One of my favorite scenes in Hollywood involved Tom Hanks and this...



Big (1988)

It was because of this movie I had to visit an FAO Schwartz.

Unless you happen to be female

Wal-Mart pays higher than mw? I don't really believe that, but I don't really know, either.

Yes, yes they do. And they have medical benefits.

Yeah, right, they probably pay 1 cent more then mw.
If Kerry makes it, and raises mw to $7, Wal-Mart is screwed...

-t

You guys really have no clue about what Wal-Mart pays do you?

A link that has a reprint from "The Nation" on WalMart and labor practices.



Much of the article is about Unions and how unionized stores are using Wal-Mart to pretty-much smack the unions down during contract negotiations. But I've seen similar number for wage and benefits elsewhere.

Take from it what you wish.

$8.00/hr X 40 hr/week =$320
$320/week X 50 weeks (two weeks vacation) = $16,000 gross pay

take out taxes (approximately 14% for FICA/medicare = $2240) and your net salary is $13,760 for the average employer.

For a three person family, the poverty cutoff in the US is $15,260.

Funny, my aunt works at Wal-Mart. Claims her healthcare isn't the best, but it's cheap. And more than she would get at any other job of the like.

But yeah, the average is $8 a hour. I would agree with that. Well above minimum wage.

I don't know to expect much more from a retailer, on the one hand. But I know Costco is generally known for good wages and benefits, especially in comparison to Wal-Mart.

snippet from business week.

Interesting how we have a catch 22 between share-holders and labor market (at least in short term analysis).

What cracks me up is, people complaining about the wage of unskilled work.

WELL DUH. You aren't going to get payed a lot of money for unskilled labor. If you want payed more, go to school. Learn something.

School past high-school is expensive. Many can't afford it unless they already come from a family with money.

That kind of thinking drives the income gap ever bigger. Hyperbole would say you end up with no middle class. Only an upper class and a "serf" class.

WRONG WAY !

The question is why other retailers (like Costco) can afford to pay more to their employees and still be financially very sound and profitable.

It just feeds the notion that Wal-Mart is taking advantage of those who have little or nor rights, because they lack education and opportunities.

-t

As established in the mw thread, there will always be people taking these jobs. That's not in question.

(It might also be worth quickly noting that, in a down economy, many skilled workers take low-wage jobs at places like Wal-Mart because they can't find other work)

I've known a few single welfare mom's that put themselves through college. You know the state does help you in such instances.

If you read, Costco also sells higher quality of merchandise.

Pff, I never read.
Do you have a picture of that ?

-t

I'll miss FAO, their bear, their variety, and their atmosphere. But there was no reason for them to charge 150% more for the same toy that Target sells. Occasionally I could find some good deals in there. But I went to a Zany Brainy closing sales last year at Christmas hoping to find some deals--what I found were closeouts that STILL cost more than the same thing at Target or TRU. Of course, not that you can find everything you want at Target or TRU.

That said, I hate WalMart. HATE HATE HATE.

HATE.

They are the exception. Perhaps that has to more to do with public awareness of such programs. Perhaps it has to do with a cultural mindset of defeatism. I certainly don't know. But the statistics are pretty scary regarding enrollment rates and the percentage of children who's parents completed college vs those who's parents have not.

Would you like to invest a little money in a public awareness campaign ala your tax dollars? It would certainly benefit society as a whole....

of course, if you want to shop at these places, we need to have places like this staffed. And college grads are overqualified for most of the jobs at WalMart. Me I'd rather we admit that these people are important to my quality of life and pay them accordingly...stock price be damned.

That and they shortchange the stock-holders. A business doesn't have to run with a 30% profit margin to be successful and pay employees a living wage.

Of course, much of this discussion would be moot if employers didn't have to pay benefits. That's going to be a major political change in the next few years regardless of who's in the white house/congress. It's good for a vast majority of the businesses if there was a national heath care system. But that's another discussion.

If you have an opinion, dear, please don't hesitate to let us know.