It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Walmart Will Give Half- Million Employees Raises

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: Daedal

Maybe the pressure of raising the minimum wage is finally embarrassing the Walton family. I'm sure their multi-billion dollar fortune won't break the bank. To them, this is pennies on the dollar. What's sad, is it takes public outcry to get these billionaires to reward their workers for helping their business become successful. Without workers who are struggling to make ends meet selling the Walton's merchandise, Walmart can't exist.


Undoubtedly. The media exposure IMO, played a vital role in this decision, coupled with the push to raise the federal minimum to 10.10 per hour.

Perhaps one of the first times shining the light on unfair work practices resulted in a change, albeit minimal.

Now, if they can continue to expose the industry, perhaps even better conditions for workers and taxpayers could result.

Corporate welfare would be a good start.
edit on 19-2-2015 by Daedal because: edit




posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Daedal

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: Daedal

Maybe the pressure of raising the minimum wage is finally embarrassing the Walton family. I'm sure their multi-billion dollar fortune won't break the bank. To them, this is pennies on the dollar. What's sad, is it takes public outcry to get these billionaires to reward their workers for helping their business become successful. Without workers who are struggling to make ends meet selling the Walton's merchandise, Walmart can't exist.


Undoubtedly. The media exposure IMO, played a vital role in this decision, coupled with the push to raise the federal minimum to 10.10 per hour.

Perhaps one of the first times shining the light on unfair work practices resulted in a change, albeit minimal.
Agreed. First thing I thought when I saw the headline was: "that oughtta shut 'em up!" -the Waltons
edit on 19-2-2015 by AshOnMyTomatoes because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower

Yep!

When I worked for a big box store it was understood that "name brand" items were sold for less because they were special "insert store here" versions. These versions often had cheaper internal parts, but otherwise looked identical. The SKU's are where the difference could usually be found.

This is also another reason why many big box stores will advertise "price matching" -- but good luck getting it. The SKU number next to the barcode is not the same...and the products internal components aren't the same either.

Think twice about big purchases from big box stores, you may not be getting what you think you're paying for...
edit on 19-2-2015 by MystikMushroom because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 12:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: WeRpeons
For the people who think unskilled workers don't deserve a livable wage... I ask you the following questions:

=How would you feel if nobody picked up your trash every week?

-How would you feel if stores were closed because we had nobody to sell the merchandise?

-How would you feel if there were no products to buy because there would be no people assembling and packaging the product.

=How would you like to eat off of a dirty plate, drink out of an unwashed glass, or use eating utensils with dried foood caked on them every time you visited a restaurant?

-How would you like to do without the inconvenience of getting your morning coffee or stopping at a fast food restaurant when traveling on long trips.

-How would you like using disgusting and smelly public restrooms?


So just because someone is working an unskilled job, doesn't mean their job isn't important to society. When you think about it, unskilled workers are really more important than professional athletes. All they offer to society is entertainment, and they get paid more than doctors who save human lives!!!




You are confusing two separate issues. At no point has anyone ever argued that people who work low paid jobs are unimportant or shouldn't be valued. Wages reflect supply and demand. Nothing more. Wages don't have diddly to do with what we think are important jobs or anyone's self worth.

Low skilled jobs like those at Wal-Mart don't pay a lot because there are more people looking for those jobs and the value of those jobs to the business is not that high. On the flip side, a pro athlete can make millions despite being dumb as a box of rocks because they have a very narrow skill set that can generate many millions more than their salary.

Yes, it would be nice if everyone made some minimum standard of living, but that is not how economics works. Central planning of economies has never worked and never will. There will always be some people whose labor is not as valued as others for a variety of reasons.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated




Nothing more. Wages don't have diddly to do with what we think are important jobs or anyone's self worth.


Yeah thats the problem. Sick of the selfish capitalistic ideology managing our economy.

Didn't your parents teach you that sharing is caring?

Profit is not more important than culture and humanity.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 12:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated
Yes, it would be nice if everyone made some minimum standard of living, but that is not how economics works. Central planning of economies has never worked and never will. There will always be some people whose labor is not as valued as others for a variety of reasons.
So you're going to argue that it's OK that in the past few decades, more and more unskilled positions have slipped from paying low wages, to poverty-level wages? If unregulated economics allows for a job that takes up all of a person's working time and doesn't provide them enough to live, surely regulation is required to prevent that? If that's not how economics works, addenda to economics are necessary.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes

No no your wrong its all about economic business principles taught in school.

Who cares about the value of life or the well being of our communities supply and demand bro!



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 12:27 PM
link   


Wal-Mart's annual report, issued late last week, puts a different spin on things. Buried within the long list of risk factors disclosed to its shareholders--that is, factors "outside our control" that could materially affect financial performance--are these: "changes in the amount of payments made under the Supplement Nutrition Assistance Plan and other public assistance plans, (and) changes in the eligibility requirements of public assistance plans."

www.latimes.com...


well maybe they are coming to the realization that their business model is doomed if the gov't is broke and unwilling to give borrowed money to both their employees and customers and decided finally to make a few changes?



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Edumakated


Yeah thats the problem. Sick of the selfish capitalistic ideology managing our economy.

Didn't your parents teach you that sharing is caring?

Profit is not more important than culture and humanity.


I know this is about Walmart, but your sharing is caring comment above made me think of a scenario my wife had. She worked as a waitress, and had to choose between 2 jobs when we moved.

Job A offered her $10 an hour, maximum of 8 hours a day, and all tips were pooled, with everyone getting an equal share of the tips. This pool also included staff who usually don't receive tips, such as cooks, expediters, hostesses or hosts, dishwashers, and even cleanup personnel.

Job B only offered her $2.43 an hour, minimum 8 hours a day, but all her tips were hers.

Which of these jobs was fair and would lead the workers to share more?



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 01:29 PM
link   
I read this on cnn money the headline was "Walmart raises wages significantly above minimum wage". I had to laugh at this because 1.75 above minimum wage is far from significant. Also as a former walmart employee I can tell you they've been starting people at 8.15 or more for 5 years. So the raise in that context is even less.

What a joke.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 01:45 PM
link   
a reply to: asmall89

It's gross man. I don't like seeing the community around me degrade into Detroit because these corporations are too selfish to pay people.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

I think starting people out at 10-12 am hour is fine if they are more than willing to offer performance based incentives.

Opportunit for advancement into a supervisor position that at least bring them above poverty, maybe a few years as at 30-40k a year and eventually up to 50k for management.

Not 8 to 9-10 to 12-13 for supervisor positions.

What world do we live in where supervisors are paid poverty wages?



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: AshOnMyTomatoes

originally posted by: Edumakated
Yes, it would be nice if everyone made some minimum standard of living, but that is not how economics works. Central planning of economies has never worked and never will. There will always be some people whose labor is not as valued as others for a variety of reasons.
So you're going to argue that it's OK that in the past few decades, more and more unskilled positions have slipped from paying low wages, to poverty-level wages? If unregulated economics allows for a job that takes up all of a person's working time and doesn't provide them enough to live, surely regulation is required to prevent that? If that's not how economics works, addenda to economics are necessary.


Economies evolve. Some positions today aren't worth what they were 20 or 30 years ago. Meanwhile, other positions are in high demand with high salaries to match. As consumer needs change along with technology, some jobs disappear and others are not as valuable while other jobs are created that pay much higher salaries. You can't argue that it is bad that some jobs don't pay as much today while ignoring all the other jobs that have also been created in that time period.

At no point have minimum wage jobs been seen as a career. What is different is today people expect to be able to raise a kid, buy a car, cell phone, cable, and get hair done every week on a minimum wage job.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 02:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated
At no point have minimum wage jobs been seen as a career. What is different is today people expect to be able to raise a kid, buy a car, cell phone, cable, and get hair done every week on a minimum wage job.

Well that's an issue then, considering the majority of jobs on the market pay this low.

Think about this carefully: how can an entire population of people move through a minimum wage, "non-career" job and into a "real career" job, if there are not enough "real career" jobs to go around, and there never will be? It doesn't matter if everyone in the world went out and got themselves the exact same college degree; someone would still need to flip burgers, be a janitor, muck out horse stalls, etc.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes

Your banging your head off of a wall man.

I hate to say it but theres a lack of understanding and knowledge in that perspective that extends beyond our ability to reconcile with it in a few posts.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 03:07 PM
link   
That raise looks good on paper and to the public. The ugly truth is, Walmart's MO is anytime you give your employees a little more, like a bonus, stock dividend, or even a 3rd paycheck if that's how the month falls, you cut your employees hours for a couple weeks afterward to make up for the loss.

Management makes a bonus on how low they keep production costs, so they'll be cutting even more hours to benefit themselves.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 03:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: AshOnMyTomatoes

originally posted by: Edumakated
At no point have minimum wage jobs been seen as a career. What is different is today people expect to be able to raise a kid, buy a car, cell phone, cable, and get hair done every week on a minimum wage job.

Well that's an issue then, considering the majority of jobs on the market pay this low.

Think about this carefully: how can an entire population of people move through a minimum wage, "non-career" job and into a "real career" job, if there are not enough "real career" jobs to go around, and there never will be? It doesn't matter if everyone in the world went out and got themselves the exact same college degree; someone would still need to flip burgers, be a janitor, muck out horse stalls, etc.


Majority of jobs pay way more than minimum wage. Secondly, it is up to the individual to manage their own career and move themselves up the ladder if they want more than minimum wage. Again, these jobs are designed to be transitory in nature. Yes, we will always need burger flippers, etc. However, the last time I checked there was a steady supply of teenagers looking for these TEMPORARY jobs to earn a little spending money. The fact someone screwed up their lives having kids they can't afford and stuck in a dead end job by their own actions does not mean we now need to raise the minimum wage.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 03:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: AshOnMyTomatoes

originally posted by: Edumakated
At no point have minimum wage jobs been seen as a career. What is different is today people expect to be able to raise a kid, buy a car, cell phone, cable, and get hair done every week on a minimum wage job.

Well that's an issue then, considering the majority of jobs on the market pay this low.

Think about this carefully: how can an entire population of people move through a minimum wage, "non-career" job and into a "real career" job, if there are not enough "real career" jobs to go around, and there never will be? It doesn't matter if everyone in the world went out and got themselves the exact same college degree; someone would still need to flip burgers, be a janitor, muck out horse stalls, etc.


Majority of jobs pay way more than minimum wage. Secondly, it is up to the individual to manage their own career and move themselves up the ladder if they want more than minimum wage. Again, these jobs are designed to be transitory in nature. Yes, we will always need burger flippers, etc. However, the last time I checked there was a steady supply of teenagers looking for these TEMPORARY jobs to earn a little spending money. The fact someone screwed up their lives having kids they can't afford and stuck in a dead end job by their own actions does not mean we now need to raise the minimum wage.
Again, show me a source that says there are enough jobs for everyone over the age of, say, 20 to have a career that pays a living wage?



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes

Clearly there isn't.

hes trying to say that these jobs are not in demand. the fact is that these jobs ARE in demand we NEED these low level store positions in order to maintain society.

They dont appreciate the fact that they can go to the store and buy whatever food they want whenever. Its a total lack of appreciation for the world we live in and how easy we have it.



posted on Feb, 19 2015 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

Yep. And chances are excellent that your tax dollars are paying for this "raise" anyway.

www.walmartsubsidywatch.org...



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join