes. A systemic pattern by a company known for insisting on detailed, private financial information from its suppliers, but unable or unwilling to make sure that its own contractors follow the law. This raises huge questions about their 10,000 overseas contractors and subcontractors, about whether or not Wal-Mart has complied with its own vague code of conduct, especially since Wal-Mart is the only major retailer that refuses to allow independent auditing of its factories overseas.

Mr. Speaker, it is time for Wal-Mart to open up to independent monitoring abroad, to stop cheating its employees at home, and to become a force to lift standards, to make our world a better place.

To help them, Congress ought to start now investigating the practices of America's largest retailer, particularly as it relates to labor and employment. Communities should help Wal-Mart by not cutting corners and cutting their own throats in competition for another store, and instead establish reasonable land use and planning regulations for Wal-Mart developments.

Most important, consumers should begin to consider whether the lowest price is worth any cost: to the poor of the world, to suppliers here at home, to the health of our main streets, and the abuse of Wal-Mart workers, and Americans denied basic organizing rights. There is a Wal-Mart Day of Action planned next month for January 14. This will give us all an opportunity to consider whether the lowest price, regardless of its cost, is worth it.