The Wal-Mart hatred bandwagon is a load of crap...

[Zer_]

Be warned, a long post will follow.

WAL-MART Drives Down Retail Wages $3 BILLION Every Year

* "A recent study by researchers at UC Berkeley's Labor Center has quantified what happened to retail wages when Wal-Mart set up shop, drawing on 15 years of data on actual store openings. The study found that Wal-Mart drives down wages in urban areas, with an annual loss of at least $3 billion dollars in earnings for retail workers."

* UPDATE: Since the completion of our film, the study has been finalized and published, and the published findings produced a different number for the annual loss in retail earnings than the preliminary figure we used in the film. The published study ultimately found that Wal-Mart actually reduced the take-home pay of retail workers by $4.7 BILLION dollars annually. Unfortunately for the retail workers this statistic concerns, Wal-Mart's effect on retail wages turns out to be worse than we had anticipated.

Okay, so because these effects are due to Wal-Mart alone? This is an effect caused by several superstores, not just Wal-Mart. Blaming Wal-Mart alone for this is just being a bigot. Also it is interesting to note that the overall number of people doing lower paying jobs is going up. This isn't because of Wal-Mart alone, there are several factors. If minimum wages went up, Wal-Mart would follow the laws, and raise their prices accordingly.

"We also have a significant number of Associates and their children who receive health insurance through public-assistance programs. Five percent of our Associates are on Medicaid compared to an average for national employers of 4 percent. Twenty-seven percent of Associates' children are on such programs, compared to a national average of 22 percent (Exhibit 5). In total, 46 percent of Associates' children are either on Medicaid or are uninsured."

This is a quote from one of Wal-Mart's own internal memos. It states that many of their employees and their children are on public health care programs. If they did that kind of research on other low paying jobs like McDonald's or even Target they'd find remarkably similar results. It's the way it is for minimum wage jobs. Anyone who is working a minimum wage job is costing a tax payer's money.

In 2004, a study released the UC Berkeley Labor Center found that "reliance by Wal-Mart workers on public assistance programs in California comes at a cost to taxpayers of an estimated $86 million annually

McDonald's, Target... It's the same for any minimum wage job. Get over it. Wal-Mart employees follow the exact same tax system as anyone else in their state follows. Just because Wal-Mart employees are payed less, that means that they shouldn't benefit from any form of public health care? That's self righteous and makes me sick to even think people who make 200 grand a year are fucking complaining.

5. Capture savings from current initiatives to improve labor productivity. These initiatives include reducing the number of labor hours per store, increasing the percentage of part-time Associates in stores, and increasing the number of hours per Associate.

Other large companies like Blockbuster's, Metro (Local), and Target have similar policies.

Wal-Mart says that "Wal-Mart's 'full time' status begins at 34 hours per week, not 28, for associates hired after 2002." Before 2002, however, Wal-Mart's definition of full-time WAS 28 hours per week, and was raised in 2002 to 34 hours per week in order to raise the bar for healthcare eligibility for their employees

By law here in Quebec an employee must work more then 36 hours per week for 3 consecutive weeks before they are essentially forced into being a full-time employee. Wal-Mart is still not breaking any laws here. For the entire duration of my 2 first jobs I was part time not by choice, but because it's just the way it is.

Wal-Mart is paying eleven million dollars to settle Federal allegations it used illegal immigrants to clean its stores.

Yeah and I guess the US should sue itself for hiring illegal immigrants to build that wall of yours on the Mexico border. This is happening everywhere, and it's not just Wal-Mart.

Wal-Mart disputes a claim made by Edith Arana in the film, that she experienced racial as well as gender discrimination in her experience working at Wal-Mart, by saying hers is an isolated incident.

Calling it an isolated incident is a bit off mark. Racial sexual discrimination happens in all businesses. It doesn't just happen in Wal-Mart stores. Wal-Mart itself can't be held morally accountable for such things. The person responsible is normally store managers, or the actual person(s) who are discriminating. Saying Wal-Mart is evil because they discriminate is just hogwash.

The city [of Cameron, MO] provided $2.1 million in infrastructure improvements through sales and property-tax increment financing in the area of a Supercenter and surrounding industrial park. Wal-Mart served as the developer for the project.

Contrary to what Wal-Mart haters say, a Wal-Mart doesn't adversely effect every small business in any given area. The fact is that yes, a small family owned business can't compete directly against a superstore, any superstore. But Wal-Mart's low prices means more money in the consumer's pockets to be spent elsewhere. This can be beneficial to the businesses who aren't in direct competition to the superstores.

"As of [March 5, 2005], Wal-Mart Realty has a total of 356 buildings for sale or lease, a total of 26,699,678 million square feet of empty stores. That's enough empty space to fill up 534 football fields. This phenomenal figure makes Wal-Mart the King of Dead Air in America and the world. No othe retailer has this many dead stores in its inventory. The annual figure ranges around 350 to 400 from year to year."

I guess Wal-Mart isn't the evil and invincible super-corporation we once thought. In other news I heard there were a lot of other privately own lots that are not in use around the world.

Taken in the context of Wal-Mart's taxpayer costs, however, Wal-Mart's per store charitable contributions do not match up to the amount of money a store takes in the "numerous forms of public assistance--Medicaid, Food Stamps, public housing--that often allow workers to subsist on Wal-Mart's low wages. A report by the House Education and Workforce Committee conservatively places [public assistance costs] at $420,750 per store; the Wal-Mart Foundation's per-store charitable giving is just 11 percent of that amount ($47,222).

Nope, but I bet you that the amount of money people save by shopping at Wal-Mart would help balance those numbers a whole lot. I've also covered this in part above, again why should any Wal-Mart employee be deprived of any public services because they have a lower wage?

A WAL-MART Worker may donate money from their paycheck to the CRITICAL NEED FUND, a program to aid other employees in times of crisis, like a fire or tornado.
In 2004, WAL-MART Employees gave OVER $5 MILLION to help fellow workers

Oh right... that's a bad thing?

There is also the whole ordeal about sweat shops and the so called "negative impact" that they have on 3rd world countries. The people who constantly complain about these things are people who live comfortable lives, they have ample amounts of food and have decent homes to live in. Most people in 3rd world countries do not live in the same conditions we do. I've stated these facts before on the escapist but I'll say it again. The sweat shop employees who are payed 0.15$-0.40$ an hour are often times better payed then the regional average for the area. Often times the alternatives to working in these shops is something like working outside in the fields, prostitution, coal mining. The alternative jobs in these 3rd world countries pay less then the sweat shops.

Before the industrial revolution here in America and Europe we had to work in sweat shop conditions because it was necessary for survival. We didn't have the technology to mass produce things. These 3rd world countries don't have industrial revolution technology, thus the sweat shops of long past are still present in these countries. If these sweatshops were to shut down then the workers would end up in a worse state then they are now.

The people who fight to shut down sweat shops are the same dickheads who are against GM crops. Yes GM crops those fantastic little things that have helped feed billions of people (yes billions).

There's also a lot of heat on Wal-Mart for being against any labor unions. Okay so let's consider Wal-Mart if they had a labor union. The overall wage of Wal-Mart workers would go up. The labor union (which is actually a business in itself, without laborers paying fees they wouldn't exist) would charge union fees to Wal-Mart. All that money Wal-Mart pays to the union and workers results in higher prices across the board. So now that Wal-Mart's prices went up, any competition (Target, Zellers, etc...) will also raise their prices, and thus the extra money those same Wal-Mart employees get in their higher wages goes right back to the big corporations because they raised their prices to make up for the higher wages.

Most of the arguments put down by "Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price" are in fact cases of negligence, racism, or malpractice that can't really be blamed on Wal-Mart as a corporation. Those who are to blame are the people who actually do discriminate against their employees. I'm all for taking down a asshole manager who deliberately withholds on hourly wages because of the color of someone's skin. Going on saying how evil or immoral Wal-Mart is is just stupid. Just because someone is murdered in New York, it doesn't mean every New Yorker is a murderer.

 

[arcus_angelus]

All that being said. . .why the big stance on defending Wal-Mart? I don't mind that you're doing it, i'm just curious as to why you're doing it.

 

[perfectimo]

"Why all the hate on Walmart?" anyone going to make this?

I know this isn't a response to your OP but why did you feel you needed to make a new thread, couldn't you have brought this up in the other thread and given it a direction since it has just turned into, "I hate people" "People are dumb" and so on?

EDIT: Forgot "Why all the hate on..." lost popularity, hmmm... Anyone going to make a "Ask a Walmart employee"?

 

[Zer_]

I decided to post a new thread because posting in the topic that inspired me to do this would've just resulted in one huge ass post in a topic that has nothing to do with Wal-Mart as a corporation and more to do with someone getting fucking trampled to death.

All that being said. . .why the big stance on defending Wal-Mart? I don't mind that you're doing it, I'm just curious as to why you're doing it.

Because I tend to be opposed to bandwagons in general. When I saw all this Wal-Mart hatred I got curious as to why people actually hated Wal-Mart. Fact is most of the people have no fucking clue exactly why they hate Wal-Mart.

As we sit at our computers, any one of which could feed some people for years, let us excuse ourselves from guilt. Let us take all that we can from these countries in order to further fuel the growing gap between the richest and the poorest. That is the American way!

I don't feel guilty because I just so happen to be born in Canada. When you look at the 3rd world countries, their situation can usually be traced back to geographical location. When you don't have a lot of fertile land, you have to dedicate more of your own energy into survival. That's why the industrial revolution happened in Europe and North America when it did but not in much of Asia or Africa. Because of our geographical location we had more time and resources to spend on new developments which eventually fueled the industrial revolution.

 

[Brett Alex]

EDIT: Forgot "Why all the hate on..." lost popularity, hmmm... Anyone going to make a "Ask a Walmart employee"?

"Why all the hate on ask a Walmart employee threads?"

 

[perfectimo]

I decided to post a new thread because posting in the topic that inspired me to do this would've just resulted in one huge ass post in a topic that has nothing to do with Wal-Mart as a corporation and more to do with someone getting fucking trampled to death.

Cool just wondering, read these word and take note, don't swear in all your posts and your thread title, it's a quick and easy way to get in the bad books with the mods and community.

 

[perfectimo]

EDIT: Forgot "Why all the hate on..." lost popularity, hmmm... Anyone going to make a "Ask a Walmart employee"?

"Why all the hate on ask a Walmart employee threads?"

No, wait. How about, "Why all the hate on "ask a ..." threads?" Any better or did I just ruin it?


EDIT: Damn it, sorry for double didn't even realise.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

I hate Wal-Mart for the same reasons I hate McDonalds and Gamestop.

1. They hate their employees. Wal-Mart even sent a handful of employees to keep out a mob, resulting in the death of one of them.

http://www.huliq.com/1/73764/black-friday-walmart-death-worker-trampled

2. They hate the consumer. Both McDonalds and Wal-Mart sell utter crap at prices that reflect this, and provide minimal customer service in the form of employees who don't have a clue what they're doing/have a bad attitude.

3. The people who shop at Wal-Mart do so purely because of the prices, which means that Wal-Mart is a gathering place for all sorts of lovely people. Obviously it depends on where you live, but there are still always gonna be real weirdos in the store.

4. Don't try to return something. Ever.

5. Don't try to shop there during a busy shopping time of the year. Refer to the link if you need a reason why.

6. Finally, they have store chains everywhere and make tons of money. Why should I support their cruddy service and shoddy products when I can go somewhere that not only needs the money more, but actually makes or distributes a QUALITY product?

This is the whole problem I have with Barnes and Noble. Our mall used to have a Borders book store, which was great. It had tons of books and lots of manga at reasonable prices (for new books.) Lo and behold, a Barnes and Noble opened right across from them. That Borders location went out of business fast, and now there's none near me. So what do I get? I get to trudge through the Barnes and Noble, all the way up the stairs to the 2nd floor, where a scattered, unsorted mess of various manga from the same 5 or 6 extremely popular (yet cruddy) series that every prepubescent teen is busy buying en masse.

Borders actually had things like Priest, JoJo's Bizarre Adventure and Mermaid Saga. Barnes and Noble has things like Naruto, and... Naruto. Oh, and did I mention Borders had awesome people working there? Yeah, well... They did.

My point is, I would equate Barnes and Noble with Wal-Mart. Just more sub-par service and selection that people seem to love for some reason.

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

[Vortigar]

People hate Wal Mart because it's a company that skirts the edges of the law to its absolute limit to press costs. This leads to a lot of practices that many in a more comfortable job would frown upon.

The obvious lack of morals of the company, not bothering to cover up that they're out to score the cheapest (and thus most exploitative) contracts puts them in a bad light. And we're talking about the employee as well as supplier contracts here.

You'd imagine that a company which from a wealthy country would try and improve the conditions in less developed countries, but Wal-Mart (and companies like it) simply don't bother and only try to push costs and prices down as far as they will go.

Low budget stores (which originated from Germany btw, Lidl and Aldi are massive concerns that easily pushed Wal Mart from settling on European soil) exist to supply to the bottom rung of the financial ladder in our rich countries. To be able to do this they invariably end up at business models like these.

Why people target a certain business specifically with these allegations is beyond me though as it is a problem of the capitalistic model across the board that the rich will stay rich and the poor will stay poor. Low budget stores throw this fact in our face again and again.

I'm not going to outright condemn these businesses for these practices as both people over here and there facilitate them and they serve a required function in our countries, but I can definately agree with the sentiments against them.

Aside:
Particularly Lidl is legendary for its insane employee policies in Europe. You get a set number of time to serve a customer, regardless of how many products they're buying. Can't make the grade? The manager is empowered to throw you out. You can only go to the bathroom a set number of times a day for a maximum amount of time. Break that limit and you might be thrown out again. They even went so far as to make an exception for menstruating women, having them wear a badge during their period to identify that they could take longer bathroom breaks during those days. This last one was overturned as it was deemed an illegal breach of privacy by the courts.

 

[Zer_]

People hate Wal Mart because it's a company that skirts the edges of the law to its absolute limit to press costs. This leads to a lot of practices that many in a more comfortable job would frown upon.

The obvious lack of morals of the company, not bothering to cover up that they're out to score the cheapest (and thus most exploitative) contracts puts them in a bad light. And we're talking about the employee as well as supplier contracts here.

You'd imagine that a company which from a wealthy country would try and improve the conditions in less developed countries, but Wal-Mart (and companies like it) simply don't bother and only try to push costs and prices down as far as they will go.

Low budget stores (which originated from Germany btw, Lidl and Aldi are massive concerns that easily pushed Wal Mart from settling on European soil) exist to supply to the bottom rung of the financial ladder in our rich countries. To be able to do this they invariably end up at business models like these.

Why people target a certain business specifically with these allegations is beyond me though as it is a problem of the capitalistic model across the board that the rich will stay rich and the poor will stay poor. Low budget stores throw this fact in our face again and again.

I'm not going to outright condemn these businesses for these practices as both people over here and there facilitate them and they serve a required function in our countries, but I can definately agree with the sentiments against them.

Aside:
Particularly Lidl is legendary for its insane employee policies in Europe. You get a set number of time to serve a customer, regardless of how many products they're buying. Can't make the grade? The manager is empowered to throw you out. You can only go to the bathroom a set number of times a day for a maximum amount of time. Break that limit and you might be thrown out again. They even went so far as to make an exception for menstruating women, having them wear a badge during their period to identify that they could take longer bathroom breaks during those days. This last one was overturned as it was deemed an illegal breach of privacy by the courts.

So in reality you're not against Wal-Mart, you're against the general idea of capitalism. That's cool.

Oh and don't blame Wal-Mart employees or managers because someone died, especially considering the circumstances the manager is not to blame for this. The people just ran in before the store was even open. They literally broke through the door. Someone had to be there to unlock the door in the first place... Helps to think a little.

 

[beddo]

Labour laws in the United States are pathetic. They only help to increase the gap between rich and poor. Just look at the number of people in poverty in the US, it's sickening.

The United States has an appaulling history of employment standards. The government is so corrupt that Giants such as WalMart and McDonalds are able to lobby against improvements in workers rights.

 

[Brett Alex]

EDIT: Forgot "Why all the hate on..." lost popularity, hmmm... Anyone going to make a "Ask a Walmart employee"?

"Why all the hate on ask a Walmart employee threads?"

No, wait. How about, "Why all the hate on "ask a ..." threads?" Any better or did I just ruin it?

Nah, definitely better, just a bit late to the party. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.76570#910804]

 

[Samurai Goomba]

Oh and don't blame Wal-Mart employees or managers because someone died, especially considering the circumstances the manager is not to blame for this. The people just ran in before the store was even open. They literally broke through the door. Someone had to be there to unlock the door in the first place... Helps to think a little.

Except the Wal-Mart managers KNEW how many people were out there. A different store would have brought in the police, or had security standing by. There were about TEN employees standing by that door to stop all those people, and that is EXTREME negligence on the part of Wal-Mart management. Also, that store should have closed the MINUTE they found a dead body. Ever heard of a CRIME SCENE?!?

Yes, it does help to think a little.

 

[perfectimo]

EDIT: Forgot "Why all the hate on..." lost popularity, hmmm... Anyone going to make a "Ask a Walmart employee"?

"Why all the hate on ask a Walmart employee threads?"

No, wait. How about, "Why all the hate on "ask a ..." threads?" Any better or did I just ruin it?

Nah, definitely better, just a bit late to the party. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.76570#910804]

Damn and it was you as well...

 

[beddo]

Oh and don't blame Wal-Mart employees or managers because someone died, especially considering the circumstances the manager is not to blame for this. The people just ran in before the store was even open. They literally broke through the door. Someone had to be there to unlock the door in the first place... Helps to think a little.

You can blame the managers because it is their responsibility to ensure their employees are safe in their place of work. There was no system to handle the rush of customers and completely inadequate security. The people responsible for not ensuring the safety of their staff should be charged with corporate manslaughter and the customers who trampled him with manslaughter.

The fact that the shop continued operating is an insult. The police should have shut it down and the council should have withdrawn WalMart's trading licence.

 

[Vortigar]

So in reality you're not against Wal-Mart, you're against the general idea of capitalism. That's cool.

I know I'm cool, but thanks for the reminder.

 

[Zer_]

Oh and don't blame Wal-Mart employees or managers because someone died, especially considering the circumstances the manager is not to blame for this. The people just ran in before the store was even open. They literally broke through the door. Someone had to be there to unlock the door in the first place... Helps to think a little.

You can blame the managers because it is their responsibility to ensure their employees are safe in their place of work. There was no system to handle the rush of customers and completely inadequate security. The people responsible for not ensuring the safety of their staff should be charged with corporate manslaughter and the customers who trampled him with manslaughter.

The fact that the shop continued operating is an insult. The police should have shut it down and the council should have withdrawn WalMart's trading licence.

Uhh... There are countless other superstores that had a similar number of people waiting in line, they just didn't end up breaking through the doorway.

Also the store closed down at least temporarily as can be read in this quote from the New York Times.

Wal-Mart security officials and the police cleared the store, swept up the shattered glass and locked the doors until 1 p.m., when it reopened to a steady stream of calmer shoppers who passed through the missing doors and battered door jambs, apparently unaware that anything had happened.

?How could you know something like that would happen?? said one worker, who added that the store was even busier this year than on Black Friday last year. ?No one expected something like that.?

Overall Wal-Mart did deploy extra security, but clearly it wasn't enough in this case. Which is tragic, but you can't blame the store's Manager for this. Could something have been done to try and prevent this, yeah most likely. Big crowds like this happen every year, but no one can foresee things like this.

 

[beddo]

Oh and don't blame Wal-Mart employees or managers because someone died, especially considering the circumstances the manager is not to blame for this. The people just ran in before the store was even open. They literally broke through the door. Someone had to be there to unlock the door in the first place... Helps to think a little.

You can blame the managers because it is their responsibility to ensure their employees are safe in their place of work. There was no system to handle the rush of customers and completely inadequate security. The people responsible for not ensuring the safety of their staff should be charged with corporate manslaughter and the customers who trampled him with manslaughter.

The fact that the shop continued operating is an insult. The police should have shut it down and the council should have withdrawn WalMart's trading licence.

Uhh... There are countless other superstores that had a similar number of people waiting in line, they just didn't end up breaking through the doorway.

Also the store closed down at least temporarily as can be read in this quote from the New York Times.

Wal-Mart security officials and the police cleared the store, swept up the shattered glass and locked the doors until 1 p.m., when it reopened to a steady stream of calmer shoppers who passed through the missing doors and battered door jambs, apparently unaware that anything had happened.

?How could you know something like that would happen?? said one worker, who added that the store was even busier this year than on Black Friday last year. ?No one expected something like that.?

Overall Wal-Mart did deploy extra security, but clearly it wasn't enough in this case. Which is tragic, but you can't blame the store's Manager for this. Could something have been done to try and prevent this, yeah most likely. Big crowds like this happen every year, but no one can foresee things like this.

I think that history would beg to differ with you:

[link]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_crush#List_of_human_stampedes[/link]

Football specific:
[link]http://www.stadiumguide.com/disasterspecial.htm[/link]
[link]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillsborough_disaster[/link]
[link]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luzhniki_Disaster[/link]


We know full well that large gatherings of people can and will inevitably lead to human crush death if they are not handled properly.

Shutting down the store for half a day is an insult to the memory of that worker. That store should have been shut down for good until a public inquiry could be completed and those responsible held to account. WalMart should have their licence to trade in that area permanently removed. It's the only way that they and other stores will learn about the importance of both staff and consumer welfare in their stores.

 

[Zer_]

Okay so a list of stampedes isn't going to tell me weather or not a stampede is going to happen tomorrow. Can you tell me when and where we should put extra security so we are to prevent these stampedes? Stampedes will happen weather there's security or not.

Just because terrorist acts have happened in the passed, it doesn't tell us when they will attack next. There are large crowds of people gathered around the world all the time, only a small fraction of them ever turn into a stampede. If I was to compare this to the ever so famous chance of being struck by lightning, I would find that we are more likely to be struck by lightning then being injured in a human stampede.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_behavior

In history there is usually a catalyst to trigger herd behavior into being violent. When there's a mass protest that catalyst is the protest itself. When it comes to a football game, or any other sporting event the catalyst is always something like a bad referee call which costs the game, fights starting in the crowd or just a bunch of angry people because their team lost the game. In Wal-Mart's case there was no clear catalyst, people were waiting for the store to open. By the time anyone could have guaranteed injury it was probably too late.

Stop trying to pin the blame on somebody. No crime was committed in that accident.