<p>NEW YORK (Reuters) - An internal memo sent to the Wal-Mart Stores Inc. board proposes numerous ways to hold down health care and benefits costs with less harm to the retailer’s reputation, including hiring more part-time workers and discouraging unhealthy people from seeking jobs, the New York Times said Wednesday. </p>
<p>I think the idea of having the employment office on the tenth floor of a building without an elevator as a way to discourage “un-healthy” workers a bit much. Seriously, there are no bargains in a non union shop.</p>
<p>The NY Times story left me so cynical about Wal-Mart, whose reported foilbles I have followed in the media for awhile now. I was glad to see the efforts the company expended in the aftermath of Katrina, realizing that Wal-Mart might have done so in part with the hope of receiving good press. But as I learned from various and political and civic battles, when an adversary does the right thing and adopts your position, be grateful. Nevertheless, the company officer’s ‘draft’ statements to the company board about discarding higher-paid employees and screening out applicants for particular genetic dispositions made me cringe.</p>
<p>I don’t deny that Wal-Mart’s low prices benefit working class families, but at what cost to the overall public treasury, i.e. the resources that are used to provide services to the working class and everyone else?</p>
<p>You can balance that cost with whether the workers and the public are not somewhat better off than if these workers were unemployed and collected welfare or unemployment and getting all the benefits like medicaid and food stamps that they would still have a right to??</p>
<p>I have shopped at WM and my observation is that this is not the cream of the labor pool.</p>
<p>Actually Barrons I believe Walmart has a large number of employees on Federal Assistance of one kind or another. Those low prices and low wages are being subsidized by you and me. Yes, it’s better than having them be completely dependent but the bigger question is why doesn’t Walmart pay them a Living wage? There are companies who pay their employees well and still make a profit - Costco would be one of those - kind of an old fashioned notion these days to actually take care of your employees.</p>
<p>This is from the mediamatters website - my connection with CC is too slow to copy the link.</p>
<p>An August 2004 University of California, Berkeley Labor Center study found that many Wal-Mart workers in California rely on government safety net programs such as food stamps, Medi-Cal (California’s version of Medicaid) and subsidized housing at an estimated cost to taxpayers of $86 million annually-- $32 million for health-related expenses and $54 million for other assistance. Further, families of Wal-Mart employees utilize these services considerably more than the average for families with employees of all large retail companies. In fact, if other large retailers in California were to provide wages and benefits at Wal-Mart’s level it would cost California taxpayers an additional $410 million in increased public assistance costs. According to the study:</p>
<ul>
<li> The families of Wal-Mart employees in California utilize an estimated 40 percent more in taxpayer-funded health care than the average for families of all large retail employees. </li>
<li> The families of Wal-Mart employees use an estimated 38 percent more in other (non-health care) public assistance programs (such as food stamps, Earned Income Tax Credit, subsidized school lunches, and subsidized housing) than the average for families of all large retail employees.</li>
</ul>
<p>Please compare Wal Mart employees to the unemployed–how much do they get in benefits? I beleive CA is one of the few states where retail–especially groceries–is heavily union. Fine but you pay for it in higher prices.</p>
<p>As to Costco–they sell only things they can get cheap and in bulk. Fine for some shopping but some people don’t want 88 rolls of TP at a crack. Many smaller items can’t be found there.</p>
<p>I don’t shop at Walmart - in fact we don’t even have one in Seattle- and while we aren’t wealthy- I am willing to spend more to buy from a company that gives back to the community and carries goods from companies that do so as well.
We buy organic as much as possible- limit what we buy- are just as likely to buy from a 2nd hand shop as retail-and buy from companies that are local or independent.
Why do I want to buy from a national chain when my dollar will then go out of the area?
I want my money to stay here- to support my community.
But large companies are dictating more what their workers do away from the job.
Workers are required to quit smoking and may be fired if blood tests indicate they have not.
We have an inititave on the ballot that not only bans smoking in businesses, but 25 feet from open doorways, necessitating businesses where workers are allowed to smoke to go to an area without any shops for a smoking break.
I don’t smoke- and I obviously agree it is unhealthy, but I don’t feel we need to develop nanny state laws dictating behavior in a “free” country.
If a business wants to be smoke free they already have that option.
But to require all businesses to ban smoking and to further that ban to 25 ft from their doorway, makes them into the smoking police.
Are they going to now restrict serving of alcoholic beverages until a suitable time like after sundown? Why don’t they ban them altogether- drinking is certainly a disruption to many families, a drain on our economy for work lost, and then we have the incidence of accidents caused by drinking, impulsive behavior exacerbated by alcohol- Prohibition worked really well didn’t it?
oh wait…</p>
<p>actually costco is a great resource
we buy tp there ( 18 rolls) and paper towels ( 12) rolls
I admit the laundry soap containers are huge but I buy that at the natural health store which doesnt contain the phospates that TIDE does.
Our house is less than 1000sq ft so there isnt’ a lot of room for storage- but buying a 9 pk of tuna isn’t a big deal and neither is paying $27.00 for Calvin Klein jeans that are over $70.00 at Nordstroms</p>
<p>You do have to plan to go to Costco- know your prices, and what you have room for, for the items that come in bulk. It can be a time saver though, not to have to run out so much for bread and milk and printer paper.
Just as long as you go often enough to know where everything is located- and not wander through picking up things that look like great bargains and then your total is $600!</p>
<p>You are giving the pleasure police too many ideas now, please shut up I am telling you, the day will be soon where it won’t be illegal to buy cigarettes, but won’t be able to smoke them anywhere. On that note, it is time for a smoke break. (while I still can smoke within 25 feet of the doorway.</p>
<p>Despite the tradition of strong unions in the Great Northwest, and the Puget Sound region’s particular reputation for being “green,” there are Wal-Marts within a 10 minute drive of the Seattle city limits.</p>
<p>The essential dichotomy regarding the detrement or benefit of the Wal-Mart phenomena is whether or not society welcomes the trade offs. As was noted, in places like California Wal-Mart employees are in fact subsidized by the public. And I am not just talking about income assistance. Communities everywhere have bent over to provide tax relief to Wal-Mart and to build road improvements (on PRIVATE land) that benefit the company, but at no cost to Wal-Mart.</p>
<p>As author Elizabeth Warren noted in her recent book, limited income families in the U.S. do pay less for food and clothing today than 25 years ago, but that fact is deceiving. Their true income has declined, the cost of home ownership is out of reach for average income earners, and the true cost of living is much more.</p>
<p>I think the entire walmart issue is a double edge sword. I personally love walmart, I wouldn’t be feeding my family as well if it weren’t for them because local groceries are in the midst of double the prices, whole foods much more. for those of you who don’t do your food shopping at a walmart, indulge me and do it there one week, buying what you typically would. you will not believe the savings. costco, I go there at times, but don’t like them. I find them expensive actually. I go to sam’s club, and even a local area tv show did an evaluation of costs of those bulk stores, and costco was the highest cost. sams the lowest and BJ’s in the middle. being a case manager at a large hospital, I have taken care of walmart employees. their insurance coverage was good. better than a huge international company in our area. and are you kidding me with companies wanting to hire part time employees to save money? what exactly is new with that? it’s the norm, as is finding ways to fire people who have seniority, 6 weeks vacation, highest paid etc. it is very few companies who value their older experienced employees and utilize their expertise to create an intelligent dynamic workplace, in fact older employees are in many companies harrassed and demeaned until they relent and quit. in my many trips to walmart, I have seen severely ■■■■■■■■ employees, with their assistants, doing jobs and being paid. who else is going to hire this type of person? I am proud of my local walmart. they volunteer locally, donate money locally, have elderly greeters at the front door which warms my heart, have a bevy of employees who would not be hired anywhere else. so they have a job, a place to go, a meaning to get up and social interaction, rather than sitting at home collecting disability, unemployment, welfare etc. so many of them may still have children on welfare, or they may themselves be on welfare because they work part time and still need the health coverage that welfare gives them. I know people who work at walmart, and they love it. they feel important, and say they are treated very well. I know many people who work at our local walmart who once worked at a local union grocery store that went under. they went under because their employees were being paid better than me, an RN. they also love their new jobs, and also say their health insurance was better than at that union shop. I think walmart is being attacked unfairly. any other company would not undergo this scrutiny.</p>
<p>Clearly, Wal-Mart has just gotten too big, and must be nationalized. All Wal-Mart employees will become federal employees, with the various open-ended pension and benefit perks, civil service protection, federal employee unionization, etc. Then, all injustice at Wal-Mart will end, and in fact, the chain will become just as effective and profitable as all the other government agencies. Then–on to the automobile companies. I just read that Ford thinks the union-mandated 48 minutes per shift for bathroom breaks is too much, and I’m outraged. The French can have nationalized companies. Why can’t we have a thriving economy like theirs? Sometimes I just don’t understand you people.</p>
I am telling you, the day will be soon where it won’t be illegal to buy cigarettes, but won’t be able to smoke them anywhere. On that note, it is time for a smoke break. (while I still can smoke within 25 feet of the doorway.</p>