Enyar wrote: How did they become more productive? They were sand bagging before and all of a sudden, in fear of losing their job they decide to pump out more work?
I was thinking through advances in technology, like we were discussing.
Enyar wrote: How did they become more productive? They were sand bagging before and all of a sudden, in fear of losing their job they decide to pump out more work?
I was thinking through advances in technology, like we were discussing.
Enyar wrote:Curmudgeon wrote: My thoughts: how the hell much money does a person really need? Take the Waltons, for instance: a combined net worth of $115.7 billion. That's $115,700,000,000.00. The average Wal Mart associate makes around $19,000.00 a year. The CEO's bonus last year was $20,000,000.00. http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2013/06/13/as-walton-family-solidifies-majority-wal-mart-workers-promise-dissent-for-fair-pay/ Wal Mart has 2.1 million employees worldwide. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2011/performers/companies/biggest/employees.html Split that $115,700,000,000.00 in half, this leaves the Waltons with $57,850,000,000.00. Split the other half between the 2.1 million employees who made that huge number possible, each would receive approximately $27,547.00. And still leave the family WAY more than they could spend quickly. This number doesn't even touch the non-family compensation. Way lopsided numbers like these are why there is a growing clamor to put some kind of brakes on this. I'm not saying all companies are like the Wal Mart example; for instance the boss here owns 4 dealerships in town, pays his employees well (better than the local average), there's not a revolving door, we get a great bennies package, a good match for 401 and Chistmas Club etc and he still has a wad of $ left for himself. That's the way a company should be run.I'm with you on that my friend. That's why my plan is to get in the race, make enough money to get my 56' Rybovich and support my chosen lifestyle/ family and then GTFO and enjoy myself on some island in the Caribbean. Give back to the community here and there and help those less fortunate. That being said, who am I to say it needs to be taken from the Waltons? They are free to do whatever they want with that money. If they wanted to use it for toilet paper that's up to them.Why should the employees get an extra $8,000 to blow on who knows what and the Waltons lose 50% of their worth? Does the boss you speak of run a dealership where service and quality is key? Or is he more of a give the customer the run around, sell shady cars, waste peoples time but at a good price.
I refuse to work for shady people. That's a big reason I left somewhere else recently. 
right now, it's 2:13 PM on a friday where i'm at...
how many people are reading and posting to this thread to complain about those greedy rich people stealing from the poor while they are at work being paid to do something else?
novaderrik wrote: right now, it's 2:13 PM on a friday where i'm at... how many people are reading and posting to this thread to complain about those greedy rich people stealing from the poor while they are at work being paid to do something else?
Me! 
Oh wait, I work for myself.
Just got done cleaning the carb on a 66 Mustang. Now I'm sitting in the office screwing off. Then again so are my employees while they are getting paid.
Enyar wrote: That being said, who am I to say it needs to be taken from the Waltons? They are free to do whatever they want with that money. If they wanted to use it for toilet paper that's up to them.Why should the employees get an extra $8,000 to blow on who knows what and the Waltons lose 50% of their worth?
Curmudgeons point is that the Waltons, as an example, are consuming vast amounts at every other Walmart workers' expense. It is wasteful as they can't possibly spend that much cash in this lifetime or the next. The alternative is they could consume less with no ill effect on themselves and help 2.1 million people out in the process.
This is the point where you state "So what?!"
The reason being this is not good for the country or anyone in it. That level of selfishness, i.e. "I'm getting mine so to hell with the country or anyone in it!", will cause troubles for all of us in the long run including the god d@mned Walton family.
The argument that people are "lazy" and "don't work hard enough" to earn this cash has been proven false over and over again. Some people are lazy. The vast majority are working 40+ hrs a week, producing much more than their parents ever did, and seeing all the results of that labor go to CEO's and the like. The average worker hasn't seen a true pay raise in decades. That's why its a problem for all of us. A weak middle class is the death of this country. That is what we currently have here. People who were solid middle class, the bedrock of this country, are rapidly and in great numbers slipping into poverty. I can't think of a single family I know who are middle class who aren't doing worse now than they did in the 90's.
If you think this is right then you deserve whatever outcome awaits us all.
For educational purpose here are some articles that are pertinent to this discussion.
Here's how CEO compensation can be done right.
It makes up for arriving at 7a and leaving at 7p, getting calls at 2a on Sunday nights.
GameboyRMH wrote: I was thinking through advances in technology, like we were discussing.
So are they working more or are they more productive?
If more, and/or they are now skilled workers because they know the technology then hopefully they would be rewarded for their hard work before a competitor took them away and paid them what they deserve.
If they are just monkeys that hit numbers on a keypad (like me) and are being more productive just because EZ widget machine made their life easier...then no change.
Xceler8x wrote: The reason being this is not good for the country or anyone in it. That level of selfishness, i.e. "I'm getting mine so to hell with the country or anyone in it!", will cause troubles for all of us in the long run including the god d@mned Walton family. The argument that people are "lazy" and "don't work hard enough" to earn this cash has been proven false over and over again. Some people are lazy. The vast majority are working 40+ hrs a week, producing much more than their parents ever did, and seeing all the results of that labor go to CEO's and the like. The average worker hasn't seen a true pay raise in decades. That's why its a problem for all of us. A weak middle class is the death of this country. That is what we currently have here. People who were solid middle class, the bedrock of this country, are rapidly and in great numbers slipping into poverty. I can't think of a single family I know who are middle class who aren't doing worse now than they did in the 90's. If you think this is right then you deserve whatever outcome awaits us all. For educational purpose here are some articles that are pertinent to this discussion. 1. Who decides how much a CEO makes? 2. CEO Pay 1,795-to-1 Multiple of Wages Skirts U.S. Law Here's how CEO compensation can be done right. 1. Toyota president delivers highest returns for lowest pay 2. Costco CEO Craig Jelinek Leads the Cheapest, Happiest Company in the World
I agree, it's not good for the country as a whole but that's how the system works and we shouldn't be able to just take it away from them.
I think that the problem is with greediness and excessive supply of workers. Not the system. Maybe the educational system or how we teach our children, but not capitalism. It's a major issue and I'm worried about the future but the only way things will change is if we change how we use our brains and wallets.
oldtin wrote: It makes up for arriving at 7a and leaving at 7p, getting calls at 2a on Sunday nights.
Any business owner at the level of the Waltons (or even of the guy I work for) who doesn't have a plan in place and managers to run those things deserves those 2am Sunday phone calls.
Swank Force One wrote:PHeller wrote: Another thing I've noticed as a recent college grad is that many of my peers are working full-time jobs with benefits, which is great, but they are only getting $12-16/hr. That's just enough money to pay rent and utilities, and pay back student loan debt, but not much else. If your car leaves you sit you better hope you have a friendly co-worker who will pick you up or a family member who can. What I hate is that instead of our government incentivising companies to pay a larger number of employees a better wage, we'll tax the rich owners of the companies, and give handouts to those who don't work at all. I'm all for taxing the living crap out of people who get rich doing nothing, especially sports stars and thug-life rappers, but we need to find a better way of convince the rich to pay more people to do stuff. What if we tied personal income tax rates to unemployment rates? All the rich folks would get together and hires lots of maids/butlers ala Downton Abbey.This is one of those scenarios where one REALLY needs to step back and look at a degree as an investment, not a requirement. Jobs that pay that much and MORE are available without a degree. I still believe that kids are pressured to go to college and get a degree without anyone really stopping them and forcing them to think and do their research about what they're getting into. And what you just posted is the direct result.
And I think here is the highlights reel from Page 1.....(all I am reading of this crap)
Curmudgeon wrote:oldtin wrote: It makes up for arriving at 7a and leaving at 7p, getting calls at 2a on Sunday nights.Any business owner at the level of the Waltons (or even of the guy I work for) who doesn't have a plan in place and managers to run those things deserves those 2am Sunday phone calls.
Unfortunately I'm the minion (although i prefer the term henchman) on the receiving end of those hours/calls. This week I found the company an extra 26,000,000 in revenue. I expect I'll get a hearty "at a boy" and a letter that's says how much they love me.
Xceler8x wrote:Enyar wrote: That being said, who am I to say it needs to be taken from the Waltons? They are free to do whatever they want with that money. If they wanted to use it for toilet paper that's up to them.Why should the employees get an extra $8,000 to blow on who knows what and the Waltons lose 50% of their worth?Curmudgeons point is that the Waltons, as an example, are consuming vast amounts at every other Walmart workers' expense. It is wasteful as they can't possibly spend that much cash in this lifetime or the next. The alternative is they could consume less with no ill effect on themselves and help 2.1 million people out in the process. This is the point where you state "So what?!" The reason being this is not good for the country or anyone in it. That level of selfishness, i.e. "I'm getting mine so to hell with the country or anyone in it!", will cause troubles for all of us in the long run including the god d@mned Walton family. The argument that people are "lazy" and "don't work hard enough" to earn this cash has been proven false over and over again. Some people are lazy. The vast majority are working 40+ hrs a week, producing much more than their parents ever did, and seeing all the results of that labor go to CEO's and the like. The average worker hasn't seen a true pay raise in decades. That's why its a problem for all of us. A weak middle class is the death of this country. That is what we currently have here. People who were solid middle class, the bedrock of this country, are rapidly and in great numbers slipping into poverty. I can't think of a single family I know who are middle class who aren't doing worse now than they did in the 90's. If you think this is right then you deserve whatever outcome awaits us all. For educational purpose here are some articles that are pertinent to this discussion. 1. Who decides how much a CEO makes? 2. CEO Pay 1,795-to-1 Multiple of Wages Skirts U.S. Law Here's how CEO compensation can be done right. 1. Toyota president delivers highest returns for lowest pay 2. Costco CEO Craig Jelinek Leads the Cheapest, Happiest Company in the World
why can't all the bitter employees that don't want to work for slave wages to make the Waltons richer just go across town and get a job at Target? or maybe they could try to find a job that pays them a wage that is more in line with what they think their time and energy is worth?
on the consumer end of it: why can't the people that don't want to support that kind of a company also go across town and shop atTarget?
Because things aren't really any better at Target.
http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Target-Salaries-E194.htm
2011 CEO compensation:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/target-ceos-compensation-up-84-to-24-million-2011-04-29
One thing I am a strong believer in: there must be entry level jobs. No one starts out in the boardroom and no one has the necessary skills right out of the gate. There also has to be a place for kids just starting out (like my daughter) to be able to work part time.
Once past entry level, pay goes up as it should but it hasn't kept pace with inflation. The problem is that there are people out there who have been in the workforce for 15-20 years still making low wages, that's what is strangling the middle class in this country. These are the people in a jam.
Papa John's owner and CEO threatened to cut all their employees back to 30 hours a week or less in response to legislation mandating health insurance benefits for full time employees. The owner and CEO finally relented. http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/11/21/papa-johns-schnatter-says-he-will-honor-obamacare-and-give-health-insurance-to-all-employees/ There are other companies out there that won't hire anyone full time for this very reason, they just aren't as high profile.
Enyar wrote: What I don't get are the people who complain about paying workers too little and the CEOs too much as they walk out of Walmart . I believe that not all companies would benefit from paying their workers more. Walmart pays their workers very little because that aligns with their strategy. If they paid their workers 50% more, sure the service would be great, stores would be cleaner, people would be productive, etc but they wouldn't be able to sell products as cheap as they do. They pay E36 M3ty wages and have to deal with long lines, poor service, theft and all kinds of things. But they sell so much more that they can make up for it and make money. Not happy with the CEO's pay? Don't shop there. Jealous about their pay? Go to school, make the contacts, get a little lucky and become the CEO. I don't like the wealth gap between the rich and poor but I don't blame the CEOs. I blame we the people for demanding it.
I don't. Once I learned what walmart pays their workers and their contractors (here and overseas) I stopped shopping there.
And yes, I do worry about what CEOs get paid. After watching several companies I work for lay off people when the economy went bad, yet the CEOs continued to get their bonuses (And raises) while the people they laid off had to worry about eating.. Stuff like that should be across the board.
I could be wrong, but I am on a few different boards that are based overseas or have a large european contingant. I also read the BBC for my news.. the whole "we don't owe the worker a thing" seems to be an american onservation. I have read more than a few stories on the BBC where they talked about "taking care" of their workers because it was the proper thing to do.
As for people jumping ship and changing jobs.. I work at SIX casinos plus Local 77 IATSE. I do make good money per hour, but I am constantly on the run from one place to the other to make it.
Curmudgeon wrote: Because things aren't really any better at Target. http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Target-Salaries-E194.htm 2011 CEO compensation: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/target-ceos-compensation-up-84-to-24-million-2011-04-29 One thing I am a strong believer in: there must be entry level jobs. No one starts out in the boardroom and no one has the necessary skills right out of the gate. There also has to be a place for kids just starting out (like my daughter) to be able to work part time. Once past entry level, pay goes up as it should but it hasn't kept pace with inflation. The problem is that there are people out there who have been in the workforce for 15-20 years still making low wages, that's what is strangling the middle class in this country. These are the people in a jam. Papa John's owner and CEO threatened to cut all their employees back to 30 hours a week or less in response to legislation mandating health insurance benefits for full time employees. The owner and CEO finally relented. http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/11/21/papa-johns-schnatter-says-he-will-honor-obamacare-and-give-health-insurance-to-all-employees/ There are other companies out there that won't hire anyone full time for this very reason, they just aren't as high profile.
fine go work at and take your business to K Mart or Sears.. whatever floats your boat and gives you the most best warm fuzzy feelings... but ultimately people have the choice of what is going to happen in their individual lives- and most of the people that i've worked with that have been in the workforce for 2 decades or more that are still making entry level wages are probably being overpaid for the jobs that they do.
this is still going?
Datsun1500 wrote: Since everyone seems to be worried about the CEO money vs the little guy money,I have a question. If the CEO takes a pay cut, will it make everyone below him suddenly do a better job? Is the prevailing attitude really "I'd do a better job if the guy above me made less"?
No, the problem is that the little guys aren't making enough. The CEO's pay is where the money is going, that's why it's part of the conversation.
In reply to novaderrik:
Back in the early 1980's I worked part time at Kmart while in college. They gave me a $0.15 raise once.
All the Kmarts near me closed up and I was one of the reasons as I never went there as the one in my town sucked the big one.
An interesting article from the The Daily Beast today.
Why Are Walmart Stores Underperforming? Blame Their Terrible Wages.
TL;DR - Wal-mart doesn't pay enough and employs 10% of retail workers. Therefore, Wal-mart is slitting it's own throat just like we talked about in this thread. In regards to compensating the U.S. worker, If there isn't enough money coming in there sure won't be enough money coming out.
Employers need to realize that paying their workers less means the workers will have less to spend. Taking care of your employees comes back to you in a positive way. Paying your employees as little as you can get away with will hurt your bottom line on a long enough timeline.
Meanwhile, Wal-Mart: Actually Duke's Pay Rose by 41% ... and Then The Company Locked the Barn Door After the Horse Had Bolted. For anyone keeping count at home that's $28.5 Million for Duke's salary. Do you think they could've paid him a bit less? If the company is underperforming while he's the leader, I'd say so. Toyota's CEO earned $1.9 Million last year. They seem to be doing ok. There must be something wrong with Toyota right?
Xceler8x wrote: An interesting article from the The Daily Beast today. Why Are Walmart Stores Underperforming? Blame Their Terrible Wages. TL;DR - Wal-mart doesn't pay enough and employs 10% of retail workers. Therefore, Wal-mart is slitting it's own throat just like we talked about in this thread. In regards to compensating the U.S. worker, If there isn't enough money coming in there sure won't be enough money coming out. Employers need to realize that paying their workers less means the workers will have less to spend. Taking care of your employees comes back to you in a positive way. Paying your employees as little as you can get away with will hurt your bottom line on a long enough timeline.
Have you ever DEALT with a Wal-Mart employee? I used to absolutely refuse to walk into one. However, when one opened down the street, I did a "ship-to-store" on some cheap ass shelves for the shop. In and out, right?
I walked in. Handed the chick my receipt, and basically said "I'm here to pick up my stuff." She had absolutely no clue what to do, and panicked for 5 minutes trying to figure it out...then walked into the "back" and disappeared for another 5, and came back saying "I can't find it." I ask for a customer service manager. 5 minutes later, the customer service manager shows up. She's covered in E36 M3ty tattoos, and is OBVIOUSLY ON CRANK; Jittery, giggling, scratching. She can't figure out what the berkeley to do either. They finally find the stuff, but can't figure out how to find on the computer whether or not I've paid for it. I have the receipt. That's not good enough. At one point, I walked behind the counter and said something to the effect of "I've never worked at a Wal-Mart. I'll bet you a crisp hundred dollar bill that I can figure this E36 M3 out in less than 5 minutes." At that point, I was referred to as "Sir" for the first time during that whole transaction. I walked out and disputed the charge with AMEX.
You can place the blame for ineptitude squarely on pay all you want, but I had plenty of E36 M3 minimum wage jobs, and I NEVER made a customer go through some E36 M3 like that. I showered, showed up on time, and did my berkeleying job. If there was something I didn't know how to do, I found someone who did...then paid very close attention to how they did it.
Minimum wage jobs are there as a stepping-stone, or supplemental income for people who don't really need the money, or DO need it as supplemental income as a second job.
Wal-Mart's business model is not "Sell top quality merchandise at top dollar and offer our customers excellent service." Wal-Mart's business model is "Sell E36 M3 artificially cheap to run the little guys out of business, then run the prices up to the maximum of what the market will bear, and sell A LOT of it." Yes, they could absolutely be Publix; High profit margin, well paid, PROFESSIONAL employees with a HUGE majority share in the company, high quality food. At that point, they'd have to compete with Publix (or insert whatever fancy region-specific store you want,) and would get blown out of the berkeleying water. Meanwhile, another business would come along to fill their spot in the market, and make BILLIONS.
The crackheads have to berkeleying shop somewhere. Get it?
If you want a good steak, go to a killer steakhouse, get a killer steak and excellent service, and drop $100. If you want to eat horse parts, go to McDonalds and get a 50 cent horse-burger served by some dribble-lip mush mouth who barely passed the second grade, but knows what a picture of a horse-burger looks like.
Or whatever. Have it your way. $20 minimum wage for everyone!? Why not $100!? The price of everything goes up. Wal-mart will still suck ass...they'll just be gone, and the crackheads will be forced to blow their huge paycheck at the fancy grocery store. They'll still be broke.
The free market works. If you want crap at a crap price, sold by crap employees, go where the crackheads go (Wal-mart, not publix, Harbor Freight, not Home Depot, McDonald's, not Ruth's Chris.)
FWIW, I follow the "Have well trained, well paid, reliable employees, and do kick ass work" route. I'm glad that the crackheads are not my clientele, and that I can sleep at night knowing I do good work. Doesn't mean I think that Michael's should pay their numbtard, zero-experience, GED-havin' employees $20/hour. They can do whatever the berkeley they want, and make a whole lot more money than me doing it. I'm okay with that.
dribble-lip mush mouth made me LOL
Datsun310Guy wrote: In reply to novaderrik: Back in the early 1980's I worked part time at Kmart while in college. They gave me a $0.15 raise once. All the Kmarts near me closed up and I was one of the reasons as I never went there as the one in my town sucked the big one.
I worked for a local department store when it opened here. Some in the Philly/del/NY region might know Boscov's. When they opened the Atlantic City Store, the minimum wage was $4.25 an hour and they paid $5. All the other Boscov's were at minimum (the other 17 of them).
When a year went by and it was time for reviews and raises.. after busting ass -and- going to school. I got a full 20 cents out of a possible 25
poopshovel wrote: Wal-Mart's business model is not "Sell top quality merchandise at top dollar and offer our customers excellent service." Wal-Mart's business model is "Sell E36 M3 artificially cheap to run the little guys out of business, then run the prices up to the maximum of what the market will bear."
I've heard that last part repeated many many times - it's the conventional wisdom - but I have NEVER seen any of the various Wal*Marts around here raise their prices once they've established control of their area.
Duke wrote:poopshovel wrote: Wal-Mart's business model is not "Sell top quality merchandise at top dollar and offer our customers excellent service." Wal-Mart's business model is "Sell E36 M3 artificially cheap to run the little guys out of business, then run the prices up to the maximum of what the market will bear."I've heard that last part repeated many many times - it's the conventional wisdom - but I have NEVER seen any of the various Wal*Marts around here raise their prices once they've established control of their area.
It's entirely possible that I'm just regurgitating some bullE36 M3 I've heard over the years. Honestly, it's irrelevant to the conversation, and it was silly of me to put it in there. My bad.
Datsun1500 wrote: In reply to mad_machine: You were getting 22% more than the workers at the other stores at that point, and wanted more.... If they started you at 4.25 and gave you a 50 cent raise at 6 months, and another 50 cents at 1 year, would that have been better? Same result. It goes to show if they raise the minimum raise, those who make it will want more.
So you are saying I shouldn't have gotten a raise at all because I was already making more than the people at the other stores? It doesn't work like that. It just means that the area I live in is -more- expensive to live in than the other areas they have stores in.
poopshovel wrote: Edited lots of good stuff... FWIW, I follow the "Have well trained, well paid, reliable employees, and do kick ass work" route. I'm glad that the crackheads are not my clientele, and that I can sleep at night knowing I do good work. Doesn't mean I think that Michael's should pay their numbtard, zero-experience, GED-havin' employees $20/hour. They can do whatever the berkeley they want, and make a whole lot more money than me doing it. I'm okay with that.
Thanks for the comment poopshovel.
I think we're all just looking for a good value you know? I don't shop at Wal-mart for the same reasons you don't. I know some folks work there who are really trying to do a good job. Some definitely aren't or are incapable.
I think the market can work if left alone. If you have people actively work against it, the free market has no chance.
You'll need to log in to post.
