Right to Work? - Page 3
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 62
Like Tree18Likes

Thread: Right to Work?

  1. #21
    Posting Addict Alissa_Sal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Debating Away on the Debate Board!
    Posts
    11,770

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlyssaEimers View Post
    $11.75 is far above the minimum wage. I do not think a retail company could afford to pay much more than that. Do you know of another retail company that pays its cashiers more than $21 an hour? Do you think Walmart could afford to pay its employees $21/hour while the store across the street pays its employees $8/hour?
    Whether they can or can't afford to pay her more, my point is that they aren't paying her a living wage which means that (unless we approve of single parents and their children starving on the streets) someone is going to have to pick up the difference. If it's not Wal-Mart (who probably pay their C-Level around $6-$7MM per and also reported net earnings of $15.4B for the 2010 fiscal year -per Wiki, too lazy to keep digging for 2011) then it's going to be you and I. Unless we let her starve. I'm not in favor of letting working families starve to death or lose their (tiny $900) apartments if their companies pay them less than a living wage, but I realize some may disagree.
    -Alissa, mom to Tristan (5) and Reid (the baby!)

    Got an opinion? We've got a board! Come join us for some lively debate on the Face Off! Debate Arena board.

  2. #22
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,855

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alissa_Sal View Post
    Whether they can or can't afford to pay her more, my point is that they aren't paying her a living wage which means that (unless we approve of single parents and their children starving on the streets) someone is going to have to pick up the difference. If it's not Wal-Mart (who probably pay their C-Level around $6-$7MM per and also reported net earnings of $15.4B for the 2010 fiscal year -per Wiki, too lazy to keep digging for 2011) then it's going to be you and I. Unless we let her starve. I'm not in favor of letting working families starve to death or lose their (tiny $900) apartments if their companies pay them less than a living wage, but I realize some may disagree.
    I do not think we should let them starve I just do not think it is Walmart's responsibility to pay every single employee more than $21/hour.

    ~Bonita~

  3. #23
    Prolific Poster
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,237

    Default

    You don't think it is an employer's responsibility to pay their full time employees enough to function on their own without gov't assistance?

  4. #24
    Posting Addict Alissa_Sal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Debating Away on the Debate Board!
    Posts
    11,770

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlyssaEimers View Post
    I do not think we should let them starve I just do not think it is Walmart's responsibility to pay every single employee more than $21/hour.
    I don't know; it kind of seems like they have a non-working business plan to me. I mean sure, it works great for them. LOL Just not so great for their employees, and not so great for the rest of us. I mean, right now, they pay about half of a living wage, which means that we have to pick up the other half. In essence, we are in the position of having to possibly subsidize half of their employees' wages with government assistance to get them to a place where they can feed their families and live in some minimal amount of comfort.

    Imagine if I came up with a business plan that said that in order for me to keep my prices low AND net huge profits (like 15.4B annually) I just wasn't going to pay my employees at all; the goverment would need to pay them the full amount they need to live. You'd probably laugh and say that my business model is ridiculous, right? But when it comes to mega-retailers like Wal-Mart, we're basically halfway there. I think it's kind of like the whole lobster pot scenario. I don't think that's how Wal-Mart started out, but over time as they and other stores continued to compete for lower prices and higher profits, their ability to pay a competitive living wages inched down over time, like turning up the heat on a lobster so he doesn't know it's getting hot until he's boiling.

    Realistically, I don't know what we could really do about it at this point without a major shift in our culture, which is why I guess we keep doing nothing and just paying the difference so Wal-Mart employees can live while Wal-Mart nets (NETS - this is their revenue AFTER they pay their bills) all of those billions of dollars annually. To tie this back into unions, if there was a union at Wal-Mart they might be able to fight for higher wages so that we paid less to subsidize Wal-Mart employees. True, that would cut into Wal-Mart's profit margins, which means that in order to retain those profit margins they would have to raise prices. So it's kind of lose-lose, isn't it?
    boilermaker and Jessica80 like this.
    -Alissa, mom to Tristan (5) and Reid (the baby!)

    Got an opinion? We've got a board! Come join us for some lively debate on the Face Off! Debate Arena board.

  5. #25
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,855

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jessica80 View Post
    You don't think it is an employer's responsibility to pay their full time employees enough to function on their own without gov't assistance?
    You can not just single large retailers like Walmart out. You can not expect Walmart to pay their employees $21 dollars an hour, while everyone else pays their employees $8/ hour. Did you have an example of a store that paid their cashiers $21/hour? If you right now deemed that Walmart had to pay all of their employees $21/hour they would be out of business in a very short amount of time.

    A business has expenses. The cost of making a product, the cost to ship and sell a product, and so on. If you were to raise salary of all retail workers to the currant cost of living, the price of the product would be so high that the cost of living would go up so they still would not be making cost of living.

    If you want to make more than cost of living, go to college and get a good paying job, not retail.

    ~Bonita~

  6. #26
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,855

    Default

    If you double Walmarts costs by increasing the pay of its cashiers by more than double, they will increase the cost of their goods by double so I would still be paying for that worker to have a living wage, the same as if that worker was on assistance. I think of Walmart as a job to gain experience and to learn from, not a job that someone should strive to work at their entire life.

    If you paid an unskilled Walmart worker the same as someone who went to college for 4 years to get a good job, who would go to college? It would also bring the skilled pay workers pay down in comparison to the cost of things because the cost of necessities would go up so much.

    ~Bonita~

  7. #27
    Posting Addict Alissa_Sal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Debating Away on the Debate Board!
    Posts
    11,770

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlyssaEimers View Post
    If you double Walmarts costs by increasing the pay of its cashiers by more than double, they will increase the cost of their goods by double so I would still be paying for that worker to have a living wage, the same as if that worker was on assistance. I think of Walmart as a job to gain experience and to learn from, not a job that someone should strive to work at their entire life.

    If you paid an unskilled Walmart worker the same as someone who went to college for 4 years to get a good job, who would go to college? It would also bring the skilled pay workers pay down in comparison to the cost of things because the cost of necessities would go up so much.
    *Someone* has to work at Wal-Mart, or else Wal-Mart would go out of business. They don't have enough CEOS and managers to man the stores without the "lowly" workers. I don't think it serves anyone to look down on people who are working there; if they didn't, no Wal-Mart.

    I know this is blasphemy, but if we didn't think that corporations needed to maintain 15.4B annual profit margin, and were willing to raise the prices a bit, they might be able to pay a little bit more. That's what I'm saying about a cultural shift in attitude though. As long as we value dirt cheap prices and large corporate profits, we will continue to pay for it elsewhere. *shrug*
    boilermaker likes this.
    -Alissa, mom to Tristan (5) and Reid (the baby!)

    Got an opinion? We've got a board! Come join us for some lively debate on the Face Off! Debate Arena board.

  8. #28
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,855

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alissa_Sal View Post
    *Someone* has to work at Wal-Mart, or else Wal-Mart would go out of business. They don't have enough CEOS and managers to man the stores without the "lowly" workers. I don't think it serves anyone to look down on people who are working there; if they didn't, no Wal-Mart.

    I know this is blasphemy, but if we didn't think that corporations needed to maintain 15.4B annual profit margin, and were willing to raise the prices a bit, they might be able to pay a little bit more. That's what I'm saying about a cultural shift in attitude though. As long as we value dirt cheap prices and large corporate profits, we will continue to pay for it elsewhere. *shrug*
    I am not looking down on people that work at Walmart. I think it is a great place for people who are just starting out or are retired and want something a little extra. I do not think though, that you can expect to work at Walmart or any other retail store and expect to get rich. Nor can you expect Walmart to pay their employees double what their competitors do.

    ~Bonita~

  9. #29
    Prolific Poster
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,237

    Default

    I wasn't specific to Walmart. I think all business should pay living wage. Living wage is the very minimum to survive without public assistance.

    I didn't go to college for 4 years to make a living wage. I went to make a higher salary so I could buy my own home, have children, money to enjoy things like trips etc. Living wage covers food, rent in an affordable building not a luxury one etc.

  10. #30
    Prolific Poster
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,237

    Default

    DP

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
v -->

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Sitemap | Terms & Conditions