Wal-Mart employees calling for their employer to improve working conditions and make company health insurance more affordable is probably not the image the world's largest retailer wants to have. But a union-backed group is to launch two television ads today that feature exactly those images and words.Starting today, the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union will be running ads starting today that feature Wal-Mart workers. The 30-second ads, produced by WakeUpWalMart.com, show three workers who list their complaints. The complaints include low wages and an odd claim of being locked in stores without the ability to care for a sick child.
One complaint I will never get about Wal-Mart is the absurd "low wage" argument. Wal-Mart does comply with the law, and workers have complete freedom to work or not work there. The tired rhetoric of the downtrodden being somehow "forced" to work at Wal-Mart still holds no water as far as I am concerned. Wal-Mart may indeed pay low -- albeit legal -- wages, but should not be forced to pay higher wages or the very fabric of capitalism will start to be shredded. Workers should be responsible for their own families, not a private employer.
Although I do have many beefs with Wal-Mart, I agree with the company on this one. It says, "Our customers see these attacks as a part of a tired and failing campaign. Americans know that Wal-Mart creates jobs, reduces the cost of health care through our $4 generic drug program and protects the environment through our sustainability efforts."











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
11-30-2006 @ 1:00PM
Ramesh Mehta said...
I worked for walmart as my post retirement activity.
No, wages are not low compared to other retailers and benefits are way superior. I think walmart is a great american success story and its business model needs to emulated in other countries for creating jobs for almost everyone.
I worked for TARGET for a brief period. That place is a blood suckers and slave drivers. My spouse who works there has not gotten the raise for the last 2 years and the way It pushes their employees is beyond acceptable business practice.
Please unions should go after TARGET or at least investigate the truth about it practices.
11-30-2006 @ 12:55PM
MIKE CORBY said...
IF YOU WORK AS A MEAT CUTTER FOR TWENTY YEARS AND WAL-MART BECOMES THE ONLY GROCERY STORE IN THE AREA AND PAYS A SALARY CONSIDERABLY LESS THAN INDUSTRY'S STANDARD WHY NOT UNIONIZE
11-30-2006 @ 10:29PM
Steve Johns said...
Walmart provides good dependable jobs for hundreds of thousands of people all over the US. They are in business to make money. That is not a crime. Just ask the people at Enron, Worldcom, Delta Airlines, and others about working for companies that they thought were profitable that one day turn up broke. The management at Walmart will never let that happen. The people who work there don't have to be there. No one holds a gun to there head and makes them do it, so obviously they can't find better employment elsewhere. And if the unions get involved, the good thing we know as Walmart will no longer be. Can anyone say Kmart?
11-30-2006 @ 3:55PM
Webb for President said...
Brian:
I've never seen one of your "beefs" with Wal-Mart in any of your posts. Is this just wishful thinking, some feeble attempt to make it look like you're even-handed? Why bother?
First you say that you "...don't buy the low-wage argument." Then you turn around and admit as much: "...may pay low wages." But admittedly, that's not half as bad as the shrill cry of "it's legal!" Poll taxes were once legal too.
I wonder if you'd even acknowledge that employers in the U.S. WERE in fact responsible for employees in a way that they are not now. I'll accept your premise that they are not the final arbiter, nor should they be, of a family. But I ask you: where would we be as a society if nobody felt any responsibility toward anyone but themselves? Well, sadly, the past few years--with a decline in pension and health care benefits--might be a harbinger.
Adolph's comment touches an interesting paradigm shift. "Choice" clearly doen't mean today what it did in the days where too few workers were chasing too many jobs. Except in specialized fields, I see almost no upwards wage pressure. You can correctly point to the increase that upper-class individuals have received, but that's really more a function of the "clubbiness" at the top. It's the same "clubbiness" that allows departing under-performing execs million-dollar handshakes.
You can quote the merits of the free-market all you want, tell me "...the system works." And I will always ask, "For whom?"
11-30-2006 @ 5:26PM
Jim Beske said...
All retail jobs at big box stores are a dead end - unless you get into management and are willing to move. They are a great place to find low price items and a good part time job possibly for a teen or spouse but definitely not a career.
I personally can't stand the big company "team" mentality Walmart tries to push, way to socialist for me.
I think their wages are fair in most areas for what is expected of you and the education it takes to get the jobs - the benefits are better then nothing and the value for product is unbeatable by any other big box stores - just not a fan of how they run their stores. Most people that work at them are hard working given task driven assignments are will get a lot of work done for really not much money.
12-01-2006 @ 12:21PM
kathy said...
I work at a walmart in the Panhanfle of Fl. and What I can say is.. The associates attitudes, comes from the old saying crap rolls down hill. The problem starts when we get to work.. from our daily meeting, Managment down our back, say they know thier understaff they dont want to hear it. tell us to pick up the slack. time it starts and gets to the employees its a big ball of crap. and for what incentive, wright ups, for not getting the job done when you dont have the people to do it. salary caps. higher insurance rates, and disaplined if you have to leave early. walmart needs to focous on thier Managment skills. I personally dont have a problem with the pay, its the treatment and the new policy. bad managment.. = Associate attitudes.
12-04-2006 @ 11:34AM
Webb for President said...
Am I missing something? I thought this discussion had gotten a lot bigger than this, or am I confusing this with another thread?