Discussion
  • Read More
    Pixie SticksHamilton Nolan
    2/19/15 10:24am

    What WalMart is not telling you: they have also told Regional Managers that each store needs to cut 5% of staff.

    Lets not circle jerk with them just yet. Their altruism is actually a wash.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Misteaks were madePixie Sticks
      2/19/15 10:35am

      Out of curiosity, where did you hear that? A short Google search reveals nothing like that. The only layoffs affecting Walmart employees are 50 jobs at the Bentonville HQ.

      I understand Walmart is low hanging fruit but to insinuate layoffs without proof is mere conjecture on your part.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      bingoboingoPixie Sticks
      2/19/15 10:37am

      You can't always have your cake and eat it too. As much as we want higher wages, the cost of higher wages is sometimes decreased employment levels.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    FridayFridayHamilton Nolan
    2/19/15 10:26am

    $10 an hour is a great start but it's still a far ways off from a living wage. It's certainly a step in the right direction but nowhere near what it would take for me to stop boycotting Walmart.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      BillyColeSlawFridayFriday
      2/19/15 10:33am

      I've been trying to think of a way to reward them for this behavior, but not too much. Like "ok, I'll make a trip or two to your stores, but no more than that until we hit $15. Or something.

      Yeah, I know my measly few bucks doesn't matter, but if that's the case, why boycott at all?

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      FridayFridayBillyColeSlaw
      2/19/15 10:36am

      You could buy things there that you can't get anywhere else in your town without going online. I have many friends who do that. Like, they hate Walmart and refuse to do everyday shopping there but when push comes to shove and you want to get a new vacuum cleaner or trash can, that's when you shop at Walmart. Obviously if you live in a big city you can get that stuff at other stores but if you're in a small town it's Walmart or nothing.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    UnderYetOverHamilton Nolan
    2/19/15 10:27am

    With the decline in unemployment numbers, employers are having a hard time finding qualified candidates at minimum wage. So they knew they'd have to do it eventually, and figured they'd do it in a splashy way rather than gradually for the PR bump.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      SparrowmintUnderYetOver
      2/19/15 10:33am

      I do hope this puts some upward pressure on other jobs. Around here, a lot of advertised office jobs, even ones that expect a degree and have a long list of requirements and responsibilities, are offering $8-11 an hour for said jobs. If everyone knows that Walmart is paying $10 as a base, hopefully that helps push other wages up. At the big hospital chain around here, there are receptionists with 20 years seniority with the company that are getting paid $12 an hour.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      RaptorJawsSparrowmint
      2/19/15 10:43am

      Amen. Bump for all the derpasaurs who say shit like "who will got to college now that you can make $10/hr and rising at WalMart!" and don't understand that rising wages for the unskilled jobs necessarily lead to rising wages for skilled jobs.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    JoespeaksthetruthHamilton Nolan
    2/19/15 10:46am

    I have a simple solution for all of these unhappy employees... go look for a job elsewhere and see what they pay... it is not the fault of ownership that these individuals did not make it a point to better themselves in life to be capable of working somewhere other than walmart or something of the like. If you are a go getter in this country then you will make something of yourself 90 percent of the time no matter what race, gender, or religion you may be because there are successful people from all walks of life in this nation. It is articles like this that give lazy non-motivated people hope that there are others on their side. This article is a joke

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Arctic16Joespeaksthetruth
      2/19/15 11:04am

      So what do you do? Where did you go to school?

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      GiggleBumpsJoespeaksthetruth
      2/19/15 11:25am

      "If you are a go getter in this country then you will make something of yourself 90 percent of the time no matter what race, gender, or religion you may be because there are successful people from all walks of life in this nation. "

      What kind of data, exactly, are you mining to come up with this statement? Better yet, HOW would you gather that data? This is one of those statements bloviators like to make - sounds important and legit, until you realize it's all smoke and mirrors.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    kamla deviHamilton Nolan
    2/19/15 10:25am

    This is a good start and illustrates that activism can be an effective tool in positive social change.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      sohomakiiiikamla devi
      2/19/15 10:48am

      You might be more optimist then most, milady.

      No one becomes a multi-millionaire, let alone a billionaire by being altruistic.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      kamla devisohomakiiii
      2/19/15 11:20am

      Sadly you are right.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    AnthonyIsMyPreferredCarterHamilton Nolan
    2/19/15 10:29am

    I can't wait for all the second-year business majors to come in here and explain how the world will collapse if workers are paid a living wage. Even WalMart doesn't agree with you idiots anymore.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      HHaloneAnthonyIsMyPreferredCarter
      2/19/15 10:47am

      When has humanity since establishing civilizations ever functioned without slavery? Never. It doesn't work especially with this many people. Were everyone given the means to flourish we'd put our selves into extinction within a few short generations. I don't like that it is this way or even agree with it, but it's the only way to maintain any kind of balance. The only way it could possibly ever change would be to reduce the world population to less than 10% of what it is now.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      AnthonyIsMyPreferredCarterHHalone
      2/19/15 11:00am

      This right here is the winner. You skipped right past "OMG! We need poverty wages!!1!1!1!!" and went straight to advocating slavery. I've hit a real Poe's Law moment with this argument.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    DirtbagSurferHamilton Nolan
    2/19/15 10:28am

    This is a good thing, and well past due. It is also good to note that with an improving economy, the tide may have turned a bit in favor of low wage earners inherently giving them more leverage. Certainly we are nowhere near a labor shortage but that can happen rather quickly as the economy gains some steam. Even slight upticks in consumer confidence and spending can move the needle rather swiftly in the labor market and in combination with an ever increasing positive public sentiment towards a living wage and fair working conditions, the foundation is being laid and change becomes a must, reluctant or not. It is a start, and that is great news to read!

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      More Ghosts Less StuffHamilton Nolan
      2/19/15 2:31pm

      This is for everyone, interested:

      1) What's a reasonable living wage in the part of the nation you live in, and why?

      2) Why should we have a flat living wage Nationwide when different parts of the nation have different costs of living?

      Bonus question:

      3) Do people keep things such as inflation in mind when they speak of raising the minimum wage to a higher living wage?

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        More Ghosts Less StuffMore Ghosts Less Stuff
        2/23/15 10:22am

        I'm saddened to see how few comments I've gotten about this.

        Reply
        <
    • Read More
      Quantum SuicideHamilton Nolan
      2/19/15 10:36am

      Wal-Mart just released their fourth quarter earnings report this morning, and the price per share went from $1.53 to $1.61 after they'd removed the cost of wage litigation (analysts were looking for a minimum of $1.54/share, which Wal-Mart couldn't achieve because of the legal costs re: pay disputes).

      This is a good sign, because it means that labor has found an effective legal strategy.

      Keep the pressure on and they'll have no choice but to bump that up to something resembling a living wage, unless they want a decade of legal fees eating into their earnings.

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        GazesAtShoesHamilton Nolan
        2/19/15 10:27am

        So instead of the tax payer picking up the bill to the tune of $6.2 Billion in public assistance, we're going to pay slightly less that amount. Thanks, Walmart.

        Reply
        <