Walmart food drive for employed unable to affordthanksgiving

Actual Topic Title (OT turned into twitter I guess)

Walmart's Thanksgiving food drive for it's employees unable to afford thanksgiving

Walmart higher ups say this is an act of kindness towards it's workers. Critics (like myself, lets not beat around the bush) argue that this is yet another example of Walmart refusing to pay their employees enough to get by despite record profits in the billions. Also that this is further evidence of a company that makes billions by perpetuating a culture where it's employees need to subsist off of other people either through tax payer dollars or straight up charity.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2013/11/19/walmart-donations-drive-employees/3637953/

What's the point of even working at Walmart anymore? Their slave wages aren't enough for any basic living expenses.

What's the norm for wages at walmart

If you don't like your pay you are free to try and find another employer.

Can we all agree that it's time to raise the minimum wage, now? When we subsidize full time workers of these jobs so that they remain above the poverty line, I find it hard to argue otherwise.

@mattbbpl: I didn't realize they were forced to stay at a min wage job. If I didn't try and better myself I could of stayed at a min wage job myself but I decided to move on till I got experience and skills that pay a good wage now. Btw this is one of my local walmarts lol nice to see it in national headlines

Arguably Walmart is exploiting you as a taxpayer in that case, they don't have to pay their employees enough to live so long as you continue to do so.

I've always disapproved of Walmarts shady tactics.

They rather hire two people and give them 20 hours each so they can avoid supplying healthcare, and other benefits for a full time employee.

Uncle Sam needs to step in and tell Walmart you can have someone working for you for 2+ years part time, but have them working 365.

Then address that part of the equation.

Precisely.

Walmart workers should start up a union. They would then require Walmart to let them work 40 hours a week when the worker want to work full time and pay them $12 an hour.

I just did, but I'd rather address issue I actually care more about first, the exploited worker. I feel like I have to bring up the exploited taxpayer however to appeal to people on both sides of the issue.

Because giving your employees decent wages makes too much sense.

The family behind Wal-Mart is evil.

in other words, they've having a potluck

@lamprey263:

your avatar and sig make your post unintentionally funny.

I was making $7.65 an hour when I worked there, eligible for a whole $.40 raise after a year (33 hours a week). Thank God I'm out of that place. At my new job my monthly bonus is the same amount that I was making per month at wal-mart, and that doesn't include my regular pay.

As of this moment, I'm officially not boycotting Walmart because their low prices are great. Long live Walmart!

Not a fan of Wal-Mart myself, but I don't particularly see the reason for giving employees more when those employees are willing to work for less. A lot of those employees aren't highly skilled and are easily replaced, and Wal-Mart is paying them at least minimum wage (as far as I know). If those employees think that they're being underpaid for the kind of work that they're doing, then they are free to go work for an employer who will pay them more.

How about the corporation that made over 15 Billion in fucking profit last year donate some fucking food for employees who cannot afford to purchase their own for Thanksgiving instead of asking other employees who are likely just getting buy to do it?

As soon as the word 'Union' is mentioned, they're fired.

Wal Mart is notoriously anti-Union, so there's no point in them trying to form one.

reminds me of this

they're so anti-union that they get unionized actors to convey the message!

That's the way, support walmart screwing over their employees!

So what's wrong with Unions? UPS/Fedex seem to be doing fine.

It's kind of darkly hilarious how this attempted PR stunt has backfired on the company.

I really don't know how anyone (never mind people in management) thought that this would be a good idea.

Give to our hard working employees, 'cos we sure as hell don't.

Wal-Mart could pay their employees more, but then they'd have to raise their prices and everyone would piss and moan about it. It's lose-lose from a PR standpoint.

No, they wouldn't. Their whole business model is to offer stuff cheaper than the competition. Wal-Mart would absorb the costs just like any business and considering how huge their profit margins are I think they'd be fine.

And who are you to decide how much money a privately-run business is allowed to make? They make scant profits on any individual item, and rely on volume of business to make profits. Minimum wage jobs are for unskilled laborers just breaking into the retail business, they aren't meant to be careers capable of supporting families. You work hard, acquire knowledge and skills, maybe even go to school while you are working, and move up.

They actually wouldn't have to. Their profits, ROE, and share price indicate that not only could they offer significant wage increases without raising costs, but their shares would still be able to beat anticipated returns when weighed against their current stock prices.

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2013/11/12/wal-mart-pay-raise/

I never said anything about how much money they're "allowed" to make. I merely said they'd be perfectly fine if they offered their employees better wages.

Anyone who isn't happy about what they are making is free to go look for another job. Nobody is putting a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to work there.

Hey, Walmart, how 'bout paying your employees a bit more? Costco has starting wages at $12/hour for stocking positions and $15/hour for cashiering, at least at the one where I live.

That's all fine and well, but it doesn't change the fact that Walmart is perfectly able to find sufficient labor while paying lower wages. If workers are willing to undersell their skills, then why should Walmart pay more?

If Walmart is really underpaying their employees by so much, then it seems to me that the employees are equally to blame for choosing to work there. By choosing to work there for $hitty pay, they are literally telling Walmart that that's all that their labor is worth.

You're one of those people who doesn't really read other people's posts and basically just replies with irrelevant chaff, aren't you?

They have radically different clienteles and products so this comparison doesn't fly.

Pretty much. The labour market at the moment strongly favours employers so Walmart can get away with crap wages for workers and not suffer for it. This situation's not going to improve without government intervention until the unemployment rate falls significantly and substitute jobs open up in better-paying retailers.

I'm pretty sure they would gladly leave if they were able to.

Yes, let's raise minimum wage so we can make it worse for everybody with higher prices.

While I do have to agree with your point, I still think Walmart is a dick for doing that when places like Costco give higher wages for essentially the same kind of work.

Pretty sure we can pay the extra buck for the yoga pants, buck-o.

Pay an extra buck? How unamerican!

I know we're being silly, but I think we can all take a moment to be serious and agree that if you think paying an extra dollar for yoga pants is significant enough of an issue to prevent a large group of people from getting paid a living wage, your brain's hemispheres need to be divorced.

Agreed, you're a deplorable excuse for a human being if that's how you view this.

Right here, right now, what should a low-skilled employee at Walmart earn? When I say low-skilled I mean someone w/o any skills or education to work a job beyond that of being a cashier, stocker, etc..,

People need to be paid what they are worth and what their skill-set determines rather than what you'd like them to make.

Maybe they should accept the consequences of their actions and just learn to use the money they earn better.

Pretty sure someone putting in the shitty work walmart makes people do is worth at least one decent meal a year. Then again I don't really consider exploiting other humans and acting like a dictator to be skills that should be seen as being put above honest hard work and I know you disagree with that.

Again, how much money do you propose an entry level, low-skilled job provide to the worker? The Walmart discussion comes up often but I have yet to hear one person give an actual number representing an acceptable hourly wage.

They make $10.50 here and the sky isn't exactly falling.

Whatever the market dictates.

The market doesn't matter anymore nor does the skill set of an individual. Walmart makes a lot of money so the worker(s) should be paid high wages regardless. Isn't that the general impression people have towards big business? Forget the position. Forget skill and education. All that matters is paying people more money.

$10.50/hr is quite generous considering what type of work is done at your average store. If by chance the minimum wage increases Walmart will not eat the cost. It will be passed on to the consumer. Then the consumer will bitch.

Actually, a full time employee at Walmart is making enough to keep a family of four above the poverty line.

Why someone would chose to have 2 children, while working such a low income job is beyond me.
However in a society where it's common for both parents to work, I find it hard to blame Walmart.

Again, 1 adult working full time, can keep a family of 4 out of poverty, simply by working as a cashier at Walmart. If both parents chose to work, they'd be making more than double the minimum income to be considered "in poverty"

Sounds like a problem with Walmart. If you're making the sort of profits walmart does and you can't afford to pay your workers a half way decent wage then you're probably a piece of shit. Especially when your shitty business practices are costing the tax payer as much as Walmart does.