• 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

Depends on the law. There are many laws that I don't like that I think it would be ok for courts to ignore. Oh wait a minute, scratch that, if I wanted to ignore law or the Constitution, I would be a Union loving Liberal.

Insults aside, the point would be one concerning the law.
 
That is simply not true. The union doesn't hire anyone, so it can't sell it to the employer. The union merely works for employees, hired by the employer, to negotiate a contract. All employees are hired by the company. You are the one mischaracterizing the relationships.


The union is like the mob guy you ask a favor of in dealing with a guy you don't like. They over do it, kill the guy, and you owe them.
 
The union is like the mob guy you ask a favor of in dealing with a guy you don't like. They over do it, kill the guy, and you owe them.

Nice objective view you have there j.

:coffeepap
 
You get paid what you're worth, not a penny more. If you want more, earn it.

an employee at walmart who works twice as hard as another employee both get paid the same amount. How do you earn more money if you do everything right and don't get a raise, a promotion, or anything that would even increase the possibility of a raise or promotion? I have an idea: you could protest and demand to be compensated for your hard work. Which is exactly what some people do.

Also, I noticed that you quoted me and then didn't answer any of the questions I asked. In fact, what you said was unrelated to what I said. Unless you're saying that every employee of every company makes exactly what they deserve and wage is directly related to the amount of effort exert by a respective employee. If you believe that is true, then I'd like to know the name of the world you live in.
 
an employee at walmart who works twice as hard as another employee both get paid the same amount. How do you earn more money if you do everything right and don't get a raise, a promotion, or anything that would even increase the possibility of a raise or promotion? I have an idea: you could protest and demand to be compensated for your hard work. Which is exactly what some people do.
...implying that union wages are performance based....

Also, I noticed that you quoted me and then didn't answer any of the questions I asked. In fact, what you said was unrelated to what I said. Unless you're saying that every employee of every company makes exactly what they deserve and wage is directly related to the amount of effort exert by a respective employee. If you believe that is true, then I'd like to know the name of the world you live in.
Earth. It's quite nice, you should come visit.
 
What baffles me is that people still try to find work there despite Walmart's pretty terrible reputation with employment and employee benefits.
 
Most people dont know this, but on the transportation and distribution side of Walmart, employees make excelent way above average wages. For instance there is a waiting list to be a semi truck driver in the Walmart fleet. Its the type of position you have to know somebody who knows somebody. It is one of the best paying driver jobs in the industry, paying typicaly above 80,000 a year when the typical driver will normaly get payed around 45-50,000 for driving more miles. I had to go to a combat zone and work 3-4 times as much to exceed their pay it is that good. That kind of pay in the industry is normaly for ultra specialized type of hauls and equipment. Not all Walmart employees want to even think about striking they got it so good. Walmart is not all cheap all the time.
 
Has anyone in this thread ever gone on strike? Has anyone posting here picketed their employer? Have you tried to start a union?

Some people got raises and others who did all the physical work did not. I gave my boss notice that I was quitting over my pay at the end of the next pay week. He asked if I had another job. I told him no. He made a comment about that not being the best decision I could make. I told him I could leave at the end of the day if he preferred because I could find a job pretty much anytime I wanted, made plenty of money doing side jobs, and I'd go back to minimum wage just to be somewhere else and let him know that others were already looking. He said he would need to speak to someone. He asked the others about this who confirmed they were planning to leave too and he then went to his boss. The next day those who did not get a raise initially, myself included, got raises effective the beginning of the next pay cycle. The good part of it was that this prompted me to go back to school ASAP to be done with working for other people. This was not a big corporate business and losing everybody with experience would have made my boss's job a lot less cushy so it sometimes is just a matter of playing things from the right angle.
 
Earth. It's quite nice, you should come visit.

I'll come visit if you go back to my last few posts and answer some of the dozen or so questions I asked. And also how you worked at Wal-Mart for 3 years doing every job there and still can't spell the name right
 
What you are saying is that it is selfish to ask for more, but not selfish to refuse to give from what you have. If your car breaks down on the highway, is it selfish to ask for a ride back into town? If a man gets on the bus to go to work and finds he has no change in his pocket, is it selfish to ask for change from another passenger? And is it respectable to have a pocket full of change but refuse to lend a hand to this man asking nothing more than a few quarters that may very well end up underneath your couch cushion? Now consider the same situation with the knowledge that right before the man got on the bus, his change was stolen. Did the individuals in Walmart's board room ever ask for more? Did they ever speak up for themselves, demand they be fairly compensated for their work? Do you really think the millionaires in this country made it to where they are without ever taking a penny more than what they were given?

Have you ever considered that maybe you're not an employer because you have never asked for more? If you refuse to see virtue in the "have nots" standing up for themselves, that's fine. But you are mistaken in presuming the virtue of the "haves" in this matter. These are people who were given everything and still demanded more. You can stand up for them, but make no mistake about who you are standing up for.
What I am saying is that it is arrogant to demand more from an employer. You either earn more and ask for it, or move on, it is the employers business, they took the risks, including hiring the employee. If a business goes under the employee finds another job, the owner may never recover. If the employee wants to make the rules he can open a business, if he wants more money it's up to that employee to prove it, this is what modern employees seem to forget.
 
Most people dont know this, but on the transportation and distribution side of Walmart, employees make excelent way above average wages. For instance there is a waiting list to be a semi truck driver in the Walmart fleet. Its the type of position you have to know somebody who knows somebody. It is one of the best paying driver jobs in the industry, paying typicaly above 80,000 a year when the typical driver will normaly get payed around 45-50,000 for driving more miles. I had to go to a combat zone and work 3-4 times as much to exceed their pay it is that good. That kind of pay in the industry is normaly for ultra specialized type of hauls and equipment. Not all Walmart employees want to even think about striking they got it so good. Walmart is not all cheap all the time.
And it comes full circle. The distribution end requires a CDL, those licenses can be lost for multiple or serious traffic offenses and require licensing well above the standard, but those who went through the courses and take the time to be good at it are well compensated by the company. While there are more truckers than other specialists, they are more rare than carters and floor staff, nice example.
 
And it comes full circle. The distribution end requires a CDL, those licenses can be lost for multiple or serious traffic offenses and require licensing well above the standard, but those who went through the courses and take the time to be good at it are well compensated by the company. While there are more truckers than other specialists, they are more rare than carters and floor staff, nice example.

Thanks. Its says a lot about the kind of job it is if there is a multi year waiting list for it. Talk to any Walmart driver and you will find them to have been there for quite some time. Industry turn over is like 80% or so last I checked thats low compared to the early to mid 2000's where it was 110% at one point. Walmarts driver turnover is some outragous number I think something like .5% or something to that effect. Talk about a huge difference. I dont know exactly what Walmarts over all turnover in employees is but if I remember correctly it is lower than the industry average.
 
You get paid what you're worth, not a penny more. If you want more, earn it.

No Jerry you are very much wrong, you get what you negotiate. Most people ask how much the job pays, very few let potential employers know their salery requirements. Most people get what they are given, not what they negotiate. Most people are paid MUCH less than they are worth and a few people are paid far more than they are worth. Most people dont know what their worth. If they did they would either work for themselves or, they would be payed much more and wouldnt need a union. I own a business Jerry and hire business men and women who are a) learning how to negotiate or b) can hold their own at the table. I dont deal with those who ask what I pay. They arent ready to be in business and would make lousy parteners. Employees are business people selling their services whether they admit that or not. You dont get what you earn, only what you negotiated. You CAN earn the right to continue to do business. If you take my lesson to heart, you will go far in business and as an employee, because you will take care to know what your market value is and how to articulate it in a concise effective fashion, and negotiate to get as much of that value as possible. I have just given you some very valuable and expensive advise that cost me several hundred thousand dollors to learn, for free. I give this advise to all my contractors, and now to you Jerry and to the good people of the Debate Politcs forum. You should thank me. :cool:

PS This was the free version of my contractor speech.
 
Thats not what I was talking about. I was talking about the union bosses not losing thier jobs because they didn't work for Hostess even though thier employee's did. The union bosses have nothing to lose in situations like what happened with Hostess. Especially when they just do what you have done in this post. Put the blame somewhere else for those employee's losing thier jobs.

A: The Union bosses didn't fire anyone.
B: The UNion bosses can get voted out ... Capitalists cannot.

They are only democratically accountable if the ones that elect them hold them accountable. But how can they hold them accountable when they are lied to? When they are so blind?

They arn't lied too .... What are you talking about? Where do you get this Chariacture of Unions ...
 
Amazing. Ok, German boards have a two tier determination system. The advisory tier has half representation from employees and half from the board of directors. On the other tier, where decisions are made, unions have representation but its not half, it varies from 10% to 40%, depending on the company.

If you are going to present information, please know what you are talking about before you double down on wrong.

YOu also have different levels, such as work councils and so on, the point is, workers involved in decision making makes a difference in the way corporations are run.
 
Of course it would be a different discussion. A discussion where your point is openly wrong instead of hidden behind the false morality that you have when you focus on inheritance. Let me ask you a question. If a person builds a company, like Wal-Mart, from the ground up...not inheriting it...do they have the right to the millions that they make? Do they have the right to dictate how much thier employee's make and not give into demands if they do not want to?

No one builds anything from the ground up, its all dependant on the institutions that they depend on and that govern how buisiness is done ... Its like saying someone that became king from being a peasant ... that doesn't justify the kingship.

Do you really think that it doesn't take mental labor to control the company? Do you think that there isn't mental labor involved in controlling capitol?

Sure ... But they arn't compensating themselves for mental labor ... their mental labor is not what pays them.

I never stated that Corporations are individual entities. The way that you have been argueing though is that there are two sides in this paradigm. The CEO (one person) and the employee's (talking as if they are one). "The CEO should give employee's more money" or "The CEO should give employee's more benefits". Not because they deserve it but because they have a right to it "because those employee's are more important than the CEO" (note that I am paraphrasing here)

I'm not saying they CEO SHOULD do anything ... Capitalism is not a meritocracy, I'm sainy if the workers want to get better pay and benefits, and improve the workplace the best way to do that is organize.

And yes, economics is a social activity. One that includes more than those employee's. It includes every single person alive. But like every social activity there is always those on the top, and those on the bottom. That will never change and is impossible to get rid of...even with unions.

That was the argument against democracy for monarchy.

The worker has no right to say what happens to the wealth he helps produce. He abrogates that by agreeing to work for someone else for a certain amount of pay. Even the companies administrators do not have that right. Only the owner does. Anyone else has to have his permission. The only way that a worker has that right is if they own the company.

Under Capitalism .... an institution which doesn't work ...

Also you have a "right" to what you can get.

Lets look at it this way. Does the individual employee have to pay any other employee? Does the individual employee have to pay the manufacturing costs? Does the individual employee have to pay the electric bill? The permits? Does the individual have to worry about whether thousands of products will sell or not? Does the individual employee have to worry about negative publicity that could loose customers? Does the employee have to pay for the products that are bought wholesale? Does the grocery night stocker have to worry about making sure that the electronics section is stocked?

Yes he does ... The money that pays for that comes partially from his labor, and he does need to worry, becuase it would cost HIM before it costs the executive.

Also that doesn't justify anything, power being difficult to wield doesn't justify the power.

I could go on and on with that list. But in all of them the answer is No. The employee does not have to do any of that. The only thing that the employee has to do is do the ONE job that they are assigned to. The one job in hundreds that are required of such companies like Wal-mart. The owner of the company has to make sure that all of that is accomplished. He/She normally does that by hiring other people to make sure its done. But if its constantly not then it must be brought before his/her attention so that he/she can remedy the situation. Along with remedying the situation that made that situation get all the way up to him. (just one small example of how a CEO's job includes more than just controlling capitol) A CEO has to worry and take care of the whole company, the individual worker that you are mostly talking about only has to worry about one thing.

So why would'nt a democracy recognize that? Or is everyone else but the CEO too dumb to know people's real value?

So, with that said...why should the employee, who again only takes care of one small detail among hundreds, have a "right" to dictate the wealth that his/her already compensated work goes towards?

That individual doesn't have teh right to dictate anything, he has a right to participate in the decision making.

Perhaps I didn't understand your point? Maybe you could expand on it?

I was talking about cooperatives, and you were mentioning somethign about managers in cooperatives, that I didn't get.

Umm...not sure of your point here. I sense sarcasm here....Are you saying that moving from one job to another in the same area is too much?

My point is the principle is the same.
 
It would be interesting to read. But if the company broke a law, would you prefer the court ignore that?

If the law is wrong I have no problem with that. People have the right to associate with whoever they want. If a law is made that makes it to where you no longer have that right then yes, it should be ignored.
 
A: The Union bosses didn't fire anyone.

No, they are just the cause of the people being fired.

B: The UNion bosses can get voted out ... Capitalists cannot.

Actually they can. All you have to do is buy enough stock in the company and you can take it over.

They arn't lied too .... What are you talking about? Where do you get this Chariacture of Unions ...

So union bosses never lie huh? If you really believe that then I have the deed to the golden gate bridge to sell ya......
 
No, they are just the cause of the people being fired.

... No they arn't ... infact when unions are stronger job security is better.

Actually they can. All you have to do is buy enough stock in the company and you can take it over.

Yeah ... and kings can be voted out ... all you need is be be pope :roll:, If you're saying its a plutocracy then fine.

So union bosses never lie huh? If you really believe that then I have the deed to the golden gate bridge to sell ya......

I didn't say that .... You're claiming that all they do is lie ... give me a specific lie and I'll give you 10 that Walmart gives to its workers to avoid unionization.
 
No one builds anything from the ground up, its all dependant on the institutions that they depend on and that govern how buisiness is done ... Its like saying someone that became king from being a peasant ... that doesn't justify the kingship.

So if you put an item on a shelf you think that you have a right to "vote" that you get paid more than the person that invested the time and the money and the hundreds of work hours to start up a company. Do you have any idea how insane that sounds?

Sure ... But they arn't compensating themselves for mental labor ... their mental labor is not what pays them.

Actually yes it does.

I'm not saying they CEO SHOULD do anything ... Capitalism is not a meritocracy, I'm sainy if the workers want to get better pay and benefits, and improve the workplace the best way to do that is organize.

It is only the best way because it provides force. But it certainly is not the right and moral way to go about it.

But you're right, you're not saying that the CEO SHOULD do something. You're whole arguement is based on the premise that the CEO HAS to do something. That the workers should have more say because they do something that a monkey can do. (stock shelves)

That was the argument against democracy for monarchy.

Actually that arguement has nothing to do with democracy or monarchy or any other form political ideology. It has to do with plain simple fact and reality. There will always be someone that drives a honda and someone that drives a porsche. Not everyone can have the same thing.

Under Capitalism .... an institution which doesn't work ...

Actually Capitalism is the one thing that has been around as long as man has. You see dictators come and go. You see democracy come and go. But capitalism has ALWAYS been around. You call yourself a socialist but what you don't understand is that socialism never ever works. It is a political ideaology that fails the moment even one person takes advantage of that system.

Also you have a "right" to what you can get.

Sounds like a capitalistic idea right here folks. Thought you were against capitalism Rgacky3?

Yes he does ... The money that pays for that comes partially from his labor, and he does need to worry, becuase it would cost HIM before it costs the executive.

No he doesn't. If he did then every paycheck that he got he would have to dole out money to help pay for those things. And he is already compensated for the labor he does. By being paid the money that he agreed to be paid the moment he got hired. If he thought that his labor was worth more than that initial agreement then maybe he shouldn't have agreed to that amount when he got hired.

Also that doesn't justify anything, power being difficult to wield doesn't justify the power.

It has nothing to do with power. It has to do with ownership.

So why would'nt a democracy recognize that? Or is everyone else but the CEO too dumb to know people's real value?

A democracy cannot work when running a company. Take a look at our government. The very thing that you are argueing for to run a company is done in the House and the Senate. If our government was a company it would have failed by now. People argue all the time. People have different opinions on how things should be. Things which do not need to be done is done and things which should be done are not done. THAT is democracy for you. And is why no company would ever succeed if that company was a democracy.

That individual doesn't have teh right to dictate anything, he has a right to participate in the decision making.

No actually he doesn't. Those items that he puts on a shelf are not his. The building is not his. The land is not his. The company is not his. He has no right to help decide anything that the company does. He has no more right to it than a guest in your house has a right to help you decide what carpet you should put in your living room.
 
YOu also have different levels, such as work councils and so on, the point is, workers involved in decision making makes a difference in the way corporations are run.

Which I could agree with, but it was your breathtakingly pro union stance of "they are part of management". They advise, they make workers opinions heard on strategy, they dont run the companies. Its a nice backpedal but try to make sure you are factual next time.
 
No one builds anything from the ground up, its all dependant on the institutions that they depend on and that govern how buisiness is done ... Its like saying someone that became king from being a peasant ... that doesn't justify the kingship.

Under Capitalism .... an institution which doesn't work ...

Only going to address two points of this mess.

No they dont. Of course they pay an enormous amount of taxes that builds that infrastructure. The institutions would not be present without the businesses. From the first few settlers here to today its always been business paying the majority of the bills to make the infrastructure happen. The problem is government currently misuses an enormous amount of what they take in. Cronyism is rampant at every level of government. Government has entirely too much power and it shows in the way they deal with the public.

Under Capitalism which works better than anything else we have found so far.....Keep that in mind.
 
company mismanagement...putting people in charge who knew nothing of what they were doing.

You do realize that some of those managers were union members right? Don't try separating the union from the company ****up.
 
What baffles me is that people still try to find work there despite Walmart's pretty terrible reputation with employment and employee benefits.

Yea well, most of it is a load of bs.
Walmart has competitive benefits, in some cases better than other employers.
Most likely better than the "mom and pops" everyone loves.
 
Back
Top Bottom