If Walmart Paid its 1.4 Million U.S. Workers a Living Wage, it Would Result in Almost No Pain for the Average Customer

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

"If Walmart Paid its 1.4 Million U.S. Workers a Living Wage, it Would Result in Almost No Pain for the Average Customer Approximately 1.3 Million Would Be Paid More Than They are Worth"

Fixxored!

Don't like the attitude and lack of enthusiasm that Walmart employees put on display? Tell you what. You get what you pay for. It's true for you and it's true for Walmart. Shitty wages = shitty employee attitudes. Go to your local ALDI or Publix and check out how much work people get done and how they interact with the customers if they get reasonable pay and full benefits. Those employees care and do a good job because their employer treats them well.

Edited April 26, 2011 by Mr. Big Dog

[Danno 1,228]

Don't like the attitude and lack of enthusiasm that Walmart employees put on display? Tell you what. You get what you pay for. It's true for you and it's true for Walmart. Shitty wages = shitty employee attitudes. Go to your local ALDI or Publix and check out how much work people get done and how they interact with the customers if they get reasonable pay and full benefits. Those employees care and do a good job because their employer treats them well.

In the Wal-marts I have been to I have never had a problem with attitudes from the employees., I would have to say they are as good as anyplace I shop.

It does seem true "some" of the employees seem as though employment at anything more complex would be -out of the question, but they are alway most helpful.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In the Wal-marts I have been to I have never had a problem with attitudes from the employees., I would have to say they are as good as anyplace I shop.

It does seem true "some" of the employees seem as though employment at anything more complex would be -out of the question, but they are alway most helpful.

So, would that not mean that most of the employees would be deserving of a living wage and decent benefits? Why do you and I have to subsidize this corporation with our taxes?

[rin and john 71]

Shitty wages = shitty employee attitudes. Go to your local ALDI or Publix and check out how much work people get done and how they interact with the customers if they get reasonable pay and full benefits. Those employees care and do a good job because their employer treats them well.

Kind of a chicken and egg argument...

If ALDI and Publix have better quality employees, perhaps it is because they can select the best candidates due to their pay practices? Having managed people for over 20 years, increasing the pay of a "shitty" employee fixes the attitude for a very short time.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Kind of a chicken and egg argument...

If ALDI and Publix have better quality employees, perhaps it is because they can select the best candidates due to their pay practices? Having managed people for over 20 years, increasing the pay of a "shitty" employee fixes the attitude for a very short time.

I agree that pay raises do not raise an employee's standard. Offering a decent pay and benefit package and a good work environment, on the other hand, tends to attract more productive people.

My issue with slavedrivers like Walmart is that you and I subsidize these companies with our taxes. That should not be the case. Ever. If Walmart cannot operate w/o hanging on the taxpayer's teat, then they ought not to be in business.

[rin and john 71]

My issue with slavedrivers like Walmart is that you and I subsidize these companies with our taxes. That should not be the case. Ever. If Walmart cannot operate w/o hanging on the taxpayer's teat, then they ought not to be in business.

I agree, but they are not the worst of the lot. GE, ExxonMobil, and others all made billions globally, but paid little to no tax to the US coffers although benefitting greatly by selling/operating in the USA. Why? Because the US has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. Large corporations with subsidiaries in multiple countries will have some latitude as to where they take their profit (and in effect pay their taxes). If I produce widgets in a foreign country with a 10% tax rate for $1 and sell them in the USA for $5, I make $4 profit. But I can "sell" them from my foreign subsidiary to my US subsidiary at $4.90 (a transfer price internal to my corporation). My foreign subsidiary pays 10% on $3.90 ($0.39) and my US subsidiary pays 35% on $0.10 ($0.035). Total tax burden is $0.425 on my $4.00 profit. I keep $3.575 for each widget sold. If I had paid all my tax in the US (transfered at $1 to my US subsidiary) I would have paid 35% on $4.00, or $1.40 in taxes leaving me with $2.60 for each widget sold.

Lower the corporate tax rate in the USA and the tax revenue will increase. Other countries have already figured this out.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Don't like the attitude and lack of enthusiasm that Walmart employees put on display? Tell you what. You get what you pay for. It's true for you and it's true for Walmart. Shitty wages = shitty employee attitudes. Go to your local ALDI or Publix and check out how much work people get done and how they interact with the customers if they get reasonable pay and full benefits. Those employees care and do a good job because their employer treats them well.

Wait....I thought it was only CEO's performance that is effected by their compensation? Great, now the peons expect to be adequately compensated for their work. Pretty soon, they'll get bit in their heads that their work adds value to the company.

Edited April 26, 2011 by 8TBVBN

[Zero Sum 305]

Don't like the attitude and lack of enthusiasm that Walmart employees put on display? Tell you what. You get what you pay for. It's true for you and it's true for Walmart. Shitty wages = shitty employee attitudes. Go to your local ALDI or Publix and check out how much work people get done and how they interact with the customers if they get reasonable pay and full benefits. Those employees care and do a good job because their employer treats them well.

I think attitude is a complex topic, but I certainly agree with you that there is a comparison that is valid for customer service at Walmart vs ALDI or Publix.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I agree, but they are not the worst of the lot. GE, ExxonMobil, and others all made billions globally, but paid little to no tax to the US coffers although benefitting greatly by selling/operating in the USA. Why? Because the US has one of the highest corporate tax rates special interest loopholes in their tax code in the world.

There, fixed that for you. I agree that the tax code needs fixing. Closing all these special interest loopholes would help a lot. And we could probably lower tax rates somewhat at the same time w/o losing out on revenues. That would level the playing field. All that said, at least I am not subsidizing GE's and Exxon's workforce.

[Zero Sum 305]

There, fixed that for you. I agree that the tax code needs fixing. Closing all these special interest loopholes would help a lot. And we could probably lower tax rates somewhat at the same time w/o losing out on revenues. That would level the playing field. All that said, at least I am not subsidizing GE's and Exxon's workforce.

If you think about it from the perspective of the staggering pay raises they give themselves, compared to the lack of a staggering pay raise for the peons, its actually mostly corporate boardmembers we're currently subsidizing, not the whole workforce.

[Danno 1,228]

So, would that not mean that most of the employees would be deserving of a living wage and decent benefits? Why do you and I have to subsidize this corporation with our taxes?

Actually all this Subsidizing, such as food stamps, section 8, cell phones and cash payments have directly lead to a loss in the value of getting an education or skill.

It's your beloved social programs doing it, not wal-mart.

Wal-mart is a simply player in the arena of free trade.. they trade money for hours spent working at their store.

If people don't care for their trade offer,let them move on.

Wal-mart and many such places are simply a starting point... a place where an unskilled person can get a job and maybe gain some experience to move up or move on.

Why do you want to destroy the first rung on the ladder of employment?

And if wal-mart agreed to this silly "living wage" what about every other minimum skill employer aren't you expecting they will do the same?

Don't you in truth just want to jack the minimum wage up higher?