Decision to Block Wal-Mart Hurts Poor in DC

[The_Patriot21]

There's nothing wrong with wal-mart as a job, especially with a good management team. Jdavis I don't know if your stores just had lousy management that was lying to you or what, but the stores I worked in generally had at a minimum 60% or more of its employees full time and we always got good reviews from corporate, without fail.

As far as employees complaining-you see that in most jobs of this nature. whether its someone just starting out in the career field (it is considered an entry level job or at least used to be) or someone who just can't find work elsewhere, people think they're entitled to more. go to McDonalds sometime and listen to those people complain about their jobs. Its rare to find ANY job out there in america without disgruntled workers-so maybe the problems not Walmart as an employer but with an entitlement minded america.

[JDavis]

There's nothing wrong with wal-mart as a job, especially with a good management team. Jdavis I don't know if your stores just had lousy management that was lying to you or what, but the stores I worked in generally had at a minimum 60% or more of its employees full time and we always got good reviews from corporate, without fail.

As far as employees complaining-you see that in most jobs of this nature. whether its someone just starting out in the career field (it is considered an entry level job or at least used to be) or someone who just can't find work elsewhere, people think they're entitled to more. go to McDonalds sometime and listen to those people complain about their jobs. Its rare to find ANY job out there in america without disgruntled workers-so maybe the problems not Walmart as an employer but with an entitlement minded america.

 

The part time to full time ratio goal was taught to us at our initial training at the Home Office.  Most stores established stores are in the 50 to 60% range for full time, but that will only get lower with time.  As I said, at my last store no store in the district was allowed to hire full time without permission from the DM, we asked multiple times and never got approval.

 

WalMarts future plan is to keep having fewer and fewer full time associates. There is much greater flexibility in part timers.  I don't know if you know how WalMart schedules it associates, but it is all based on projected sales...if you project to sell X then you get Y hours.  Miss your projection too many times and you will not be a manager for very long.  In months like Jan where it is very slow the allowed hours goes way down, if you have too many full timers you cannot cut payroll to match sales, and this is very bad.  The hours worked to sales ratio is a very important stat for  Walmart manager. 

[The_Patriot21]

even the store two hours from us-which was held by the home office as the model store for our region-held a 75% full time to part time ratio davis, when a new store was started in our region, they took staff from that store and modeled it from that store. In all the stores I worked in, the only departments that were largely part time were cashiers and greeters-and since wal-mart no longer has greeters, its down to just cashiers. Sure, they have some part time floaters in the other departments, but the vast majority was full.

 

and regardless, even at a 80% part time to 20% full time, thats still jobs-a part time job is better then no job at all, and I know lots of people who make just as good of a living off of 2 or 3 part time jobs as someone with a single full time.

[nebula]

I do not know anything about the business climate of DC, I do not even know where the Walmarts were going to be.  So, I cant say what other companies are willing to go in.

 

Well, maybe you should research this.

[JDavis]

 

I do not know anything about the business climate of DC, I do not even know where the Walmarts were going to be.  So, I cant say what other companies are willing to go in.

 

Well, maybe you should research this.

 

 

   

[Matthitjah]

 

 

 

 

Why does a business exist, to serve its customers. 

 

 

 

 

A business exists to make money. If it is not profitable, then it will not continue to serve customers.

 

 

A business that has making money as it focus will never succeed for very long.  Read "Made in America", the biography of Sam Walton.  His focus was never making money.  And yet he clearly made money better than just about anybody ever.

 

You haven't a clue what you are talking about.

 

Basic Business Principles 101 state that a business exist's to make a profit. All the rest follows. The Mission statement may read somewhat differently but the fact remains a business is in business to make money especially in a Capitalistic society.

 

If it fails to do that basic thing it ceases to exist.

 

 

Yes, actually I have a very good clue what I am talking about.  A business that has "making money" as their focus will fail eventually.   Give your customers good service and you will make money.  I have a BS in Business Management and I never had a single class where we were taught that the reason for a business to exist was to make money.  That is just a short sighted view.  Companies whose focus is only on making money make very poor long term and customer service decisions as those decision can often cost more in the short run.

 

link....http://www.science20.com/gerhard_adam/economics_purpose_business

 

what is the point of business?", the only legitimate answer can be to provide goods and/or services and make money as a result.  

There may be those that disagree with me, but it is important to recognize that the failure to focus on goods and services invariably results in a failed business that is no longer capable of making money.  Unfortunately too many businesses have fallen into the view that stockholders are more important than customers, so we see companies exploiting the very customers they depend on for their existence.  It's as if they haven't realized that, even temporary success in this will inevitably lead to long-term failure.  

 

Thanks for making my point. The goal is to make money. Offering good customer service is a result of the goal or target being set. Offering good customer service is just a means to an end. The business exist's to make money.

 

D.C. setting a policy that forces Walmart to pay past their labor set point is ludicrous and show's apoor understanding of sound business labor practices. There's a reason that walMart is the number one retailer in the world. They have a sound business plan.

 

 

Before you add something silly again yourself please explain to me something. When you get into a car to drive somewhere do you have a point of destination? If so doesn't it make good sense to get there by taking the most direct route?

 

When you got your B.A. did they teach you to take a handful of darts and throw them at a wall blindly and then progress according to where one of them happened to stick?

[JDavis]

Way to take half of a sentence and ignore the rest.

Now I understand how you have come to the views you have.

To make money is not a destination, that is like getting in the car and saying "lets just have fun".

Any business that starts with the goal of making money and works backwards from there will fail.

[SavedByGrace1981]

I've heard the Wal-Mart/anti Wal-Mart arguments for years and years.  From my point of view, as one living in this imperfect world, it all boils down to this:

 

If I like Wal-Mart and I believe it serves my needs, I can shop there.  If I don't like Wal-Mart, I can shop elsewhere.

 

But if I don't like my government, can I shop around for a different one?

 

Blessings!

-Ed

[JDavis]

I've heard the Wal-Mart/anti Wal-Mart arguments for years and years. From my point of view, as one living in this imperfect world, it all boils down to this:

If I like Wal-Mart and I believe it serves my needs, I can shop there. If I don't like Wal-Mart, I can shop elsewhere.

But if I don't like my government, can I shop around for a different one?

Blessings!

-Ed

That is what elections are for...or should be for.

[SavedByGrace1981]

 

I've heard the Wal-Mart/anti Wal-Mart arguments for years and years. From my point of view, as one living in this imperfect world, it all boils down to this:

If I like Wal-Mart and I believe it serves my needs, I can shop there. If I don't like Wal-Mart, I can shop elsewhere.

But if I don't like my government, can I shop around for a different one?

Blessings!

-Ed

That is what elections are for...or should be for.

 

Well, at the risk of going too far off topic and perhaps stretching the metaphor past the breaking point . . . I'll offer this:

 

If I don't like Wal-mart, but the majority rules Wal-Mart should be THE place to shop, then . . . it's either shop there, or go without.

 

I guess the point I'm trying to make is this:  I am of the opinion that people who complain about "Wal-Mart this" or "Wal-Mart that" frequently seem to miss that larger point - Wal-Mart (like the rest of us) has to operate within the confines of government rules.

 

Wal-mart HAS no power to tax.  Government does.  Wal-Mart HAS no power to regulate.  Government does. Some may argue that Wal-Mart HAS the power to set prices - (they can undercut the competition), and that may be true to some extent.  But even that power, if indeed it exists, only exists because of Wal-Mart's SUCCESS. If Wal-mart were to someday go bankrupt, it would no longer have that power.  Some other entity would. 

 

Recently the city of Detroit went bankrupt.  Yet - I doubt they gave up their power to tax - or that there will suddenly be vacancies in the mayor's or other city offices.  No heads will roll.

 

Government power exists in part because the people cede power to their elected representatives - that is true.  But power, once in the hands of government - never seems to be ceded back to the people.  At least I cannot think of a case where that has happened (peacefully, that is.).

 

It's fashionable to bash corporations, especially in this day and age - and Wal-Mart is certainly a big one.  While I'm not here to defend them, I do ask people to consider what the end-game might be of those leading the "bashing" - and to look beyond the platitudes and slogans.

 

Blessings!

-Ed