• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Walmart workers demand better wages

Harry Guerrilla said:
It reduces total take home profit and if you eliminate the dividend, there's gonna be problems.
Click to expand...

I think they're still making enough after salary increases to pay some stocks.
 
grip said:
You know what happen to the greedy boy who took all the cookies out of the jar? He got sick.
Click to expand...

The marketplace will determine that...Not outside forces that wish to control the outcome.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I too, worked for a small business, in a skill trade.
I started at minimum wage, no benefits.

Flash forward a few months later, I became very proficient at my job, so much that it suprised my boss and his brother.
The only problem was that, I was doing $15 an hour work for $8 an hour, still, no benefits and that boss was a holy terror.

Walked into the temp office of a publicly traded manufacturer, started at more than the previous job, 3 months later I had medical, dental, 401k, profit sharing, ESPP, paid holidays, etc.
Those evil, evil corporations could pay me more than the local "mom and pop" small business could dream of.
Click to expand...

No fair! You acquired/demonstrated skills, showed initiative, made progress and voted with your feet. The proper way, according to many, is to unionize, demand more pay/benefits and force your greedy employer to go out of business. :roll:
 
Last edited:
Harry Guerrilla said:
You just have to be careful with mass increases like that, a dime raise for everyone would rough cost $4.5 million.
The costs keep going up from there.
Click to expand...

What if by increasing salaries they got increased sales and productivity, then those costs would be offset. There's always room to move and spending money on your work force is not always the worse move you can make.
 
grip said:
What if by increasing salaries they got increased sales and productivity, then those costs would be offset. There's always room to move and spending money on your work force is not always the worse move you can make.
Click to expand...

Walmart doesn't produce anything. Their employees are also not 'selling'. They are stocking and cashiering. They don'y operate like other stores that have floor people trying to push product on you.
 
grip said:
What if by increasing salaries they got increased sales and productivity, then those costs would be offset. There's always room to move and spending money on your work force is not always the worse move you can make.
Click to expand...

I agree, it's not always a bad idea.
It just depends, is all I'm saying.

Walmart is facing something all big companies do, when they get to their size.
"Where do we grow from here."

Having that free cash for growth, may be better than mass raises, in the long run.
I don't know, though.
 
Aberration said:
If they take less profit, fund managers buy other stock.
Click to expand...

I think this is the essence of oir problems.

They keep leaving oht part of the explanation when wages are stagnant and the working class is required to accept various cuts.

"In order for the investor class to continue to harvest profits at the rate to which they have become accustomed, it is necessary for the working class to accept less (x)."
 
Aberration said:
Walmart doesn't produce anything. Their employees are also not 'selling'. They are stocking and cashiering. They don'y operate like other stores that have floor people trying to push product on you.
Click to expand...


Their employees produce labor. Their stores are selling. They push products through advertising.
 
grip said:
What if by increasing salaries they got increased sales and productivity, then those costs would be offset. There's always room to move and spending money on your work force is not always the worse move you can make.
Click to expand...

That's a good point. I wonder how they work their Electronics Department. Spiffs on the sale? Spiffs on maintenance contracts? If they don't, they certainly should. Cosmetics? Fragrances? And those people should be trained more than a regular associate. Hey!! We could turn them into a Macy's in no time! (I added that last part because I happened to think about it . . . but that's more or less where they could lead.)
 
What if...? said:
I think this is the essence of oir problems.

They keep leaving oht part of the explanation when wages are stagnant and the working class is required to accept various cuts.

"In order for the investor class to continue to harvest profits at the rate to which they have become accustomed, it is necessary for the working class to accept less (x)."
Click to expand...

Are people with retirement funds (including a lot of current and former Walmart associates) part of the "investor class?"
 
The bottom line is, unskilled Wal mart jobs, and other jobs of that ilk, aren't meant to be career positions that pay a comfortable living wage. Those jobs are simply stepping stones, something to do for a little money while pursuing something better (via education, training, etc.), or for a retiree to supplement their income a bit. Hell, I can't even think of another business that hires greeters.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I agree, it's not always a bad idea.
It just depends, is all I'm saying.

Walmart is facing something all big companies do, when they get to their size.
"Where do we grow from here."

Having that free cash for growth, may be better than mass raises, in the long run.
I don't know, though.
Click to expand...



Exactly, they're facing a transition point where they can maximize their output through improved customer care and better employees. If they're going to continue to grow against online (Amazon) competition they need to offer a little better service. They're not doing it right now with the dredges they're hiring and paying low wages too. See, I say pay better and replace the level of current workers.
 
Mycroft said:
shrug...you sent me down that road.

My road had nothing to say about taxes and loopholes...rather it's about whether Walmart is responsible for improving the economy or reduce the number of people taking advantage of government entitlements.
Click to expand...
Seeing that Walmart doesn't have (sic) any responsibility or mandate to improve the general state of our economy or to reduce the number of people who take government benefits, than why does the rich deserve tax cuts and loopholes? :roll:
 
American said:
Then tell her to get the **** out of there. She shouldn't work for such a rotten company.
Click to expand...


Well problem with that is if she wants another job she would have to go to the phillipines or china, yanno where the pigs at the trough can make a few more bucks employing communist chinese instead of americans....

Ill bet a donut turtledude doesnt give me a like on this post..loolololol
 
grip said:
Exactly, they're facing a transition point where they can maximize their output through improved customer care and better employees. If they're going to continue to grow against online (Amazon) competition they need to offer a little better service. They're not doing it right now with the dredges they're hiring and paying low wages too. See, I say pay better and replace the level of current workers.
Click to expand...

They've expanded to better compete with Amazon, through their Vudu service and in some ways, it's superior to Amazon movies, with the adoption of ultraviolet.
They may need to gobble up some other services, to fully compete or they may be better sacking the crappy employees and paying new and better employees more.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
The problem is that living wages are subjective.
Walmart employees always have the option of buying shares with a bonus, to earn additional quarterly profits.
Click to expand...

Living wages are only subjective to a certain extent. If your wages put you below Harrington's definition of the poverty line - that is, needing to choose between essentials - , then something needs to change.
 
johnny_rebson said:
You've just explained why companies are sending American blue collar jobs to China as fast as they can.
Click to expand...

And your solution is to that is allowing these companies to misbehave here in the US as well? Brilliant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom