Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
District residents why are you so against Walmart?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Please don't gloss over the MAIN point that people are allowed to work for whomever and wherever they please and that choice is up to them, not you or me. Again, if you don't want to be paid $20/k a year at Walmart don't work at walmart. Walmart is NOT the cause of the reason why someone needs to take a $20k job, and you know it. |
Anonymous
| I welcome Walmart. |
Anonymous
How much do you think we should pay cashiers and baggers? How much should someone who failed to get beyond the 10th grade earn? What is a fair and equitable salary for their skills. Since many people lack employable skills, how long should YOU continue to allow them to sit at home and wait for the $20.00 per hour job that will never materialize until they obtain some skills. You talk about these people as if you know them. I know you don't know them. There is dignity in working opposed to begging and accepting a handout. I would rather they lifted their heads off their pillows every morning, pulled up their pants, put on their shoes and walk or took the bus to their job than sit on a freaking couch watching soaps all day. If the salary is too little, I as a taxpayer who do all the above would gladly want to provide additional government support so that such individuals could sufficiently take care of the family. Give them the added assistance of food stamps, medicaid, whatever, but allow them to contribute to their livelihood. If you don't understand this, you don't understand anything about dignity versus being despondent and shamed. |
Anonymous
| PP, how about a third way? How about WM pays workers a living wage that allows them to support their families? I guess I don't think the only choices are for people to be unemployed (BTW, your stereotypical and disparaging mages of unemployed people really undercut your credibility) or for individual taxpayers to foot the bill for supplementary assistance to the working poor... I think the more reasonable solution is for the employer - here, a multi-billion dollar global corporation -- to compensate people so that those workers will be able to obtain a foothold in life and perhaps increase their skills and employability (which maybe they could do more easily now that they're not wondering how they're going to pay the rent, eat, or care for their children). I don't really see why the taxpayer should foot the bill to subsidize WM's choice to pay people so poorly that they can't live. (Of course, WM isn't the employer that takes this approach, but I am citing it because it is one of the largest, and the subject of this post.) Oh -- and don't go making any assumptions about what any poster "knows" or has experienced. You just *could* be (a) wrong and (b) accused of engaging in ad hominem attacks in lieu of making sense. |
Anonymous
I know we try to refrain from personal attacks on this board, but PP you sound like a complete idiot. Why is it now WMs responsibility to pay these people much more than their value in the labor force really is? The corner bodega or hardware store would not pay them $20/hr, most of them pay minimum wage. You're blaming WM for not paying uneducated people for doing a job that takes no skill and very little training the federally mandated wage. People around here are so f***ing naive sometimes. Another thing, these same people will shop at WM which is cheaper than the neighborhood stores, which will carry non-expired products and fresh fruit (unlike most neighborhood stores), will give them more variety etc. I know you're better than the rest of us and want to force us to live a certain way because it works for you, but unless you're giving half of your salary to another family so they can have your "living wage", please shut up and stay in your ivory Whole Foods tower. |
Anonymous
That's an average of employees, not the starting salary. Look at the range. As for the health care, they get one huge benefit: They get 2400 drugs at $4 a pop. The public has a similar program but only for 500 drugs. This is a big cost savings. As for the deductible, it depends on the premium they pay but there is no $4000 deductible $5-8 monthly premium comes with a $2000 deductible and no limit; they get a $100 credit also (premiums vary by geography and the last number is the max premium amount) $9-13 monthly premium comes with a $1000 deductible and no limit; they get a $100 credit $12-24 $1000 $250 $62-79 $500 $100 No inpatient and hospital deductibles. What other employer offers this? In contrast, Whole Foods offers free coverage for employees over 30 hours but charges a $2500 deductible. The math is clearly better on the Walmart plan. Anyone qualifies and for $60-720 a year, you save $500 on the deductible and you get a $100 credit. And they don't have the inpatient and hospital zero deductible or the access to so many meds for $4. |
Anonymous
| I don't think it undercuts my credibilty. Not only did I not grow up with many of these people that you think should not have a job, I still personally know a few. They want a job. Not your handouts. As for a living wage. What is the amount that should be paid. I am still awaiting that answer. To simply say a living wage means zilch. It may cost me more to live than my neighbor. And my neighbors neighbor may cost more to live more than I. So, answer me this. What salary would you offer the cashiers and greeters. I am not talking about the managers, but the entry level employees. |
Anonymous
| 14:39, it says something that for you the entire world is divided into Walmart shoppers and Whole Foods shoppers... unfortunately, that does seem to be where the economy is headed, but most economists would say that's not a good thing. On the facts, though, you're mistaken: I don't shop at either. But I'm certainly not going to genuflect at the altar of WM... low prices means low wages. I would rather pay a little more and have contributed a little less towards further polarizing the economy. But you are fundamentally correct: everyone is entitled to his or her own choice. We don't mandate moral responsibility in the USA. Just remember, like the song says: "Freedom isn't free." (It costs a buck-o-five.) |
Anonymous
| 14:42, my suggestion is that you take a look at the D.C. Department of Employment Services web page, which identifies the living wage for the District of Columbia. The statute provides some general guidelines as to calculation. Other jurisdictions have living wage provisions as well. Generally, "living wage"is meant to denote an objective calculation of the hourly rate that, if worked on a full-time schedule, would support a modest living. It doesn't mean what each individual worker needs to cover his/her monthly expenses because, as you point out, that would vary from person to person. In every instance, though, the living wage is greater than the minimum wage. |
Anonymous
| 14:41, you seem very knowledgeable -- could you please provide the SPDs for the plans you are describing and also the eligibility rules? Most sources have reported that WM requires a 6-month waiting period for even full-timers to become covered, with a waiting period of even longer for part-timers. Your post says "anyone qualifies." Which is correct? |
Anonymous
|
I believe they do have a waiting period, and I think many retail companies do. You can imagine how attractive it would be to walk in with an undisclosed condition, work a few hours at night as a stock boy and then start making health care claims.
When I said everyone, I mean everyone regardless of the hours they work. I don't think the Whole Foods plan covers employees who work fewer than 30 hours a week. |
Anonymous
|
I should add that the point here is not that Wal Mart is the ideal. But they are definitely held to a different standard. You go to Starbucks and they offer health insurance, but only to employees > 20 hours and the cheapest plan costs $20 per pay period If you go to the funky locally owned coffee shop, that shop probably does not offer health insurance at all unless it's Java Shack in Arlington, (which I highly recommend).
In fact the most underinsured employees in this country are those who work in retail and the service industry for small shops. So when you walk into that locally owned mom and pop you are often patronizing a company that does not provide any real benefits. |