seeler's picture

seeler

image

Walmart?

Does having a Walmart store open in an area help the local economy?

 

Reading on FaceBook that Walmart claims to help the local economy by providing employment - even though it pays employees so poorly that they have to turn to government services (food stamps in the US).  Rather than complaining people should be grateful. 

 

Has any study been done on this?

 

I don't know a lot about economics, but it seems to me that when a Walmart store opens in a neighbourhood it competes with the stores already in the area, or with others that might be considering opening up if it is a growth area.  By low wages and stocked with cheap imports,  they are able to provide cheap goods,  Before long small, locally owned and operated stores and family businesses cannot compete.  They go out of business, and leave themselves and their employees without work - except to turn to Walmart.  They buy loads of produce trucked in from other countries and undercut local farmers, and small processors.  When Walmart moves in, other employers, or potential employers move out.  And the working people are left in a bind - work for Walmart at less than a living wage, or move to Alberta. 

 

So I'm asking - does Walmart really create employment and help the local economy? 

 

 

Share this

Comments

chemgal's picture

chemgal

image

I worked at a Walmart in Alberta.  I had no experience, and they were not paying me minimum wage.  If I wanted to, I could have worked as a cashier and made a higher wage.  At the time, they were on a list of Canada's best employers, although I am sure there are various types of lists and it all depends on criteria.  The pay & benefits of Walmart in Canada is not comparable to the US.  If I was interested, I could have moved up toa  management position quickly.  Walmart would have covered a good portion of my tuition if I went into business.  My department manager made a good salary (not hourly wage).  Store managers made more.

 

I don't think Walmarts are to blame for the demise of small independent places.  If people want that type of thing, they go there.  If they want mass-produced they go to a large chain store.

 

Walmart likely helped speed up Zellers closing.  When I worked at Walmart, that was the closest competitor, people got them mixed up and constantly tried to return stuff from Zellers.  It was a bit ridiculous they would insist 100% they bought the item at Walmart, until you pointed out the brand was Zellers and then they would just look at you and say, well you're similar, can't you take it back?

 

Competition is good IMO though.  I wasn't impressed with Zellers at all.  Less people working their, it was difficult to get any help, their prices were higher, and their selection was poor.  When it comes to items I buy and their competition it is Superstore, Bed Bath & Beyond, Canadian Tire, Costco, London Drugs and Home Outfitters - department depending.  Target would be the most similar.

 

I'm not going to Walmart instead of the farmer's market.  When it came to furniture I got something at Walmart instead of Ikea, but I didn't get something from Walmart instead of a quality furniture store.

 

Did Walmart have an impact on small buisnesses a while ago?  Sure.  Walmart was the first big discount department store in many areas.  If Walmart didn't come in though, it would be something else.

Mendalla's picture

Mendalla

image

Hard to tell. They've been around here for so long now (London was one of the cities where Walmart took over old Woolco stores when the first moved in), I'm not sure how you would measure their impact since the control (London w/o Walmart) is no longer available.

 

You could collect a pile of statistics from before and after they arrived but even that wouldn't prove anything definitively since other economic trends and factors would have to be weighed against Walmart's arrival.

 

Certainly, they employ more people now than when they arrived but to what degree is that offset by jobs lost elsewhere due to business shifting to Walmart? There's been some obvious retail shrinkage around here in the past decade but how to weight the impact of "big box" stores like the Walmart Supercentre near me against the fact that London's economy has generally been going in the tank, leaving more people having less money to throw around, is something best left to economists. And then there's the impact of online shopping on sectorslike music and books.

 

I suspect that you could write a whole book on the economics of Walmart (and big boxes in general) and still not be able to actually come up with a fully tested hypothesis demonstrating their real impact. It's a very complex situation.

 

Mendalla

 

Alex's picture

Alex

image

Its not Walmart that helps or hurts the economy, it is the consumer who shops there that is responsible for their purchases. However by and large the retail sectionmof the economy is not an engine of the economy, as is the service section.

crazyheart's picture

crazyheart

image

I must say that vegetables, fruit, meat are all less expensive and fresher at Walmart that at other stores like SafeWay fo instance.

chemgal's picture

chemgal

image

Interesting CH.  I imagine it depends on the region.  We prefer Safeway for meat & fresh veggies.  Calgary COOP was equivilant for quality.  Costco is good too.  It's probably cheaper at Walmart, but I've tried a few produce items and had numerous issues with rotting from the inside.

redhead's picture

redhead

image

I have never shopped at Walmart, on principle.

 

It is possible that many consumers benefit, but I know that Walmart staff is exploited and I know that wherever a Walmart opens, local shops end in failure.

So Walmart, IMO, is bad, very bad business.

chemgal's picture

chemgal

image

redhead wrote:

but I know that Walmart staff is exploited

All of the staff or some of them?  If all, please tell me how I was exploited.

How so?

Can the same not be said of many other businesses?

redhead's picture

redhead

image

Last year. the American Walmart stores held a Thanksgiving food donation/drive for their staff - if that does not speak to anti-union, insignificant minimum wage, and human exploitation, then I do not know what does.  Walmart is not a good employer.

 

Shopping at Walmart supports exploiting people here and abroad, often women and children working in inhumane factory conditions.  If you believe in social justice, consider carefully what it means if you shop at Walmart.

chemgal's picture

chemgal

image

I'm not 100% sure how the factories are set up, but from my understanding they are not Walmart staff.

 

I understand the principle of not shopping in an American Walmart.  I don't know how much shopping at a Canadian one would contribute to the issues with the American stores.

 

When it comes to the factories, I think the specific product is more important than the store.  I know Walmart introduced products from local businesses that provided them a way to get their stuff into consumers hands.

revjohn's picture

revjohn

image

Hi Mendalla,

 

Mendalla wrote:

Hard to tell. They've been around here for so long now (London was one of the cities where Walmart took over old Woolco stores when the first moved in), I'm not sure how you would measure their impact since the control (London w/o Walmart) is no longer available.

 

Same here in Brantford.  Judging by the parking lot there are some days that Walmart appears to be doing well and other days when it is virtual wasteland.  The addition of the grocery section does not appear to have improved their fortune hereabouts.  The Zehrs right across the parking lot is not hurting for business. 

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

Mendalla's picture

Mendalla

image

crazyheart wrote:

I must say that vegetables, fruit, meat are all less expensive and fresher at Walmart that at other stores like SafeWay fo instance.

 

It is the opposite in London. Save odd specials, we generally get our produce and meat at No Frills or the Asian stores. Better quality and cheaper than Walmart. However, there is the odd item (such as Robin Hood bread flour) that is cheaper and more readily available at Walmart. Overall, we use them as our second string grocery store for stuff that No Frills doesn't have or if we are going there for other stuff. Now, for clothing, housewares, etc., we do use Walmart (since Target, so far, has proven to be useless compared to the Zellers that it replaced).

 

Mendalla

 

redhead's picture

redhead

image

Walmart and Joe Fresh exploit workers in emerging countries.  Buying clothes in Walmart and Loblaws/Superstores supports the exploitation. 

GO_3838's picture

GO_3838

image

Does Walmart support local economies?

Consider this: there was a Walmart in Quebec that became unionized. That same day, the store closed. The Walmart owners would rather put dozens of people out of work than allow their staff to become unionized. So it sounds to me that Walmart's priority is to keep unions out and wages low so that the owners don't take a cut into their billions of dollars of profit.

Many of my high school students work at Walmart. Some love it, while others hate it. I do remember when one 17-year-old boy got badly punched in the face. His manager had told him to confront shoplifters, so he once followed one out to the parking lot, and when he confronted the shoplifter, he got assaulted. I certainly think Walmart should have a better policy for confronting shoplifters (employee safety should be paramount.)

I only go to Walmart if I can't get the product anywhere else.

And in my small city, stores find it hard to compete with Walmart's "open 24 hours" policy during Xmas shopping season. So I absolutely make a point of supporting my local family businesses during Xmas season. Walmart doesn't need my business like they do.

ninjafaery's picture

ninjafaery

image

I can only share my personal experience with Walmart. I hear the legitimate problems with the company and understand why it's targetted for being a bad employer, and yes, they do sell their fair share of stuff produced in dangerous factories.

However - their reputation for having only cheap junk from third world countries is undeserved. This practice is common at Canadian Tire and other retailers.

If I want to find an item that isn't made in those exploitived areas, it's Walmart that has it. I find they usually have a product - say a fan - that's made in Canada or the US. This isn't true of Canadian Tire. I could not find a single can opener that was made domestically.

I think Walmart does promote North American manufacturerers, and despite the other criticisms, they have a better variety of merch. 

I don't like the grocery section at all and wonder at it's popularity. Expensive. 

jon71's picture

jon71

image

I used to work at Wal-mart. I first I really liked it and thought it was a good company. Over the years things went down hill. It seems like they're trying to do things on the cheap and that includes driving out long term employees and replacing them with part timers or anyone they can get cheap. In America a very large number of Wal-mart employess are dependent on food stamps and other govt. assistance just to make it. They are getting stingier and stingier with both the pay and benefits and that's why they want to drive out people who are grandfather into a better deal like I was.

redhead's picture

redhead

image

The answer to Walmart?

 

Walmart bad.

 

Walmart cares about making money.  Does not care about employees or consumers.

 

Stop shopping at Walmart-makes the family who owns Walmart very wealthy, exploits employees and shoppers.  Very bad.

chemgal's picture

chemgal

image

redhead wrote:

The answer to Walmart?

 

Walmart bad.

 

Walmart cares about making money.  Does not care about employees or consumers.

 

Stop shopping at Walmart-makes the family who owns Walmart very wealthy, exploits employees and shoppers.  Very bad.

Businesses are people.  That's true of most businesses, and while I'm a bit fuzzy on the concept, I believe publically traded companies have a duty to do what they can to make money for their shareholders.

 

I don't think Walmart is the most responsible company, but if we were capable of wiping out every company who has the goal of making money all at once we'd be in turmoil.

 

It isn't that simple.

redhead's picture

redhead

image

actually, it is that simple: support local, do not buy into stockmarket menatality and capitalisim. Capitalism is the modern interprtation of fiefdom. Which is,ath the end of the day, exploitation.

 

Use money wisely, and do not buy into corporate greed. 

 

Walmart is corporate greed.  Whenever a Walmart opens, dozens of local stores/indipendent operators are forced ot of business.

 

 

chemgal's picture

chemgal

image

When we only support local, we lose out on what's not available here.  Even the farmer's markets with strict rules know that.  Must be either worked on or produced in the province, except for fruit.

 

I like having a national lender so that if I ever moved, I could port my mortgage.  I like being able to have access to medications that I need.  It would be next to impossible to have a local industry to meet all needs, let alone wants.  Even if the manpower existed, what about the resources?

redhead's picture

redhead

image

okay - good to know chemagal.  protect one's own interest at the cost of others is the capitalist game.  sharing means caring, and individual local shops can make that happen. 

 

As far as humanpower is concerned, it is up to humans to make it happen, as consumers, shop owners and voters.  It is also up to humans to change the market, to change consumption, to become better educated, and to vote wisely.

 

Capitalism works for the few, and not the many.  How much historical and current evidence is required to prove that on many levels, capitalisim fails?

 

 

chemgal's picture

chemgal

image

redhead wrote:

okay - good to know chemagal.  protect one's own interest at the cost of others is the capitalist game.  sharing means caring, and individual local shops can make that happen. 

 

It's not just me, many others are in the same position.  Needs can't be met purely with local businesses.  If you start trade, that increases the output required by the producers.  Transportation is required to.  Eventually it just builds back up to something similar of what we have.

 

You didn't answer my earlier questions either.  Are all staff members being exploited?  How?  What about the customers?

redhead's picture

redhead

image

yes.  staff is being exploited.  read upthread.

 

customers are also being exploited;  by buying into capitalism.  by providing support of wlamart in the form of consumption, consumers exploit walmart staff and line the pockets of walmart owners...so no one except walmart family members win.

chemgal's picture

chemgal

image

Redhead, which posts explains how all staff is exploited?  What post explains how I was exploited while working there?  Unless you're just boiling it down to Walmart falls under capitialism and capitalism exploits everyone.  But then local businesses also fall under capitalism too, don't they?

 

Walmart doesn't have family members, it's a business.

Mendalla's picture

Mendalla

image

You want a world with no capitalism, redhead? Move to North Korea. Or Cuba. Actually, Cuba is the better off of the two so go there.

 

Your independent farmer is a capitalist. They exploit their farm labour to make a profit.

 

Your local credit union is capitalist. They may not be big players like the banks but, in the end, they are all about investing their members money to make a buck for those members (=shareholders) and likely someone else gets exploited somewhere along the line of making that money.

 

That nice little independent grocery store? In it for the money and likely exploiting their workers to some extent to do that.

 

Yes, scale up to Walmart levels and you magnify all the problems of capitalism but capitalism is how our economy runs even at the local level.

 

Oh, and by the way, workers in Cuba and North Korea are exploited, too. Not by big corporations, but by their governments (esp. North Korea, which is basically a divine right monarchy at this point). I'd rather be exploited by Walmart, which I can at least buy a piece of on the stock market, than some tinpot dictator who promises to take care of me while using me to take care of himself.

 

Human beings exist by exploiting, as does life in general. Right now, a virus is exploiting my DNA to reproduce itself giving me my second cold in as many months. The question is not how to end exploitation but how to balance it to minimize harm. Not eliminate harm, but minimize it.

 

How do you propose that we run society, redhead? How will your model for society minimize the harm of exploitation and ensure everyone gets the services and good they need (not luxuries they want, but needs like food and drugs)?

 

Mendalla

 

chemgal's picture

chemgal

image

Mendalla wrote:

You want a world with no capitalism, redhead? Move to North Korea. Or Cuba. Actually, Cuba is the better off of the two so go there.

 

Your independent farmer is a capitalist. They exploit their farm labour to make a profit.

 

Your local credit union is capitalist. They may not be big players like the banks but, in the end, they are all about investing their members money to make a buck for those members (=shareholders) and likely someone else gets exploited somewhere along the line of making that money.

 

That nice little independent grocery store? In it for the money and likely exploiting their workers to some extent to do that.

 

Yes, scale up to Walmart levels and you magnify all the problems of capitalism but capitalism is how our economy runs even at the local level.

 

Oh, and by the way, workers in Cuba and North Korea are exploited, too. Not by big corporations, but by their governments (esp. North Korea, which is basically a divine right monarchy at this point). I'd rather be exploited by Walmart, which I can at least buy a piece of on the stock market, than some tinpot dictator who promises to take care of me while using me to take care of himself.

 

Human beings exist by exploiting, as does life in general. Right now, a virus is exploiting my DNA to reproduce itself giving me my second cold in as many months. The question is not how to end exploitation but how to balance it to minimize harm. Not eliminate harm, but minimize it.

 

How do you propose that we run society, redhead? How will your model for society minimize the harm of exploitation and ensure everyone gets the services and good they need (not luxuries they want, but needs like food and drugs)?

 

Mendalla

 

yes

I'm exhausted today, but I don't know if I could have explained things as well as that anyway.

Tabitha's picture

Tabitha

image

I try to avod Walmart as much as I can.

I prefer to shop small local stores-and costco.

as for Walmart exploiting workers in canada-my friends mother worked payroll for them for a short time. At the end of the month if payroll was too high they were told to reduce sick pay and/or vacation entittlements to get the number they needed.A few dollars here and there on quite a few employees did the trick. She quickly left that job.

There's a fine line between shopping local-my IGA is owned locally and is very close-but as he does well he has aquired the  IGA in the next town.  At some point he may own a bunch of them.

Fountian Tire was started by the Fountians.  As it has grown and franchised is it still local?

I shop my local quilt stores for fabric but also Fabricland. One owner owns 2 of the Fabricland stores-here and 1.5 hours away. It's sort of local and also a franchise.

Azdgari's picture

Azdgari

image

Ditto.  Splendid post, Mendalla.

Jim Kenney's picture

Jim Kenney

image

Walmart in Canada may operate a bit differently than in the US.  In its early days, it would move into small to middle-sized towns and use extra low prices to drive out most of the existing businesses.  Once the other stores were gone, the Walmart prices would rise to a comfortable level of profit.  Once I became aware of this practice, I made a point of avoiding Walmart. 

 

Then Walmart tried to buy the election of a city council which would be more agreeable to its goals in a particular California city.  At that point I developed a firm resolve to avoid Walmart and to encourage others to also avoid shopping at Walmart.  It was a Walmart representative that opposed a cost increase in Bangladesh that would have prevented the loss of lives in that factory fire. 

 

Other companies also engage in immoral practices.   In one small town where I lived, McGavins and a local chain grocery combined forces to destroy a new bakery by providing really cheap bread products as long as that bakery was open.  Safeways in Calgary had lower prices in its stores around a startup discount grocery (Ranchmart) until it went out of business.  Many chains in centres like Calgary will have higher prices in the stores in poor communities whose residents can't afford to go to other parts of the city to buy groceries. 

 

Walmart may have a mix of qualities for goods.  I used to hear of many bargain clothes purchased at Walmart failing to survive more than one or two washngs.

kaythecurler's picture

kaythecurler

image

A very complex topic.  I just don't know enough facts or economics to deal with it fairly.  About all I can say with any confidence is - I have tried to shop locally since about 1970.  At that time there were stores in my immediate community selling a wide range of clothing (cheap, expensive, mens, womens, kids, sports)  now we have TWO stores carrying womens wear, one has expensive stuff, the other is like a dollar store with clothes and household goods. The dollar type store also has junky clothes for men and kids.

 

We had two stores carrying sporting goods (clothing, skis, canoes, kayaks, lifejackets, windsurfers, fishing equipment etc)- now we have several gas stations who have a few fish hooks.

We had a bookstore, a good choice of toys, games and puzzles, A health food store, two stores selling sewing items - material, sewing machines, embroidery supplies and knitting items.   

Our FIVE grocery stores had a huge range of products including fish, shellfish, offal and lamb.  Between them they had everything I could have bought in a city except for Indian, Mexican, Chinese etc ingredients. Now we have three who have lots of prepared foods and frozen meals and less choice of meats, fruits and vegetables. A lot of the meat is processed or ready to cook (and I don't buy that type of stuff).  One sometimes has Chinese vegetables and more recently has started selling foods that are familiar to our new residents from the Phippines. 

 

We don't have a Walmart or a Costco or any other Big Store (and I don't go to them when in the city)

 

I continue to try to find what I want right here but I'm finding it increasingly difficult.  When we needed new lifejackets I got them online from MEC. 

seeler's picture

seeler

image

Chemgal, I would be interested to know:

 

When you worked at Walmart, did you work full time?

Did you have any other source of income?

Did you earn enough to support two people  (say a mother and child - or as half of a couple supporting two children)?    Include in this providing a home or suitable apartment, meals, clothing, transportation, educational expenses, charitable givings, recreation, and savings). 

Was your working enviroment safe?   Did you get reasonable breaks? 

Did you get benefits if you were off sick for a few days - or a longer period of time?

Did you get paid vacation time?

Were you paid for overtime?  At the regular rate or more?

Were you required to work on Sundays? 

Did you have a pension plan?

 

If you no longer work at Walmart, why did you leave?

 

The answers you can give to these questions might help in determining whether you were exploited.   

 

My sister was pleased to get a part time job at Walmart when a store opened in her area.  Within a short period of time, she became disallusioned.  Shifts were often short or broken up, and sometimes cancelled without notice.  Sometimes she would miss her breaks - even bathroom breaks were hard to come by.  Sometimes her shift would be extended by 10 min to 1/2 hour without extra pay.  Suggestions and complaints were treated as 'trouble making' or 'poor team spirit'.   Needless to say she soon quit.  Her husband's income was adequate to support her until she found something else.

 

On the other hand, my neighbour (who stayed home and cared for her elderly mil until her death) seems quite happy working at the local Walmart  (not the same one my sister worked at).  She likes her boss and her fellow workers.  Her husband earns a comfortable living - they inherited a house.  Her wages are for extras.  She likes having some money to call her own.  She doesn't feel exploited.

 

carolla's picture

carolla

image

Here's an interesting video - about buying national rather than offshore.  It's American - so just listen from a Canadian perspective.  

 


chemgal's picture

chemgal

image

seeler wrote:

Chemgal, I would be interested to know:

 

When you worked at Walmart, did you work full time?  It really varied.  I actually had to sign a form stating I was willing to work less than the minimum hours.  I believe it was just Walmart policy and not a law that those who were part time were guaranteed a minimum number of hours.  It was at my request though, due to school.  Then in the summer a full-time staff member had Visa issues or was being deported or something.  It worked out great for all of us, Walmart promised to hold her job and they didn't have to worry about moving someone around departments while I filled in the full time hours.

 

Did you have any other source of income?  Schoiarships, although they weren't ones that paid out regularly and some were very small ie. grade 11 or not paid out before graduation.

 

Did you earn enough to support two people  (say a mother and child - or as half of a couple supporting two children)?    Include in this providing a home or suitable apartment, meals, clothing, transportation, educational expenses, charitable givings, recreation, and savings). Based on my part-time hours, no.  I really don't know when I was working full-time, it would be tight if I could.  I do know that I could have been moved into a position where I would have though.  If I had more experience I would have started at a higher rate, and post-secondary, taking care of kids, etc. was viewed as experience.  Yes, there are 16 year olds who have to support themselves, but overall I don't think the most entry level positions need to pay living wages.  I would prefer society to support careers instead, and social programs can be available when people can't.  By the time I finished high school I am confident that I could have had a living wage working at walmart if I choose that as a career path or a temporary stepping stone.

 

Was your working enviroment safe?   Yep Did you get reasonable breaks? Yep, sometimes I was bad for just getting lost in the work and managers would actually come around, tell me I needed to take a break and would take over any of the customers I was with.

 

Did you get benefits if you were off sick for a few days - or a longer period of time?

I believe I was paid for vacation.  I was a bit annoyed about the sick policy, it changed when I was there and a doctor's note was required (I don't feel like going to the doctor if I have a severe migraine as an example) but it also benefitted me as people often called in sick because they were drunk, there was a party or they were hungover.

 

Benefit wise is where things might be judged harshly by others.  There wasn't much for those who worked part time.  There was a stock matching program, but I was under 18 when I started.  I do wish it was brought up again when I turned 18, I never pursued it as I worked there longer than what I had planned.  I didn't really see the point when I thought it would be for about 6 months, but I ended up staying on for a full year after that.

 

Part-time people didn't get many benefits.  Maybe there was a health plan that I could have paid for?  I'm not sure, as I already had one.  When I worked full-time hours, it got funny.  I didn't care about the benefits and to save the person's job I think they would have preferred to go to a temp company or something.  I ended up signing something about how I wanted the hours and was forgoing the benefits that typically went with those hours.  This was a legal form, and my manager, a store manager and HR all talked to me about it and allowed me time to read everything over at home.  It did state that it was a temporary situation, and I could not have kept the arrangement past a certain period of time.

 

Based on what they did they really worked with me to give me my ideal working hours.

 

Did you get paid vacation time?

Yes

 

Were you paid for overtime?  At the regular rate or more?

Yes, time and a half I think.  I think stat holidays were the same.

Were you required to work on Sundays? When I did the full time shift, no.  As a part timer, yes, that was a rule that was brought in at some point although wasn't when I started.  There was someone who was part time who was really upset about that but she had transferred stores and was informed that was the rule when she requested the transfer.  She still had a choice between Sunday morning or evening.

 

Did you have a pension plan?  I didn't, but I think there was something beyond the stock matching for normal full-time employees.

 

If you no longer work at Walmart, why did you leave?  Like, I said, I actually last longer than expected.  I quit because in order to do 2 degrees I had to take on more courses with lab components than what was recommended.  I was working ridiculous hours that year without having a paying job.

 

I had my moments of frustrations while working there, but that can be said of any job.  The issue most of the time was certain store managers.  Some of them weren't too bright, which can happen anywhere, although when the required education level is low, a certain amount of weeding out doesn't occur.  There was an issue with a foot fetish creep, he would call the store asking certain questions related to products and then turned it personal.  I think all of us who were victims of this had that nervous laughter when we reported it.  A store manager who was 'dealing' with it first started making jokes about it.  Another store manager heard about it and there was a meeting with all of the store managers and then another meeting with all department managers so that word would be passed down on how to deal with it.  Whether or not the store manager was reported up the chain for failing to do his duty, I don't know.  Anyone could have done it though, so it's possible it did.

 

That was the worst issue I recall.

 

I don't plan to work at Walmart again, although if times get tough and I can't get anything that would be more along my career choice, I would be willing to go back there.

 

 

chemgal's picture

chemgal

image

Sorry, I suck at doing multiple on/off quotes so it's one big quote.

chemgal's picture

chemgal

image

The greeter's jobs are pretty amazing.  Not the best paying I guess.  They almost always go to retired people, many with mobility issues.  How many jobs are there when your duties are:

  • to welcome people (while sitting if wanted)
  • giving out stickers to children
  • directing people to various parts of the store
  • checking bags if the alarm went off (in a polite way, if someone was argumentative, the greeter backs off and calls a manager, no restraining anyone or anything)
  • putting a sticker on items that people are bringing in to be returned
  • shutting the doors so they don't automatically open in the case of a 'code Adam' and watching for kids leaving
  • Paging store standards when shopping carts were low

I can't think of any other things they were responsible for.  I probably missed a few, but you get the idea.

 

When a greeter shift needed coverage by someone else, people really jumped at the chance.

 

At the opposite end of the spectrum would be store standards.  I would never do their job.  I always felt like their position required a higher starting wage.  The good ones never lasted long, they quit or switched positions.  The ones who stayed did a horrible job.  It doesn't require much skill, local language skills can be very minimum, but a certain amount of physical strength is needed.  I think jobs like that are entry level ones that should be paid a living wage.  No one wants to do them, but someone has to and I was always grateful for the ones who did them well as they allowed me to do my job more effectively,

 

Thinking back, it's funny but I don't remember a single store standards employee who didn't have decent English skills.  At least at the store I worked at, they really encouraged people to have a floor position to help improve their English.  The only time I knew about was a girl who moved from Quebec.  My french was better than her English which isn't saying much.  I could learn more from a 30 min class that what she knew (or let on to knowing).  She also expected to be able to work the floor, dealing with customers while only speaking French, she had no desire to work on her English.

Kimmio's picture

Kimmio

image

I haven't been to Walmart in years. I don't like that they hire people with disabilities as greeters, for image, but not much else. It's patronizing. At least, they were doing that. People with mobility issues can often do a lot more than greet Walmart shoppers- if given fair accommodations to reach their potential rather than token jobs. I don't like any big company that pays min. wage. Mom and pop operations, I can actually understand- but big mega stores- they're just greedy. Also, who's making their products, where, and how much do they get paid? I wish I could afford to shop ethically at all times- it actually costs significantly more to do so, in price, transportation, time- but I do check labels and don't shop at Walmart.

Dcn. Jae's picture

Dcn. Jae

image

Kimmio's picture

Kimmio

image

Mendalla wrote:

You want a world with no capitalism, redhead? Move to North Korea. Or Cuba. Actually, Cuba is the better off of the two so go there.

 

Your independent farmer is a capitalist. They exploit their farm labour to make a profit.

 

Your local credit union is capitalist. They may not be big players like the banks but, in the end, they are all about investing their members money to make a buck for those members (=shareholders) and likely someone else gets exploited somewhere along the line of making that money.

 

That nice little independent grocery store? In it for the money and likely exploiting their workers to some extent to do that.

 

Yes, scale up to Walmart levels and you magnify all the problems of capitalism but capitalism is how our economy runs even at the local level.

 

Oh, and by the way, workers in Cuba and North Korea are exploited, too. Not by big corporations, but by their governments (esp. North Korea, which is basically a divine right monarchy at this point). I'd rather be exploited by Walmart, which I can at least buy a piece of on the stock market, than some tinpot dictator who promises to take care of me while using me to take care of himself.

 

Human beings exist by exploiting, as does life in general. Right now, a virus is exploiting my DNA to reproduce itself giving me my second cold in as many months. The question is not how to end exploitation but how to balance it to minimize harm. Not eliminate harm, but minimize it.

 

How do you propose that we run society, redhead? How will your model for society minimize the harm of exploitation and ensure everyone gets the services and good they need (not luxuries they want, but needs like food and drugs)?

 

Mendalla

 

Humans could choose not to operate like viruses. Viruses can't choose not to be viruses, and we have to deal with that, but Walmart can choose not to operate like a virus. They could start by paying liveable wages and benefits and advocating for the factory workers who make their products have a safe and reasonable place to work and living standard too. Their CEOs don't have to hoard mass wealth, either.

Kimmio's picture

Kimmio

image

Mendalla wrote:

You want a world with no capitalism, redhead? Move to North Korea. Or Cuba. Actually, Cuba is the better off of the two so go there.

 

Your independent farmer is a capitalist. They exploit their farm labour to make a profit.

 

Your local credit union is capitalist. They may not be big players like the banks but, in the end, they are all about investing their members money to make a buck for those members (=shareholders) and likely someone else gets exploited somewhere along the line of making that money.

 

That nice little independent grocery store? In it for the money and likely exploiting their workers to some extent to do that.

 

Yes, scale up to Walmart levels and you magnify all the problems of capitalism but capitalism is how our economy runs even at the local level.

 

Oh, and by the way, workers in Cuba and North Korea are exploited, too. Not by big corporations, but by their governments (esp. North Korea, which is basically a divine right monarchy at this point). I'd rather be exploited by Walmart, which I can at least buy a piece of on the stock market, than some tinpot dictator who promises to take care of me while using me to take care of himself.

 

Human beings exist by exploiting, as does life in general. Right now, a virus is exploiting my DNA to reproduce itself giving me my second cold in as many months. The question is not how to end exploitation but how to balance it to minimize harm. Not eliminate harm, but minimize it.

 

How do you propose that we run society, redhead? How will your model for society minimize the harm of exploitation and ensure everyone gets the services and good they need (not luxuries they want, but needs like food and drugs)?

 

Mendalla

 

Humans could choose not to operate like viruses. Viruses can't choose not to be viruses, and we have to deal with that, but Walmart can choose not to operate like a virus. They could start by paying liveable wages and benefits and advocating for the factory workers who make their products have a safe and reasonable place to work and living standard too. Their CEOs don't have to hoard mass wealth, either.

Kimmio's picture

Kimmio

image

Reminds me of the article I read this morning: "How Slavery Led to Modern Capitalism"


http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4847105/?ir=WorldPost


We know communism didn't work. Free market Capitalism isn't working for most people anymore- huge debt, income disparity gap widening. Maybe in the next century economists will come up with a new, balanced, model that'll catch on.

Kimmio's picture

Kimmio

image

What bugs me about many of the corporate big wigs is they've got so much money they could give away most of it, invest it into helping others ,and still be able to live comfortably for the rest of their lives- but they won't, likely.

ninjafaery's picture

ninjafaery

image

Walmart's biggest threat. 

 

These employees are paid above minimum, have paid benefits and vacation, AND the employer invests 20% of their income into a pension plan. AND their prices are lower than walmart. This business is expanding rapidly. 

I think this is what it's going to take for walmart to remain competive. Seems like fair treatment for employees might be what people really want - even the consumers.

 

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/08/09/2444571/the-company-with-low...

 

jon71's picture

jon71

image

There are a couple of points I want to make. First Wal-mart does not practice anything that Adam Smith would recognize as capitalism. It is a perversion of free market principles, trying to abuse and rig the system. They want to be as close to a monopoly as they can and then dictate all aspects of the retail chain. It doesn't have to be like this. Henry Ford said he'd pay all his employees enough they could buy a Ford car. It's been noted that Wal-mart pays it's employees so little they can't shop anywhere else. Last Thanksgiving one even collected canned goods so it's employees could have a nice Thanksgiving. If you want a real eye opener check out the documentary "Wal-mart: the high cost of low prices". The full movie is on youtube but I can't copy and paste the link here for some reason.

The other thing that comes to mind is that we no longer have door greeters. It was cut so save the company money of course. Customers get their own buggies, take their returns to the customer service desk on their own, no one greets them, and no stickers for kids. I HOPE someone else is assigned to guard the door in case of a code Adam but I don't know for sure.

 

 

Dr.Drew's picture

Dr.Drew

image

You know I've been on both sides of the fence.  Many of these local mom and pop stores trained us, used us, congratulated us and let us go.  And in my case, the dictators that I worked for were sneaky, conspiring and greedy - yes greedy - more than WalMart.  I think the word is Integrity and you can not buy or possess it - only you earn it.  If you are a small business owner, you adapt and you play it out.   If you lack integrity, you will not be in business long.

Failing to adapt or change, yes small business will hurt or close; however, there are some cases where it is deserved and a welcomed nudge.  Just to say one is bad is a pretty narrow view of things.   Thank you Small Business for the extra training.  Now open your mouth and here's your medicine!

crazyheart's picture

crazyheart

image

Hi Dr. Drew. Welcome to  WondeCafe I don't think I have met you before.

Alex's picture

Alex

image

Here we go Jon

 

See video

jon71's picture

jon71

image

Cool. I worked there and I found out things I didn't know before. it's so shady and seems to be getting worse.

Back to Global Issues topics