Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/18/2006 8:36:36 PM   
UtopianRanger


Posts: 3251
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Noah


quote:

ORIGINAL: LTRsubNW

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

Are you KIDDING?

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17647

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTRsubNW

there wasn't anything underhanded in how they did it



Again I ask...where's the Justice Dept. review for a Sherman Antitrust breach...where's the multiple states attorneys general up in arms about any number of issues? 



Gee. Just how many states' attorneys general have to be up in arms before you'll acknowledge that "anything underhanded" has gone on?

I hope you aren't this strict with the young men your daughter wants to date.



Let me also point out that the JD’s anti-trust division under the Bush administration has intervened the least of all administrations past { per Lou Dobbs - per WSJ } - All of this is embodied in the concept of Neo-liberalism as explained by NorthernGent

http://www.collarchat.com/m_610082/mpage_2/key_astute/tm.htm#611151



 - R


_____________________________

"If you are going to win any battle, you have to do one thing. You have to make the mind run the body. Never let the body tell the mind what to do... the body is never tired if the mind is not tired."

-General George S. Patton


(in reply to Noah)
Profile   Post #: 121
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/18/2006 8:39:27 PM   
ownedgirlie


Posts: 9184
Joined: 2/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LTRsubNW

quote:

ORIGINAL: Noah
Gee. Just how many states' attorneys general have to be up in arms before you'll acknowledge that "anything underhanded" has gone on?



I would think "one" would be much more than adequate.


Counsel Lieff Cabraser and co-counsel in Washington and New York (for hours worked unpaid).  They are just a small attorney group who filed against Exxon for the Valdez oil spill:
http://www.lieffcabraser.com/walmart%20lawsuit.htm

United States of America vs. Walmart (US District Court, District of Maryland):
http://files.findlaw.com/news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/walmart/uswalmartcmpt52501.pdf#search='states%20attorneys%20against%20walmart'

United States of America vs. Walmart (US District Court of California - EEOC):
http://www.eeoc.gov/court/walmart_decree.html

State of Connecticut, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal vs. Walmart:
http://www.ct.gov/ag/cwp/view.asp?A=1778&Q=284056

Dukes et al. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Federal Judge Orders Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., the Nation’s Largest Private Employer, To Stand Trial for Company-Wide Sex Discrimination Class Certification Creates Largest Civil Rights Class Action Ever San Francisco, CA. - June 22, 2004
http://www.cmht.com/cases_walmart.php

Article on legal issues with Walmart:
http://www.wal-martlitigation.com/currentd.htm

United States of America (District of Delaware) Environmental Protection Agency:
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/complaints/civil/cwa/walmart2-cp.pdf#search='states%20attorneys%20against%20walmart'

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit - EEOC
http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/08/98-2015.htm



(in reply to LTRsubNW)
Profile   Post #: 122
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/18/2006 8:43:02 PM   
ownedgirlie


Posts: 9184
Joined: 2/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LTRsubNW

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

Because they do it on a much more massive scale and cause more social and economic harm.  Saying that Walmart isn't really very bad because there are all kinds of other bad companies doesn't make sense.  Walmart is bad AND many other companies are bad.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTRsubNW

they're not a whole lot different from thousands of other companies around the country...they just get more scrutiny and press when they do.



I don't know if WalMart's bad, or by way of comparison they're better or worse than others...I only know that the federal government (and some state governments), who has/have not only the right, but the responsability to enforce every nuance of every argument made in the great WalMart debate by way of all kinds of federal laws and restrictions, share a vastly different view.

If they didn't, we'd see the same kinds of actions taken against them as we saw taken against Microsoft.

(It hasn't happened).

This is kind of saying that unless the government intervenes, any kind of behavior, influence and subsequent consequence is okay.  Is that what you mean?

(in reply to LTRsubNW)
Profile   Post #: 123
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/18/2006 8:43:11 PM   
LTRsubNW


Posts: 1604
Joined: 5/6/2006
Status: offline
(And still, all they've ever done is fine them).

Maybe the problem isn't with WalMart...maybe the problem is with Justice.

(Hmmm?)

(in reply to ownedgirlie)
Profile   Post #: 124
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/18/2006 8:44:22 PM   
ownedgirlie


Posts: 9184
Joined: 2/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LTRsubNW

(And still, all they've ever done is fine them).

Maybe the problem isn't with WalMart...maybe the problem is with Justice.

(Hmmm?)

Okay so what you're saying is if an organization does wrong, it's really okay if they're only fined.  But if they have done bad things, then the government must shut them down.  Otherwise, it's okay to continue business as normal?

Does "up in arms" mean to shut them down? 

< Message edited by ownedgirlie -- 10/18/2006 8:45:17 PM >

(in reply to LTRsubNW)
Profile   Post #: 125
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/18/2006 8:49:10 PM   
LTRsubNW


Posts: 1604
Joined: 5/6/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
This is kind of saying that unless the government intervenes, any kind of behavior, influence and subsequent consequence is okay.  Is that what you mean?


Not in the slightest.

I can argue all day long and even accuse you in a court of law that you're 11 feet tall.  But if in the trial, they say "But...the person you've accused isn't 11 feet tall...anyone can clearly see that person is 5'6"...please stop saying that...it's a lie"...then you have legal recourse if I do it again.

Just because I say you're 11 feet tall doesn't make it so, any more than because a variety of people hate or want to hate WalMart makes their accusations true.

If you look at those cases where the decison wasn't favorable to WalMart, in each one WalMart was told "not to do it again", they vehemently denied ever doing it in the first place and the result was a fine, and a corrective action not to do it in the future...

Whether they did or didn't do a thing isn't my concern.  The feds seem to feel that they're doing the right things (after corrective discussions), if they didn't, they'd break them up.

As I said above, if they're this blatantly horrid...maybe the problem is with the feds.

I certainly don't know.

< Message edited by LTRsubNW -- 10/18/2006 8:54:21 PM >

(in reply to ownedgirlie)
Profile   Post #: 126
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/18/2006 8:52:04 PM   
LadyLockdown


Posts: 12
Joined: 9/18/2006
Status: offline
I personally would like to see walmart go the way of the dinasaur. I don't shop there because it is the only store I can go into with a list of ten items and walk out putting the ONE item I did find back on the shelf because it wasn't worth the 20 minute wait in line to save 30 cents...and don't get me started on the lack of training, customer service and the many times I was instructed to move so stock people could put on the shelf more of what I was trying to buy off it before I was forced to put the employee's wishes before my shopping needs....I really, really hate the place and everything associated with poor service and substandard merchandise that loses half the buttons first wash cycle or comes out with seams unsewn.
It is less expensive in the long run to pay for the quality and service in the first place than to have to go back and deal with the b.s. to get a refund....they don't like to refund for some reason. If all sales are final, they should sell decent products instead of seconds. Just thought I'd share my real life experiences with the company in Georgia, Indiana, Illinois, Louisiana and Texas...


_____________________________

"Chain of Command....the chain I go get and beat you with until you understand who's in ruttin' command"

(in reply to LTRsubNW)
Profile   Post #: 127
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/18/2006 8:59:19 PM   
Noah


Posts: 1660
Joined: 7/5/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTRsubNW

quote:

ORIGINAL: Noah
Gee. Just how many states' attorneys general have to be up in arms before you'll acknowledge that "anything underhanded" has gone on?



(I would think "one" would be more than adequate).


A $78M verdict against in PA. A $172M verdict against in CA. And hundreds of other verdicts against Walmart and none of this indicates that "anything underhanded" happened in your book because no state attorney general was up in arms? How about sixteen suits against filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission? These again indicate nothing because they weren't filed by a state attorney general?

What strange moral universe is it where no malfeasance is worthy of note until a state attorney general is getting himself press over it?

You brag about your company's reputation and practices and then report that you view all this evidence of wrongdoing (and reams and reams of additional evidence as well) as negligible. I wonder what standards you judge your own actions by if Walmart is your idea of a perfectly adequate example of corporate citizenship.

They're taking it out of your ass, too. They are having you subsidize their employees with your tax dollars while they aggressively shove manufacturing jobs offshore so that your customers have less income, less to spend at your business. And all you can think of to do is defend them? If you want to understand the psychology of all the people who apply for work at Walmart before they come to your place, just take a good look at yourself.

Here's a tiny sample of judgements against your role models. Just a smattering of illustrations of the not underhanded ways they bring you low prices every day.

These aren't slip-and-falls. These are business-practice matters and there are as many more of them out there as you'd care to take the time to find. Congratulations on running your business as ethically as they do theirs.

Julie Deffenbaugh-Williams v. Wal-Mart, 156 F.3d 581 (5th Cir. 1998). Mark C. Brodeur, Dallas, TX for plaintiff. Jimmy Preston Wrotenbery and Kevin D. Jewell, Houston, TX for Wal-Mart.

E.E.O.C. v. Wal-Mart, U.S. District Court, District of New Mexico, Case No. 94-CV-1076. Richard R. Trujillo, Mary Jo O’Neill and Trisha Kirtley, Phoenix, AZ for plaintiff. Bonnie Stapleton, Albuquerque, NM for Wal-Mart.

Keith W. Cline v. Wal-Mart, 144 F.3d 294 (4th Cir. 1998). Timothy Earl Cupp, Harrisonburg, VA for plaintiff. Todd James Horn and Maurice Baskin, Baltimore, MD for Wal-Mart.

Keith W. Cline v. Wal-Mart, 144 F.3d 294 (4th Cir. 1998). Timothy Earl Cupp, Harrisonburg, VA for plaintiff. Todd James Horn and Maurice Baskin, Baltimore, MD for Wal-Mart.

Talitha Tincher v. Wal-Mart, 118 F.3d 1125 (7th Cir. 1997); 945 F.Supp. 1209 (S.D.Ind. 1996). Michael C. Kendall and Stephanie J. Haun, Indianapolis, IN for plaintiff. Gus Sacopulos and Gregory S. Carter, Terre Haute, IN for Wal-Mart.

Peggy Kimzey v. Wal-Mart, 107 F.3d 568 (8th Cir. 1997). Carla G. Holste, Ronald R. McMillin of Jefferson City, MO, and Timothy E. Gammon of Springfield, MO for plaintiff. David A. Ranheim, Michael J. Wahoske, George A. Koeck and Robert J. Borhart, of Minneapolis, MN for Wal-Mart.

Connie Holmes v. Wal-Mart, U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, Case No. 95-CV-137. Neil Cronin, Coral Gables, FL for plaintiff. Charles Powell and Frank Brown, Tampa, FL for Wal-Mart.

Cathy Jean Coates v. Wal-Mart, 1st Judicial District (NM) District Court, Case No. SF 95-2409. Stephen E. Tinkler and Merit Bennett, Sante Fe, NM for plaintiffs. Mark James and Steve Scholl, Albuquerque, NM for Wal-Mart.

Cruz v. Wal-Mart, Maverick County (TX) District Court, Case No. 91-10-10814. Craig L. White, San Antonio, TX for plaintiff. Robert E. Bettac and Dewey Poteet, San Antonio, TX for Wal-Mart.

Wal-Mart v. Bettie Jo Holland, 956 S.W.2d 590 (Tex.App.--Tyler 1997). George E. Chandler, Lufkin, TX for plaintiff. J. Preston Wrotenbery, Houston, TX for Wal-Mart.

Rollins v. Wal-Mart, Brevard County (FL) Circuit Court, Case #86-4141-CA-T. Susan K.W. Erlenbach, Titusville, FL for plaintiffs. J. Lester Kaney, Daytona Beach, FL for Wal-Mart.

Stringer v. Wal-Mart, Wayne Co.(KY) Circuit Court, Case No. 95C10228. Larry Rogers and Thomas Carroll, Monticello, KY for plaintiffs. Donna Perry, Louisville, KY for Wal-Mart.

James Desilets v. Wal-Mart, 171 F.3d 711(1st Cir. 1999). Charles L. Powell, Woodstock, VT for the plaintiffs. E. Tupper Kinder, Manchester, VT for Wal-Mart.

Mona Meche v. Wal-Mart, 692 So.2d 544 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1997). Elizabeth Ann Dugal, Christopher Leonard Zaunbrecher, Alfred Frem Boustany II, Howard Wallace Martin, James L. Brazos Jr., B. Christopher Beyer, Lafayette, LA;, Porter David Guarisco III, Baton Rouge, LA; Jo Ann Nixon, New Ileria, LA; Kim Reginald Hayes, Crowley, LA; Joslyn Relee Alex, Breaux Ridge, LA; Ted L. Ayo, Abbeville, LA; and Lawrence E. “Tony” Morrow for plaintiffs. John Goulding Swift, Lafayette, LA for Wal-Mart.


(in reply to LTRsubNW)
Profile   Post #: 128
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/18/2006 9:00:09 PM   
ownedgirlie


Posts: 9184
Joined: 2/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LTRsubNW
Whether they did or didn't do a thing isn't my concern.  The feds seem to feel that they're doing the right things (after corrective discussions), if they didn't, they'd break them up.

As I said above, if they're this blatantly horrid...maybe the problem is with the feds.

I certainly don't know.

Thanks for clarifying your thoughts.  Earlier it seemed you were saying they weren't doing anything wrong at all.  I may have misunderstood.  Regardless, I believe that whether a company does or doesn't do anything wrong is everyone's concern in the big picture.  Our government is not in the habit of dismantling companies for unethical practices such as driving jobs out of this country.  Maybe the problem is our own laws, in that it's okay to force manufacturers to off shore (per my posts earlier in this thread).  That's my biggest beef with Walmart - the squeezing out of long standing companies and jobs as a result of their price leveling.  Their prices are so cheap and affordable because the products are made off shore.  The products are made off shore because Walmart insists on the low pricing.  And since Walmart is the largest retailer of products, a manufacturer must comply if they want to stay in business.  THAT is the problem with Walmart, as I see it.

(in reply to LTRsubNW)
Profile   Post #: 129
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/18/2006 9:06:28 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline
You really are saying what ownedgirlie says you're saying, and it's utterly fallacious.  Walmart has been facing case after case about their business practices, and they're already starting to lose some of them.  The fact that the government hasn't done much to intervene hardly means that Walmart hasn't done anything wrong.  You yourself said that you won't concede Walmart has done anything wrong until the government shuts them down.  That's an absurd standard, one that almost never comes to pass.  Corporations violate the law, and are punished for it, all the time without being shut down.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTRsubNW

Just because I say you're 11 feet tall doesn't make it so, any more than because a variety of people hate or want to hate WalMart makes their accusations true.

(in reply to LTRsubNW)
Profile   Post #: 130
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/18/2006 9:13:12 PM   
LTRsubNW


Posts: 1604
Joined: 5/6/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Noah


quote:

ORIGINAL: LTRsubNW

quote:

ORIGINAL: Noah
Gee. Just how many states' attorneys general have to be up in arms before you'll acknowledge that "anything underhanded" has gone on?



(I would think "one" would be more than adequate).


A $78M verdict against in PA. A $172M verdict against in CA. And hundreds of other verdicts against Walmart and none of this indicates that "anything underhanded" happened in your book because no state attorney general was up in arms? How about sixteen suits against filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission? These again indicate nothing because they weren't filed by a state attorney general?

What strange moral universe is it where no malfeasance is worthy of note until a state attorney general is getting himself press over it?

I never said it wasn't worthy of note, in fact almost every news agency has something negative to report about them every day in one or more cities. I would submit rather vigorously that it's more than noteworthy.

You brag about your company's reputation and practices and then report that you view all this evidence of wrongdoing (and reams and reams of additional evidence as well) as negligible. I wonder what standards you judge your own actions by if Walmart is your idea of a perfectly adequate example of corporate citizenship.

I don't think (nor did I state) that WalMart is in my idea, or anyone else's for that matter a perfectly adequate corporate citizen, in fact I'd agree with the best of them that they do things that are less than seemly.  I also never bragged about my company at all, I simply and accurately stated that we pay significantly better wages, better benefits among many things, yet we still can't get the volume of applicants that they seem to pull in for wages that many here argue are unfair moreover, unworthy of accepting.

They're taking it out of your ass, too. They are having you subsidize their employees with your tax dollars while they aggressively shove manufacturing jobs offshore so that your customers have less income, less to spend at your business. And all you can think of to do is defend them? I'm not defending them in the slightest, I'm very accurately stating that until the feds and other governmental agencies can put some teeth into the ongoing arguments that want to deface that coporation, they won't win the final argument...maybe it takes more money from those who want to see WalMart get their comeuppance...regardless...they haven't been successful enough for you or others to achieve what seems to be an ongoing goal....WalMarts destruction.  When the other side has a better argument...they will win.  If you want to understand the psychology of all the people who apply for work at Walmart before they come to your place, just take a good look at yourself.

Well, I'm glad you know so much about me as to make such accurate judgements about both my integrity and business accumen.
 
(Thank you for sharing).



< Message edited by LTRsubNW -- 10/18/2006 9:21:48 PM >

(in reply to Noah)
Profile   Post #: 131
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/18/2006 9:16:43 PM   
LTRsubNW


Posts: 1604
Joined: 5/6/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

You really are saying what ownedgirlie says you're saying, and it's utterly fallacious.  Walmart has been facing case after case about their business practices, and they're already starting to lose some of them.  The fact that the government hasn't done much to intervene hardly means that Walmart hasn't done anything wrong.  You yourself said that you won't concede Walmart has done anything wrong until the government shuts them down.  I never said any such thing...what I suggested however was that we're a nation of laws, and everyone is entitled to their day in court.  WalMart has had many. That's an absurd standard, one that almost never comes to pass.  Corporations violate the law, and are punished for it, all the time without being shut down.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTRsubNW

Just because I say you're 11 feet tall doesn't make it so, any more than because a variety of people hate or want to hate WalMart makes their accusations true.


(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 132
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/18/2006 9:22:54 PM   
Noah


Posts: 1660
Joined: 7/5/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTRsubNW



If you look at those cases where the decison wasn't favorable to WalMart, in each one WalMart was told "not to do it again", they vehemently denied ever doing it in the first place and the result was a fine, and a corrective action not to do it in the future...

Whether they did or didn't do a thing isn't my concern.  The feds seem to feel that they're doing the right things (after corrective discussions), if they didn't, they'd break them up.



Whether they did or didn't do a thing was your concern when you testified here that the company had achieved their success without doing anything underhanded.

Yeah. So hundreds of millions of dollars in fines and judgements against Walmart because Walmart is "doing things right" after previous multi-million dollar judgements against them? This is your proof that according to "the feds" everything is groovy?

And your idea of the essence of corporate regulation is "If a corporation does anything significantly wrong after a corrective 'discussion' then the government can and will move to close them down immediately. Nothing less than present efforts at full scale dismantling is any evidence of wrongdoing." If the governement hasn't moved to close a given company down then we can conclude that this company is blameless in its operations?

I think the fact that this is the best defense you can muster for your heroes at Walmart says everything that needs saying.

Have a nice thread.

(in reply to LTRsubNW)
Profile   Post #: 133
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/18/2006 9:25:49 PM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline

The irony of modern Americans is the "pride" we have in abolishing slaverly, but our rush to buy cheap goods made by slave labor.

(in reply to LTRsubNW)
Profile   Post #: 134
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/18/2006 9:28:32 PM   
ownedgirlie


Posts: 9184
Joined: 2/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


The irony of modern Americans is the "pride" we have in abolishing slaverly, but our rush to buy cheap goods made by slave labor.

But we benefit from it, without having to see it.  That's why it works, sad to say.

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 135
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/19/2006 2:18:46 AM   
NakedOnMyChain


Posts: 2431
Joined: 11/29/2004
From: Indiana
Status: offline
As a response to the op, I'd thought it was already common knowledge that Wal-Mart treats its employees like crap.  I also thought that if you're in a position to work at Wal-Mart you pretty much know what you're getting yourself into.  And ya' know, it's not that much different from any of the other major chains of do-all, have-all stores out there, or even some of the grocery stores.  In my days as a lowly cashier at Payless (now Kroger) during college I distinctly remember not ever being allowed to take a break during my eight hour shifts, even if I asked.  I only worked weekends and they said only full-time employees got to take breaks.  Of course I knew it was bullshit, but I needed the money.

Edited to add:  I hate Starbucks the way most people hate Wally World.  Down with corporate coffee!   

< Message edited by NakedOnMyChain -- 10/19/2006 2:20:36 AM >


_____________________________

"Oh, it's torture, but I'm almost there."
~The Cure

"I ask for so little. Just fear me, love me, do as I say, and I will be your slave."
~The Labyrinth

(in reply to cuddleheart50)
Profile   Post #: 136
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/19/2006 2:38:29 AM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


The irony of modern Americans is the "pride" we have in abolishing slaverly, but our rush to buy cheap goods made by slave labor.


Not only that, we pay through the nose for the privilege. I remember seeing a documentry on TV about a factory in China making a well known designer label sports shoe that retailed in Britain at 95 pounds. The factory in which it was made also had its own label (budget shoes or something) and sold almost the identical shoe for 6 pounds. We not only have the shame of supporting slave labour but the absolute stupidity of paying for the privilege!

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 137
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/19/2006 3:11:25 AM   
cuddleheart50


Posts: 9718
Joined: 2/20/2006
From: Kentucky
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NakedOnMyChain

As a response to the op, I'd thought it was already common knowledge that Wal-Mart treats its employees like crap.  I also thought that if you're in a position to work at Wal-Mart you pretty much know what you're getting yourself into.  And ya' know, it's not that much different from any of the other major chains of do-all, have-all stores out there, or even some of the grocery stores.  In my days as a lowly cashier at Payless (now Kroger) during college I distinctly remember not ever being allowed to take a break during my eight hour shifts, even if I asked.  I only worked weekends and they said only full-time employees got to take breaks.  Of course I knew it was bullshit, but I needed the money.

Edited to add:  I hate Starbucks the way most people hate Wally World.  Down with corporate coffee!   




I had no idea Wal-Mart treated their employess this way, until I came across this article.  I have never worked at Wal-Mart, so I didnt even realize.

_____________________________

Dance like no one is watching,
Sing like no one is listening.
Love like you've never been hurt
and live like it's heaven on Earth.


(in reply to NakedOnMyChain)
Profile   Post #: 138
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/19/2006 5:49:39 AM   
Amaros


Posts: 1363
Joined: 7/25/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

"If it's localized enough, you could even deliver from a bicycle to cut costs - bike trailers with 200+ lbs capacity are available on the internet."

....thing is though...if small businesses go down this line, and begin to take business away from Wally-world, then all Walmart will do is institute similar services and due to their immense buying power get the bikes so cheap they'll be able to undercut the local guys and gals.......when businesses get past a certain size they operate in a new sort of fiscal universe, the free market exerts no control over this and so laws limiting big business become necessary.



Haha, never happen, they're control freaks. I worked for Wal-Mart - briefly - even the old timers said it's not run the same way since Walton died. Used to be,  department managers did all the ordering,  now  the head office controls everything, even the  environmental controls: heating , air conditioning, etc., our store got just exactly what a store located in a similar demographic in Denver got. "manager" is just a title.

I'll be the first to say that Sam Walton was a fucking genius - his kids, I'm sorry to say, don't have the same vision.

Bigger isn't necessarily better.

(in reply to philosophy)
Profile   Post #: 139
RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart - 10/19/2006 4:58:55 PM   
LTRsubNW


Posts: 1604
Joined: 5/6/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Noah
quote:

ORIGINAL: LTRsubNW

If you look at those cases where the decison wasn't favorable to WalMart, in each one WalMart was told "not to do it again", they vehemently denied ever doing it in the first place and the result was a fine, and a corrective action not to do it in the future...

Whether they did or didn't do a thing isn't my concern.  The feds seem to feel that they're doing the right things (after corrective discussions), if they didn't, they'd break them up.



Whether they did or didn't do a thing was your concern when you testified here that the company had achieved their success without doing anything underhanded.

Yeah. So hundreds of millions of dollars in fines and judgements against Walmart because Walmart is "doing things right" after previous multi-million dollar judgements against them? This is your proof that according to "the feds" everything is groovy?

And your idea of the essence of corporate regulation is "If a corporation does anything significantly wrong after a corrective 'discussion' then the government can and will move to close them down immediately. Nothing less than present efforts at full scale dismantling is any evidence of wrongdoing."

Let's be very careful in our quotes shall we?
 
Those weren't mine (as you {and anyone who's taken the time to read both the entire thread but more specifically, my comments} clearly know{s}), yet you've evidenced them as such.
 
So let's be certain that when you quote...you should (at least make a reasonably passing attempt to) do so accurately.
 
And considering yours were entirely fabricated (i.e., they were not only not mine...but wholely manufactured by you)...I think that speaks alone for itself.
 
If the governement hasn't moved to close a given company down then we can conclude that this company is blameless in its operations?

I never said that and my multiple posts on this subject (when read by someone who's both cogent as well as capable) proves exactly the opposite.

I think the fact that this is the best defense you can muster for your heroes at Walmart says everything that needs saying.

They aren't my hero's, (and it would appear they aren't yours either), they're simply a business that deserves the rights of law...as you would expect for yourself if you were accused of crimes, much as you accuse them. 
 
The difference between my posts and yours is rather simply...mine use facts...yours use both conjecture as well as falsification...as evidenced by the above post by you wherein which you entirely fabricated words in whole cloth that by virtue of your italics claim my origin.
 
(I will assume that the mods that cover this area will very quickly have a rather vigorous discussion with you regards this issue).

Have a nice thread.

I shall...but I'd like to add... as you meander your litigiousness to assume the malfeasance of my purchase of 17 dollar shirts...consider that your angst could be much better spent towards whether or not our efforts as Americans could be more appropriately focused on affecting a result towards Darfur, among others.
 
Millions are dying in foreign countries that we could save...or at least affect...but for the money we spend in Iraq and other places...even as you ridiculously (and errantly) wonder whether or not someone will get some level of SSI income 30 years from now that they didn't deserve.
 
It, and WalMart are simply non issues (as are most assuradly, my shirts).
 
American men and women are dying in Afghanistan, Iraq, among multiple other sorry places to save your meagerly hide while you selfishly consider that the national medical bill is rising some modicum because we have a few people picking pears in Arizona...yet no one other than they wants to.
 
You wonder about whether or not some peasantly tin barbeque is valued at what American wages could produce it at (or less)...yet chances are you own 2...and all the while that you concern yourself with whether or not I paid $1.27 for a pack of Kool-Aid...or  $0.97...people in other countries struggle to feed their children on less than $11.00 USD a year growing poppies...because they don't know any better, they know full well it'll be used for manufacturing drugs (but they don't even know what that means)...and they don't understand the consequences of an urban lifestyle (or what these drugs can do, or to those who use them), they haven't even a clue what a building over 9 feet tall actually is (or looks like), yet we'll spend 177 million dollars in fiscal 2006 worldwide to eradicate not only their poppy fields...but their villages, homes (and everything they've spent the last 3 generations or at minimum 4 decades building), in some cases these eradication procedures will affect their own childrens DNA for generations to come by way of chemicals such as DDT that we KNOW cause DNA transformations, but which no foreign laws keep us from using (in their countries)...and they're DAMN freaking happy to be able to afford, pay for and hand down to their children a single mule within their very short 37 year lifetime...
 
And you're worried about whether or not I pay 17 bucks for a shirt?
 
Get a clue pal.
 
Join the parade bud...it's passing you by.
 
Contribute.  You'll be a vastly more worthy opponent.
 
There's an old saying;  "The best time to plant a tree was 25 years ago...the next best time?  Today".
 
In your case (as to minds)...I'm thinking Mesopotamia might have been a more appropriate timeline for you.  (It might have helped).
 
WalMart ain't the major issue of this century, and if it is for you...God help us if you have the right to vote.



< Message edited by LTRsubNW -- 10/19/2006 5:33:24 PM >

(in reply to Noah)
Profile   Post #: 140
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Our Friendly Neighborhood Wal-Mart Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109