Thinking as a Hobby 3477603 Curiosities served |
2004-03-01 1:42 PM Working for Wal-Mart Previous Entry :: Next Entry Read/Post Comments (11) So I had lunch with Jill today, and we got to talking about Ralph Nader, then corporations, then Wal-Mart. She said she'd seen a special on PBS about how evil and horrible they are.
So I thought I'd do a little poking around. Here's the website for the PBS special Store Wars. And here's what they have to say about wages and business practices at Wal-Mart:
Oh my god! Wal-Mart is evil. They're paying wages that are typical for their industry. And they call their employees "associates". That is so 1984. (By the way, my company calls its employees "Employee Partners".)
Which means that two-thirds of Wal-Mart employees are full-time, and are eligible for benefits. I'm sorry, but on the face of it, Wal-Mart doesn't sound incredibly horrible. They're anti-union. Tell me a company that encourages unionization. They don't pay below average for retail workers...they pay the average rate (if you've got a problem with that, write your Congressperson to raise the minimum wage, don't bitch at Wal-Mart). So their benefits aren't very good...guess what? Neither are mine. Benefits packages have gotten worse in the past five years. Yes, corporations want to maximize the bottom line, but health care costs are rising, and it does cost them more to give better health benefits. Does this make Wal-Mart evil? And Jill said that she'd seen a story about Wal-Mart employees being trained on how to receive welfare. I found several stories like this one (none from mainstream news outlets...they're all controlled by corporate interests, don't you know), from Common Dreams:
So Wal-Mart provides information about government assistance to its employees. Those sons-a-bitches! Here's an editorial from a Kansas newspaper that breaks down the financials for a cashier working at Wal-Mart:
I'm sorry, but I don't see a massive scandal at work here. Wal-Mart pays the industry average, which the government recognizes as below a living wage and compensates accordingly. So an unskilled worker can get a job that makes enough to barely get by. If you disagree with the level of wages that a cashier at Wal-Mart makes, then what do you think they should be getting? And what policies should be implemented to make that happen? If we raise the minimum wage, Wal-Mart is going to pass those costs along to the customer, so the cost of consumer goods is going to go up, making it even harder for that cashier to buy the things he needs to live. If we compensate with policies like the Earned Income Tax Credit, then taxpayers are paying to balance out equity in pay...but then we're encouraging companies to pay substandard wages and let the government pick up the slack. So what's the right governmental policy? And that's a separate issue from how Wal-Mart behaves. Asking a corporation to do the right thing is a bit silly. They're going to be primarily concerned with the bottom line. But guess what? As a consumer, you have a way of influencing their behavior...with your money. You don't like their business practices, write a letter to Wal-Mart and don't shop at Wal-Mart or Sam's. Nothing, after all, speaks louder than money. Read/Post Comments (11) Previous Entry :: Next Entry Back to Top |
||||||
© 2001-2010 JournalScape.com. All rights reserved. All content rights reserved by the author. custsupport@journalscape.com |