Wal- Mart employees finally had enough [Archive]

n2ize

10-17-2006, 11:25 PM

Quote[/b] (w5klb @ Oct. 17 2006,16:03)]I think a union would be good for two reasons:

1.It would put Wal-Mart out of business which wouldn't hurt my feelings in the slightest.

2. Then the union that organized them would go away and that wouldn't hurt my feelings either.

Getting rid of two problems for the price of one. Can't beat a deal like that. I'll start painting th picket signs, just tell me where you want them delivered. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I can think of a much better scenario. Wal Mart stays in business. The Union stays in operation. Meanwhile the Wal Mart employees get paid a decent wage + benefits (i.e. medical, dental, prescription, etc) for the work they do. I think that's a really much nicer scenario than the screw everyone except the rich scenario that is so prevalent nowadays.

Now how about those picket signs. How about we stand up for Americans once and for all.

k2vhw

10-17-2006, 11:35 PM

Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Oct. 17 2006,16:25)].
I can think of a much better scenario. Wal Mart stays in business. The Union stays in operation. Meanwhile the Wal Mart employees get paid a decent wage #+ benefits (i.e. #medical, dental, prescription, etc) for #the work they do. #I think that's a really much nicer scenario than the screw everyone except the rich scenario that is so prevalent nowadays.

Now how about those picket signs. How about we stand up for Americans once and for all.

Yep......you've struck the nail on it's head!

It was that pervasive attitude again............screw you, I got mine!

W3MIV

10-17-2006, 11:42 PM

Quote[/b] (k2vhw @ Oct. 17 2006,19:35)]...screw you, I got mine!
Yup, that about sums it up for me!

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

n4sva

10-17-2006, 11:43 PM

I always wonder why the union thugs are singling out Wal-mart other than having the prospect of forcing several hundred-thousand employees to pay union dues. Which that is all a union does for you, the right to strike and pay dues and takes away your right to negotiate your own wages.

Secondly, I found that Wal-mart pays just as well or better than Target, Sears, or any other competitor.

Shall I say greed?

w2amr

10-17-2006, 11:50 PM

n2ize

10-17-2006, 11:57 PM

Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Oct. 17 2006,16:43)]I always wonder why the union thugs are singling out Wal-mart other than having the prospect of forcing several hundred-thousand employees to pay union dues. Which that is all a union does for you, the right to strike and pay dues and takes away your right to negotiate your own wages.

Secondly, I found that Wal-mart pays just as well or better than Target, Sears, or any other competitor.

Shall I say greed?
Quote[/b] ]
I alwas wonder why the union thugs are singling out Wal-mart other than having the prospect of forcing several hundred-thousand employees to pay union dues. Which that is all a union does for you, the right to strike and pay dues and takes away your right to negotiate your own wages.

Puleeeze !! You have got to be joking me. Negotiate their own wages ?? Yeah right. Go quit your present job , go work for Wal mart, and then go negotiate a wage with them and see how long you last. As far as the idea that all a union does is make you pay dues I would advise you enroll in a course in American History and pay close attention to the industrial era and labor relations in America.

As far as union thugs go talk to the unionized firemen and first responders who died while trying to save lives during 911.

10-18-2006, 12:07 AM

Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 17 2006,16:50)]Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Oct. 17 2006,16:43)]I always wonder why the union thugs are singling out Wal-mart other than having the prospect of forcing several hundred-thousand employees to pay union dues. Which that is all a union does for you, the right to strike and pay dues and takes away your right to negotiate your own wages.

Secondly, I found that Wal-mart pays just as well or better than Target, Sears, or any other competitor.

Shall I say greed?
Maybe the workers are LOOKING for a union to help improve their quality of life. Better wages, health care, etc. So it cuts into Wal-marts bloated bottom line a bit, who cares.
If you want to improve your lot in life, get a better job. Can't get a better job? Improve what you have to offer employers and get off your lazy ass and get more than a high school education. What Wal-Mart pays is pretty much inline with what should be expected for a job you can walk into with no training, no education, and no marketable skills.

Sorry, but these losers are looking to organize, under government protection, to extort thier employer into giving them more without having more to offer thier employer.

If they took that whining and put it toward 2 years at the local community college they would find suddenly they can earn more money without resorting to government protected extortion.

10-18-2006, 12:09 AM

Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Oct. 17 2006,16:57)]Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Oct. 17 2006,16:43)]I always wonder why the union thugs are singling out Wal-mart other than having the prospect of forcing several hundred-thousand employees to pay union dues. Which that is all a union does for you, the right to strike and pay dues and takes away your right to negotiate your own wages.

Secondly, I found that Wal-mart pays just as well or better than Target, Sears, or any other competitor.

Shall I say greed?
Quote[/b] ]
I alwas wonder why the union thugs are singling out Wal-mart other than having the prospect of forcing several hundred-thousand employees to pay union dues. Which that is all a union does for you, the right to strike and pay dues and takes away your right to negotiate your own wages.

Puleeeze !! You have got to be joking me. Negotiate their own wages ?? Yeah right. Go quit your present job , go work for Wal mart, and then go negotiate a wage with them and see how long you last. As far as the idea that all a union does is make you pay dues I would advise you enroll in a course in American History #and pay close attention to the industrial era and labor relations in America.

As far as union thugs go talk to the unionized firemen and first responders who died while trying to save lives during 911.
As a volunteer firefighter I can tell you that the firefighters union, the IAFF, cares more about creating more union members than the safety of the public.

Nice strawman arguement, but even in this case it does not wash.

N2RJ

10-18-2006, 12:27 AM

Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Oct. 17 2006,18:25)]Quote[/b] (w5klb @ Oct. 17 2006,16:03)]I think a union would be good for two reasons:

1.It would put Wal-Mart out of business which wouldn't hurt my feelings in the slightest.

2. Then the union that organized them would go away and that wouldn't hurt my feelings either.

Getting rid of two problems for the price of one. Can't beat a deal like that. I'll start painting th picket signs, just tell me where you want them delivered. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I can think of a much better scenario. Wal Mart stays in business. The Union stays in operation. Meanwhile the Wal Mart employees get paid a decent wage + benefits (i.e. medical, dental, prescription, etc) for the work they do. I think that's a really much nicer scenario than the screw everyone except the rich scenario that is so prevalent nowadays.

Now how about those picket signs. How about we stand up for Americans once and for all.
It won't happen.

Why do you think walmart hires illegals?

10-18-2006, 12:30 AM

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Oct. 17 2006,17:27)]Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Oct. 17 2006,18:25)]Quote[/b] (w5klb @ Oct. 17 2006,16:03)]I think a union would be good for two reasons:

1.It would put Wal-Mart out of business which wouldn't hurt my feelings in the slightest.

2. Then the union that organized them would go away and that wouldn't hurt my feelings either.

Getting rid of two problems for the price of one. Can't beat a deal like that. I'll start painting th picket signs, just tell me where you want them delivered. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I can think of a much better scenario. Wal Mart stays in business. The Union stays in operation. Meanwhile the Wal Mart employees get paid a decent wage #+ benefits (i.e. #medical, dental, prescription, etc) for #the work they do. #I think that's a really much nicer scenario than the screw everyone except the rich scenario that is so prevalent nowadays.

Now how about those picket signs. How about we stand up for Americans once and for all.
It won't happen.

Why do you think walmart hires illegals?
They do?

I know some contractors they hired were busted for it, but wal-mart themselves?

W6ECE

10-18-2006, 12:32 AM

Who forces these people to work at Walmart?

10-18-2006, 12:40 AM

Quote[/b] (W6ECE @ Oct. 17 2006,17:32)]Who forces these people to work at Walmart?
Exactly.

Don't like Wal-Marts pay, conditions, or management?

Get another job!

You can't? Well try investing a little in yourself and gain some marketable skills.

n2ize

10-18-2006, 12:43 AM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,17:07)]
Quote[/b] ]
Sorry, but these losers are looking to organize, under government protection, to extort thier employer into giving them more without having more to offer thier employer.

The very fact that you can call working people who are trying to earn a living "lazy" and "loosers" shows a level of arrogance so high that I can only assume this post is meant to be flame bait and thus does not warrant a response. Because if you can honsetly sit there and meaningfully refer to honest gainfully employed hard working individuals with such harsh and bitter (almost hateful) terminology then I really feel for you.

10-18-2006, 12:48 AM

Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Oct. 17 2006,17:43)]
Quote[/b] ]
Sorry, but these losers are looking to organize, under government protection, to extort thier employer into giving them more without having more to offer thier employer.

The very fact that you #can call working people who are trying to earn a living "lazy" and "loosers" shows a level of arrogance so high that I can only assume this post is meant to be flame bait and thus does not warrant a response. Because if you can honsetly sit there and meaningfully refer to honest gainfully employed hard working individuals with such harsh and bitter #(almost hateful) terminology #then I really feel for you.
It was not aimed at your everyday working man.

It was aimed at those few who want to sit back and demand their employer give them more than they are worth on the open market. It is those who want to form a government protected group and then force the employer to negotiate with them against its will. It is those who instead of improving themselves to get a better job and earn more want to force employers to pay them more without doing more.

It is the crowd who says "I may only have a high school education and no marketable skills, but because I breathe I want $15 an hour! What, I should go to school and learn something marketable to earn more? Hell no, I just want it handed to me!"

KC9ECI

10-18-2006, 12:49 AM

You couldn't pay me enough to work in a union shop again. I have never been so screwed as I was the years that I was a member of the AFL-CIO. Talk about a waste.

n4sva

10-18-2006, 01:07 AM

like I said. The only thing a union gives you is the right to strike and pay union dues.

K1OU

10-18-2006, 01:13 AM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,17:40)]Quote[/b] (W6ECE @ Oct. 17 2006,17:32)]Who forces these people to work at Walmart?
Exactly.

Don't like Wal-Marts pay, conditions, or management?

Get another job!

You can't? Well try investing a little in yourself and gain some marketable skills.
When Walmart often runs the smaller fish out of the pond, the opportunities dry up.

Why do you think so many towns have not let Walmart come to town?

And how do you explain Walmart getting socked for 78 milion because it was proven in a court of law that they were making employees work through breaks and lunch so productivity numbers could be achieved?

10-18-2006, 01:22 AM

Quote[/b] (K1OU @ Oct. 17 2006,18:13)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,17:40)]Quote[/b] (W6ECE @ Oct. 17 2006,17:32)]Who forces these people to work at Walmart?
Exactly.

Don't like Wal-Marts pay, conditions, or management?

Get another job!

You can't? Well try investing a little in yourself and gain some marketable skills.
When Walmart often runs the smaller fish out of the pond, the opportunities dry up.

Why do you think so many towns have not let Walmart come to town?

And how do you explain Walmart getting socked for 78 milion because it was proven in a court of law that they were making employees work through breaks and lunch so productivity numbers could be achieved?
Maybe they drive away other retail jobs. Maybe. I run a #small retail business right down the road from Wal-Mart, and there are plenty around me. You just have to be smart enough to make it when there is competition.

But regardless do you think those small shops that they
supposedly run off pay thier cashiers and stockboys $15 an hour, or any more than wally world does? Not a chance.

So if they run anything away it is not a place that pays more than they do.

All the better jobs that pay the wages these folks are trying to force Wal-Mart to give them are still around. We still have a nursing shortage, still plenty of jobs for trained auto technicians, paramedics are in high demand, truck drivers are needed.... but wait, all those require a person to have the discipline to get a bit of an education. It is easier to just go down to Wal-Mart with your GED and then whine about how little you make and how abused you are.

As for the 78 mil, if they did it they did. With a corporation that big some low and mid level managers are going to be idiots. Still does not mean any stockboy or cashier is worth more than they are paid now, and if they did not like it that much they were always free to find another job... you can't show me a city anywhere that does not have listings in every Sunday paper.

I have not seen a Wal-Mart put a hospital, auto dealer, or nursing home out of work yet, and they all are hiring around here and in pretty much every community. Opportunities are still out there for those with the drive to grab them.

n4sva

10-18-2006, 01:26 AM

The problem is that the trial lawyers regard Wal-Mart, as any large corporation, as one with unlimited cash reserves waiting to be tapped. It is called "Jackpot Justice"

10-18-2006, 01:28 AM

Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Oct. 17 2006,18:26)]The problem is that the trial lawyers regard Wal-Mart, as any large corporation, #as one with unlimited cash reserves waiting to be tapped. It is called "Jackpot Justice"
same for the unions, who have found that by extorting wages above what the market supports suddenly leads to plants leaving and the loss of union membership...they are trying to grab on to the new big fish.

K1OU

10-18-2006, 01:31 AM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,18:22)]I have not seen a Wal-Mart put a hospital, auto dealer, or nursing home out of work yet, and they all are hiring around here and in pretty much every community. Opportunities are still out there for those with the drive to grab them.
I didn't know that Walmart was an HMO or a GMAC financier. Apples to oranges.

K1OU

10-18-2006, 01:32 AM

Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Oct. 17 2006,18:26)]The problem is that the trial lawyers regard Wal-Mart, as any large corporation, #as one with unlimited cash reserves waiting to be tapped. It is called "Jackpot Justice"
When a company makes it employees work off the clock, and hires illegals, you're damn right they deserve to pay up.

KC2PBJ

10-18-2006, 01:40 AM

What's the difference between the union guy who cleans out the bathroom crapper and his non-union counterpart? About ten bucks an hour. Unions were created in the early 20th Century to improve worker safety. Nowadays it's to keep their leadership in Bahamian villas and outa Leavenworth. No one forces anyone to work at Wally World or anywhere else. If you aren't happy there, don't let those swinging doors hit you in the butt on the way out. If Immigration shows up at the door, stand back until half of the employees bail out the back door and into the deportation bus. For that matter, if you disagree with Wally World's policies, I don't see anyone holding a gun to your head to shop there. Vote with your feet and wallet.

10-18-2006, 01:40 AM

Quote[/b] (K1OU @ Oct. 17 2006,18:31)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,18:22)]I have not seen a Wal-Mart put a hospital, auto dealer, or nursing home out of work yet, and they all are hiring around here and in pretty much every community. Opportunities are still out there for those with the drive to grab them.
I didn't know that Walmart was an HMO or a GMAC financier. #Apples to oranges.
Not at all, you said that when Wal-mart supposedly drives away all the other business there is little other opportunity for people to find work... I was just showing that assumption to be flawed, there is still plenty of opportunity any place where there is a Wal-Mart.

If they drive anything away it would only be retail jobs that pay in the same range as they do. But wally world has been in my rural county for 15 years now and small business is alive and well.

KC2PBJ

10-18-2006, 01:41 AM

n2ize

10-18-2006, 01:43 AM

Quote[/b] ]
It was aimed at those few who want to sit back and demand their employer give them more than they are worth on the open market. It is those who want to form a government protected group and then force the employer to negotiate with them against its will. It is those who instead of improving themselves to get a better job and earn more want to force employers to pay them more without doing more.

Your argument is seriously flawed for a very simple and very obvious reason.. I am not going to point it out to you. Rather I'll leave it to you to figure it out and explain it . Give it some thought. Sometimes the obviuous is very elusive. It's human nature to feel strongly about something and then overlook the obvious. I do it too. Give it some thought, sleep on it for a day or so if need be.

Hint... it has nothing to do with being liberal or conservative and it has nothing to do with being pro or anti union and it has nothing to do with being pro or anti Wal mart.

10-18-2006, 01:49 AM

Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Oct. 17 2006,18:43)]
Quote[/b] ]
It was aimed at those few who want to sit back and demand their employer give them more than they are worth on the open market. It is those who want to form a government protected group and then force the employer to negotiate with them against its will. It is those who instead of improving themselves to get a better job and earn more want to force employers to pay them more without doing more.

Your argument is seriously flawed for a #very simple and very obvious reason.. I am not going to point it out to you. Rather #I'll leave it to you to figure it #out and explain it . Give it some thought. Sometimes the obviuous is very elusive. It's human nature to feel strongly about something and then overlook the obvious. I do it too. Give it some thought, sleep on it for a day or so if need be.

Hint... #it has nothing to do with being liberal or conservative and #it has #nothing to do #with being pro or anti union and it has #nothing to do with being pro or #anti Wal mart.
Let me guess, you think they are under paid now?

I think the free market determines who is over or under paid. If you have XYZ skillset, and the only jobs you can find are worth so much an hour with poor conditions, thats what you are worth. Don't like it? Instead of trying to force employers to give you more than you are worth, improve the product you have to offer by improving yourself.

KD6NIG

10-18-2006, 01:53 AM

Well, figure one of two things will happen:

1) A high school diploma may actually earn you as much as some college degree, or
2) A high school diploma may earn you a spot on the unemployment line.

I just see this as lawyers wanting money. An untapped source earns you nothing. Worst case, nothing happens, but you collect some legal fees for the 'representation'.

Personally I do shop there. Not because I support thier policies, but with having to keep my tank filled to get to work, paying bills, etc, its what I can afford. Thats the reality for most people, and likely the reason behind thier success.

A union would probably help the workers get more, yes, but it would also increase costs, likely result in job cuts (fewer workers means less wages) and probably would increase prices. That would help all of them in the long run, but would probably hurt the average family who relies on those lower prices.

But why not eh? We know gas prices will go up again anyway to hit us all in the pocketbook again.

AC0BU

10-18-2006, 02:01 AM

the only good reason to destroy walmart is to hobble china

# # # # # # # # # carson ac0bu

K1OU

10-18-2006, 02:04 AM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,18:49)]I think the free market determines who is over or under paid. If you have XYZ skillset, and the only jobs you can find are worth so much an hour with poor conditions, thats what you are worth. Don't like it? Instead of trying to force employers to give you more than you are worth, improve the product you have to offer by improving yourself.
A scholarly approach reveals..

"When stores such as Wal-Mart or Target propose building in these areas the initial reaction of local authorities is positive citing an increased tax base and more options for the community. However, over the years the result is often a lower tax base as the smaller businesses close. Another fact is the quality of employment at these large stores – on average they pay less and have less benefits as compared to their smaller counterparts. Also, these retailers usually have a combined total retail employment rate of only forty percent in the category of fifty employees or greater. Employment also declined in the department stores in many areas as they began to downsize and cut personnel costs due to competition with K-Mart, Wal-Mart and Target. Thus, discount retail chains affect many aspects of employment in these communities."

Attribution (http://www.msubillings.edu/caer/bix%20box%20report.htm)

10-18-2006, 02:05 AM

Quote[/b] (AC0BU @ Oct. 17 2006,19:01)]the only good reason to destroy walmart is to hobble china

# # # # # # # # # carson ac0bu
Actually it would be good for China.

The demand for those goods will not cease to exist if Wal-Mart does. Instead multiple retailers will fight for that market, and the manufactuers in China will have multiple customers in the US to replace one large one.. and be able to get more for thier goods.

n2ize

10-18-2006, 02:12 AM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,18:49)]Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Oct. 17 2006,18:43)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,17:48)]
Quote[/b] ]
It was aimed at those few who want to sit back and demand their employer give them more than they are worth on the open market. It is those who want to form a government protected group and then force the employer to negotiate with them against its will. It is those who instead of improving themselves to get a better job and earn more want to force employers to pay them more without doing more.

Your argument is seriously flawed for a very simple and very obvious reason.. I am not going to point it out to you. Rather I'll leave it to you to figure it out and explain it . Give it some thought. Sometimes the obviuous is very elusive. It's human nature to feel strongly about something and then overlook the obvious. I do it too. Give it some thought, sleep on it for a day or so if need be.

Hint... it has nothing to do with being liberal or conservative and it has nothing to do with being pro or anti union and it has nothing to do with being pro or anti Wal mart.
Let me guess, you think they are under paid now?

I think the free market determines who is over or under paid. If you have XYZ skillset, and the only jobs you can find are worth so much an hour with poor conditions, thats what you are worth. Don't like it? Instead of trying to force employers to give you more than you are worth, improve the product you have to offer by improving yourself.
Nope, you're not even close. It has nothing to do with what I think or what you think. But it is very obvious (or at least should be). Think about it for a few days and write back when you think you have the answer.

k2vhw

10-18-2006, 03:17 AM

Quote[/b] (KC2PBJ @ Oct. 17 2006,18:41)]What's the difference between the union guy who cleans out the bathroom crapper and his non-union counterpart? #About ten bucks an hour. #Unions were created in the early 20th Century to improve worker safety. #Nowadays it's to keep their leadership in Bahamian villas and outa Leavenworth. #No one forces anyone to work at Wally World or anywhere else. #If you aren't happy there, don't let those swinging doors hit you in the butt on the way out. #If Immigration shows up at the door, stand back until half of the employees bail out the back door and into the deportation bus. #For that matter, if you #disagree with Wally World's policies, I don't see anyone holding a gun to your head to shop there. #Vote with your feet and wallet.
The 'difference'?
It is no different than the pay given to a PFC in the military assigned to 'desk duty' being paid the same salary as the PFC out on patrol placing his/her life on the line! #They're BOTH doing a job that is needed and putting forth their 'labors'.
Every person working 8/10/12 hours each day deserves to be paid FAIR WAGES. We aren't talking inflated wages! FAIR WAGES are wages paid to a worker who is working full days or partial days and deserves to earn a LIVING WAGE, not usery wages. #I don't believe anyone is suggesting that a janitor be paid the same wages YOU earn..........only a FAIR-LIVING-WAGE!

I read a great deal of misunderstanding about unions exists among the posts. A great deal of hate probably due to jealousy that some don't have a collective bargaining unit to help prevent employer abuses. If anyone believes there aren't abuses by employers like Wal-Mart........how about Santa Claus and the tooth fairy?

10-18-2006, 03:29 AM

Quote[/b] (k2vhw @ Oct. 17 2006,20:17)]Quote[/b] (KC2PBJ @ Oct. 17 2006,18:41)]What's the difference between the union guy who cleans out the bathroom crapper and his non-union counterpart? #About ten bucks an hour. #Unions were created in the early 20th Century to improve worker safety. #Nowadays it's to keep their leadership in Bahamian villas and outa Leavenworth. #No one forces anyone to work at Wally World or anywhere else. #If you aren't happy there, don't let those swinging doors hit you in the butt on the way out. #If Immigration shows up at the door, stand back until half of the employees bail out the back door and into the deportation bus. #For that matter, if you #disagree with Wally World's policies, I don't see anyone holding a gun to your head to shop there. #Vote with your feet and wallet.
The 'difference'?
It is no different than the pay given to a PFC in the military assigned to 'desk duty' being paid the same salary as the PFC out on patrol placing his/her life on the line! #They're BOTH doing a job that is needed and putting forth their 'labors'.
Every person working 8/10/12 hours each day deserves to be paid FAIR WAGES. We aren't talking inflated wages! FAIR WAGES are wages paid to a worker who is working full days or partial days and deserves to earn a LIVING WAGE, not usery wages. #I don't believe anyone is suggesting that a janitor be paid the same wages YOU earn..........only a FAIR-LIVING-WAGE!

I read a great deal of misunderstanding about unions exists among the posts. A great deal of hate probably due to jealousy that some don't have a collective bargaining unit to help prevent employer abuses. If anyone believes there aren't abuses by employers like Wal-Mart........how about Santa Claus and the tooth fairy?
Ahh but what is a fair wage?

Who determines it?

I think $7-9 an hour is more than fair for someone with no real skills.

Jealous? Of collective bargaining? Not a chance. I have stood on my own two feet and represented myself my whole life. I do not need someone to make my deals for me, my work, work ethic and skills have always spoken for me. Now that I run my own show it is even more so.

I would be very supportive of unions, if they just did away with the laws giving them an unfair advantage. Don't force 100 employees to belong or be represented bcause 51 vote for it. Allow an employer to refuse to deal with a union if they vote to form one, if that labor is indeed so rare and valuable the employer will have no choice but to deal with the union, if it is easily eplaced they should be free to do so. No closed shops, let each new employee deciede if they wish to be part of the collective or to negotiate thier own deal.

K0RGR

10-18-2006, 03:29 AM

Back in the good old days, the entry jobs were with small businesses that couldn't afford to offer any benefits or pay much more than they absolutely had to. The "good jobs" were with the big companies, whose economy of scale allowed them to offer higher wages and better benefits. In turn, they usually got the best employees.

Then, corporate Amerika discovered that the quality of employees didn't matter. They could make a lot more money if they didn't offer good wages or benefits. As long as all the employers do the same thing, it works. There is very little wage competition between employers these days - corporate HR departments exist to eliminate it.

The Wall Street view is that WalMart DOES offer good wages and benefits. We should ALL be making WalMart wages according to Wall Street.

You can negotiate your wages with a small employer - not at all with a corporation. Unions merely level the playing field for the individuals in dealing with the corporation.

Wal Mart has smashed every attempt to unionize them so far. Their meat cutters succeeded in starting a union a few years ago. The next day, Wal Mart outsourced all their meatcutting and fired all the meatcutters.

I would wager that this Wal Mart will be closed in a few weeks.

10-18-2006, 03:33 AM

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 17 2006,20:29)]The Wall Street view is that WalMart DOES offer good wages and benefits. We should ALL be making WalMart wages according to Wall Street.

You can negotiate your wages with a small employer - not at all with a corporation. Unions merely level the playing field for the individuals in dealing with the corporation.
Not quite..the view is that if you have no real marketable skills and are doing work that anyone can be trained to do ina a couple days, the wages are right.

And I have worked for several large corporations and each time negotiated my wages. But I have more to offer than a high school diploma and a pulse.

K0RGR

10-18-2006, 03:53 AM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,20:33)]Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 17 2006,20:29)]The Wall Street view is that WalMart DOES offer good wages and benefits. We should ALL be making WalMart wages according to Wall Street.

You can negotiate your wages with a small employer - not at all with a corporation. Unions merely level the playing field for the individuals in dealing with the corporation.
Not quite..the view is that if you have no real marketable skills and are doing work that anyone can be trained to do ina a couple days, the wages are right.

And I have worked for several large corporations and each time negotiated my wages. But I have more to offer than a high school diploma and a pulse.
I've never seen a large corporation negotiate wages except with consultants, which I have been, and executives which I have not been. In neither case are we talking about 'regular' employees. The HR department determines the skills required for a given position, and what the competition pays for that job. A range is set, and an act of God is usually required to get around it. I've been involved in some corporate hiring, and I've never seen anybody negotiate anything HR wasn't prepared to offer in the first place.

10-18-2006, 04:03 AM

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 17 2006,20:53)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,20:33)]Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Oct. 17 2006,20:29)]The Wall Street view is that WalMart DOES offer good wages and benefits. We should ALL be making WalMart wages according to Wall Street.

You can negotiate your wages with a small employer - not at all with a corporation. Unions merely level the playing field for the individuals in dealing with the corporation.
Not quite..the view is that if you have no real marketable skills and are doing work that anyone can be trained to do ina a couple days, the wages are right.

And I have worked for several large corporations and each time negotiated my wages. But I have more to offer than a high school diploma and a pulse.
I've never seen a large corporation negotiate wages except with consultants, which I have been, and executives which I have not been. In neither case are we talking about 'regular' employees. The HR department determines the skills required for a given position, and what the competition pays for that job. A range is set, and an act of God is usually required to get around it. I've been involved in some corporate hiring, and I've never seen anybody negotiate anything HR wasn't prepared to offer in the first place.
True most of the time I have fallen into the consultant, management, or somewhere in between.

Why?

Because I made sure I was marketable as such.

It is kind of like selling food in a resteraunt. If all you have is fast food, you get fast food prices for what you sell. If you have fine food, you get more..yet it is still just a meal. Some establishments choose to sell the cheap stuff, some do better and get more for the increased quality of the goods.

Labor is the same. If all you have to offer is the same as 100 others around you, yeah expect to get a pretty set rate because they can go right to the next guy. But if you have more to offer, you get more. In many ways that negotiation still takes place, except the person wanting to sell his labor walks up with nothing to stand on to negotiate. He walks in, says I want this much, HR says what do you have to offer that the rest do not, he returns a blank stare and the negotiation is over.

That is where unions come in..they give a person who really has no legs to stand on leverage..excpet instead of him going out and bettering himself to get the leverage he relies on a group that is given special protections under the law to extort it for by by threat of harming the employer.

k2vhw

10-18-2006, 04:06 AM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,20:29)]Ahh but what is a fair wage?

Who determines it?

I think $7-9 an hour is more than fair for someone with no real skills.

Jealous? Of collective bargaining? Not a chance. I have stood on my own two feet and represented myself my whole life. I do not need someone to make my deals for me, my work, work ethic and skills have always spoken for me. Now that I run my own show it is even more so.

I would be very supportive of unions, if they just did away with the laws giving them an unfair advantage. Don't force 100 employees to belong or be represented bcause 51 vote for it. Allow an employer to refuse to deal with a union if they vote to form one, if that labor is indeed so rare and valuable the employer will have no choice but to deal with the union, if it is easily eplaced they should be free to do so. No closed shops, let each new employee deciede if they wish to be part of the collective or to negotiate thier own deal.
A FAIR WAGE.........that's easy to determine.
A FAIR WAGE is a LIVING WAGE. A wage that allows a worker who spends an entire day laboring to be able to buy healthy food, clothing, housing, medicine and medical services. A fair wage/living wage is a wage that allows a worker who labors two or even three jobs a day to afford proper sleep/rest and enjoy the basics of family life. #Hell, you have yours..........let the laborers have some. They work a hell of a lot harder than many who earn substantially more.
Now, all those 'menial jobs' that you might label them to be are also very much needed as well. #There aren't enough jobs as good as yours even IF these laborers had high-tech skills. #I know some 'engineers' are working supermarket deli counters slicing meat because they lost their jobs to 'overseas entities'. Don't THEY deserve FAIR WAGES?
Let's all stop and think about how much better America would be if more 'laborers' earned a LIVING WAGE. Let's all stop and look at the disparity between the bottom end jobs and the millions paid to undeserving 'executives' and undeserving 'privileged'.
Let's stop thinking.........'screw them.....I got mine'!

Let's stop thinking that a FAIR WAGE/LIVING WAGE is excessive. Can YOU live on $7.00/hour?
We/I aren't talking 'inflated wages'........FAIR/LIVING WAGES.

K6UEY

10-18-2006, 04:07 AM

Well the past postings all go either to the Union Liberal/Socialist side or to the Conservative Determine your own future side.

My feelings are I presently and for some years have shopped at Wal-Mart and SAM'S stores,and it is my intention to continue, UNLESS a union comes on the scene.

In my working career I have walked off the job twice when a Union came into the house. I would have little trouble bringing my shopping to a halt at ANY Union establisment.

I believe Socialism is NOT good for our Country and I will not by choice be part of it's support !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
NOTE:
To the earlier comment about the 911 Fireman, It was not the Union that made those men BRAVE it was the individuals who were BRAVE,they would have done the same good job even if they were NOT protected by the Union !!

And since it was raised I DO NOT believe ANY Employee who is paid by the VOTER'S/ TAXPAYER'S MONEY has the right to form a UNION. They should be accountable to the PEOPLE, NOT the UNION !!
In Kalifornia they have a strong UNION,and I think they could do a better job if LESS TIME was spent telling the taxpayer HOW THEY SHOULD VOTE !!
ADDED NOTE:
In our last election the Unions spent 150 million infleuncing the voters,That is a disgrace !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

10-18-2006, 04:19 AM

Quote[/b] (k2vhw @ Oct. 17 2006,21:06)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,20:29)]Ahh but what is a fair wage?

Who determines it?

I think $7-9 an hour is more than fair for someone with no real skills.

Jealous? Of collective bargaining? Not a chance. I have stood on my own two feet and represented myself my whole life. I do not need someone to make my deals for me, my work, work ethic and skills have always spoken for me. Now that I run my own show it is even more so.

I would be very supportive of unions, if they just did away with the laws giving them an unfair advantage. Don't force 100 employees to belong or be represented bcause 51 vote for it. Allow an employer to refuse to deal with a union if they vote to form one, if that labor is indeed so rare and valuable the employer will have no choice but to deal with the union, if it is easily eplaced they should be free to do so. No closed shops, let each new employee deciede if they wish to be part of the collective or to negotiate thier own deal.
A FAIR WAGE.........that's easy to determine.
A FAIR WAGE is a LIVING WAGE. A wage that allows a worker who spends an entire day laboring to be able to buy healthy food, clothing, housing, medicine and medical services. A fair wage/living wage is a wage that allows a worker who labors two or even three jobs a day to afford proper sleep/rest and enjoy the basics of family life. #Hell, you have yours..........let the laborers have some. They work a hell of a lot harder than many who earn substantially more.
Now, all those 'menial jobs' that you might label them to be are also very much needed as well. #There aren't enough jobs as good as yours even IF these laborers had high-tech skills. #I know some 'engineers' are working supermarket deli counters slicing meat because they lost their jobs to 'overseas entities'. Don't THEY deserve FAIR WAGES?
Let's all stop and think about how much better America would be if more 'laborers' earned a LIVING WAGE. Let's all stop and look at the disparity between the bottom end jobs and the millions paid to undeserving 'executives' and undeserving 'privileged'.
Let's stop thinking.........'screw them.....I got mine'!

Let's stop thinking that a FAIR WAGE/LIVING WAGE is excessive. Can YOU live on $7.00/hour?
Can I live on $7.00 an hour?

Yup, I have. Well it was $7.45. I was even able to go to school part time doing it and save some money.

How? Responsibility. I don't smoke, I didn't pay $65 a month for 100 cable channels, I didn't go into debt for a flashy new car I really couldn't afford. My entertainment was ham radio/sw listening with used radios I saved for, fishing where I ate my catch, and mountain biking where I also rode my bike often to save gas and auto maintenance. I rented an apartment I could afford. I sold stuff at flea markets to make extra $$$ or worked overtime when I could.

I made it fine. Of course I didn't spend $300 a month of beer and smokes, $65 on cable, $300 on a car payment, I cooked at home insteda of eating out, I was responsible enough not to have kids I could not afford, etc.

And I did not see that $7.45 job as a career, but a temporary point while I was preparing for better.

k2vhw

10-18-2006, 04:27 AM

Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Oct. 17 2006,21:07)]I believe Socialism is NOT good for our Country and I will not by choice be part of it's support !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

In our last election the Unions spent 150 million infleuncing the voters,That is a disgrace !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
unions are FAR from SOCIALISM. Unions exist because employers (businesses) abuse employees with several unsavory actions. Poor pay, unsafe working conditions, excessive hours/workloads, discrimination to name some.
It is collective bargaining not unlike buying insurance.
As a matter of fact, communist/socialist governments don't like unions because they pose a threat to their control.

And as for spending 150 million $$$ to influence voters.......doesn't every politician do that? How can that be a disgrace for unions but not for your Governor or Senator or.........?

k2vhw

10-18-2006, 04:36 AM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,21:19)]Yup, I have. Well it was $7.45. I was even able to go to school part time doing it and save some money.

How? Responsibility. I don't smoke, I didn't pay $65 a month for 100 cable channels, I didn't go into debt for a flashy new car I really couldn't afford. My entertainment was ham radio/sw listening with used radios I saved for, fishing where I ate my catch, and mountain biking where I also rode my bike often to save gas and auto maintenance. I rented an apartment I could afford. I sold stuff at flea markets to make extra $$$ or worked overtime when I could.

I made it fine. Of course I didn't spend $300 a month of beer and smokes, $65 on cable, $300 on a car payment, I cooked at home insteda of eating out, I was responsible enough not to have kids I could not afford, etc.

And I did not see that $7.45 job as a career, but a temporary point while I was preparing for better.
Very good! You were a responsible youth. But you were SINGLE. You didn't have a family to support. You were young and growing. YOU HAD NO OTHER RESPONSIBILITIES.
We're talking FAMILIES. Again.....stop thinking that rhetoric, 'to hell with them........I have mine' or "I deserve it, they don't".
You deny the American dream of having family? Again, I am not saying that we must pay inflated wages, but please think about paying workers enough to live a simple life as I have outlined in this thread before.

10-18-2006, 04:37 AM

Quote[/b] (k2vhw @ Oct. 17 2006,21:27)]Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Oct. 17 2006,21:07)]I believe Socialism is NOT good for our Country and I will not by choice be part of it's support !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

In our last election the Unions spent 150 million infleuncing the voters,That is a disgrace !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
unions are FAR from SOCIALISM. Unions exist because employers (businesses) abuse employees with several unsavory actions. Poor pay, unsafe working conditions, excessive hours/workloads, discrimination to name some.
It is collective bargaining not unlike buying insurance.
As a matter of fact, communist/socialist governments don't like unions because they pose a threat to their control.

And as for spending 150 million $$$ to influence voters.......doesn't every politician do that? How can that be a disgrace for unions but not for your Governor or Senator or.........?
You need to do some research on socialsim, the socialist movement, and its relation to trade union. Look back at the early leaders for both.

Collective bargaining is far from insurance.
Here is a nice read from Marxists.org on trade unions and socialism. (http://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsky/1901/04/unions.htm)

10-18-2006, 04:42 AM

Quote[/b] (k2vhw @ Oct. 17 2006,21:36)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,21:19)]Yup, I have. Well it was $7.45. I was even able to go to school part time doing it and save some money.

How? Responsibility. I don't smoke, I didn't pay $65 a month for 100 cable channels, I didn't go into debt for a flashy new car I really couldn't afford. My entertainment was ham radio/sw listening with used radios I saved for, fishing where I ate my catch, and mountain biking where I also rode my bike often to save gas and auto maintenance. I rented an apartment I could afford. I sold stuff at flea markets to make extra $$$ or worked overtime when I could.

I made it fine. Of course I didn't spend $300 a month of beer and smokes, $65 on cable, $300 on a car payment, I cooked at home insteda of eating out, I was responsible enough not to have kids I could not afford, etc.

And I did not see that $7.45 job as a career, but a temporary point while I was preparing for better.
Very good! You were a responsible youth. But you were SINGLE. You didn't have a family to support. You were young and growing. YOU HAD NO OTHER RESPONSIBILITIES.
We're talking FAMILIES. Again.....stop thinking that rhetoric, 'to hell with them........I have mine' or "I deserve it, they don't".
You deny the American dream of having family? #Again, I am not saying that we must pay inflated wages, but please think about paying workers enough to live a simple life as I have outlined in this thread before.
Sure have a family.... WHEN YOU CAN AFFORD IT.

Popping out a child does not make your labor worth more than before you had the child. And having a child when your most lucrative career oppertunity if Wal-Mart or Waffle House is irresponsible... so should we reward irresponsibility by saying "lets make sure they can raise a child?'

I say we encourage responsibility.

Oh, and I could easily with two people making that much have raised a child were I forced to. It would have meant working opposite shifts so we did not have to pay for child care (of course making that much you can get it free, but I don't go for handouts from the.gov) or me working two jobs, but it can be done.

n7zsd

10-18-2006, 04:43 AM

I think it's great that the employees held a protest. #Sounds like their biggest complaint was that their hours were to be cut from 40 to 32 hours a week. #Say goodbye to benefits! #Personally, I don't shop at Wal-Mart if I can help it. #Their stores are painted red, white, and blue, yet their employees...ooops, sorry "associates" make a lower wage than the norm, and they are possibly the largest importer of Chineese crap in the world! #In Montana Wal-Mart got caught handing out welfare paperwork to new employees, telling them that they will make just little enough to collect welfare from the state. #Now who is this affecting? #Our tax dollars at work again! #As for dropping weekly hours, Sears did this years ago. #Full time employees were forced to work part time. #Several of the old timers quit. #Ever since then Sears has been going downhill fast. #Do you really think that a part time employee really gives a damn?:rock: #Kudos to the employees for standing up for themselves! #We can only hope that Wal-Mart will take a good hard look at themselves and take care of the people who are making them filthy rich. I know 'ol Sam wouldn't have treated his employees like they have been of late...God rest his soul.

kf6rdn

10-18-2006, 04:43 AM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,16:48)]It is the crowd who says "I may only have a high school education and no marketable skills, but because I breathe I want $15 an hour! What, I should go to school and learn something marketable to earn more? Hell no, I just want it handed to me!"
Not only that, you have the "I've been working as a cashier here for 65 years, so I deserve more pay!"

Yeah, the unions did great things in the turn of the century, and yes you should get paid for any hours you work, there ARE laws now for that sort of thing, yes?

But expecting MORE money then you are worth? wal mart and the like should be temp employment for a kid going to school, or someone maybe supplanting retirement SS, not "making a living".

n7zsd

10-18-2006, 04:51 AM

p.s. #Just wondering since I haven't been in Wal-Mart for quite some time...do they have those self-checkout stands? #I hate those things. #For starters, I despise having to tell it which language I want to use, and second, It takes away jobs from the store. #At a Fred Meyer in Idaho Falls, they have 4 of these things. #They have one person monitoring the whole thing, and two more behind them telling customers when one becomes available to use. #Meanwhile there are 10 empty regular checkstands. #Why not just take those 3 employees and put 'em each behind a cash register?

k2vhw

10-18-2006, 04:54 AM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,21:37)]Quote[/b] (k2vhw @ Oct. 17 2006,21:27)]Quote[/b] (K6UEY @ Oct. 17 2006,21:07)]I believe Socialism is NOT good for our Country and I will not by choice be part of it's support !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

In our last election the Unions spent 150 million infleuncing the voters,That is a disgrace !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
unions are FAR from SOCIALISM. Unions exist because employers (businesses) abuse employees with several unsavory actions. Poor pay, unsafe working conditions, excessive hours/workloads, discrimination to name some.
It is collective bargaining not unlike buying insurance.
As a matter of fact, communist/socialist governments don't like unions because they pose a threat to their control.

And as for spending 150 million $$$ to influence voters.......doesn't every politician do that? How can that be a disgrace for unions but not for your Governor or Senator or.........?
You need to do some research on socialsim, the socialist movement, and its relation to trade union. Look back at the early leaders for both.

Collective bargaining is far from insurance.
Here is a nice read from Marxists.org on trade unions and socialism. (http://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsky/1901/04/unions.htm)
Oh, I suppose then, that the unions in Poland and the effect they had there was just a 'fluke'.
I suppose that China embraces independent unions.
I suppose that ALL union members are paid equally
and are paid to do nothing but exist.

Unions ARE insurance. Insurance against usery and other unfair practices levied on workers.

Look, workers that earn a fair/living wage also pay taxes, also spend money buying goods and services that promote more business.

Now look at the statistics of unions. Only about 8% of all jobs are covered by 'unions' today. Yet I see and hear
all the complaints that 'unions are killing the economy'.
I think a look in a different direction is needed........not fingering unions. Also, large unions like UAW are working with their employers to secure a fair, workable solution to corporate economic needs.
The poison rhetoric just must stop, it is unfair and wrong.

k2vhw

10-18-2006, 05:10 AM

Quote[/b] (kf6rdn @ Oct. 17 2006,21:43)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,16:48)]It is the crowd who says "I may only have a high school education and no marketable skills, but because I breathe I want $15 an hour! What, I should go to school and learn something marketable to earn more? Hell no, I just want it handed to me!"
Not only that, you have the "I've been working as a cashier here for 65 years, so I deserve more pay!"

Yeah, the unions did great things in the turn of the century, and yes you should get paid for any hours you work, there ARE laws now for that sort of thing, yes?

But expecting MORE money then you are worth? #wal mart and the like should be temp employment for a kid going to school, or someone maybe supplanting retirement SS, not "making a living".
No, you're reading this all wrong. The masses (main stream) worker isn't asking for inflated wages and the laws you refer to are written FOR THE EMPLOYER. There are loopholes and vague rules that allow abuse. If you expect the laborer to rely on 'the law', you'll find (if you study these laws) that they have virtually NO PROTECTION. (Outside of minimum wage which is not a living wage for a family of even only 3.)
These union workers are not asking for a hand-out, they work.(sometimes 15 ~ 16 hours/day and sometimes two or 3 jobs/day.)
Jobs like Wal Mart aren't all for 'kids'. There are mothers/wives/fathers/husbands trying to live.
You simply must take all circumstances into account when you make determinations like yours.
You should consider yourself fortunate to have gone on to college or trade school........there are millions who can't afford that or simply don't have the ability. But they are HARD WORKING people. People who deserve to be treated fairly.

10-18-2006, 05:22 AM

Quote[/b] (k2vhw @ Oct. 17 2006,22:10)]Quote[/b] (kf6rdn @ Oct. 17 2006,21:43)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,16:48)]It is the crowd who says "I may only have a high school education and no marketable skills, but because I breathe I want $15 an hour! What, I should go to school and learn something marketable to earn more? Hell no, I just want it handed to me!"
Not only that, you have the "I've been working as a cashier here for 65 years, so I deserve more pay!"

Yeah, the unions did great things in the turn of the century, and yes you should get paid for any hours you work, there ARE laws now for that sort of thing, yes?

But expecting MORE money then you are worth? #wal mart and the like should be temp employment for a kid going to school, or someone maybe supplanting retirement SS, not "making a living".
No, you're reading this all wrong. #The masses (main stream) worker isn't asking for inflated wages and the laws you refer to are written FOR THE EMPLOYER. There are loopholes and vague rules that allow abuse. If you expect the laborer to rely on 'the law', you'll find (if you study these laws) that they have virtually NO PROTECTION. (Outside of minimum wage which is not a living wage for a family of even only 3.)
These union workers are not asking for a hand-out, they work.(sometimes 15 ~ 16 hours/day and sometimes two or 3 jobs/day.)
Jobs like Wal Mart aren't all for 'kids'. There are mothers/wives/fathers/husbands trying to live.
You simply must take all circumstances into account when you make determinations like yours.
You should consider yourself fortunate to have gone on to college or trade school........there are millions who can't afford that or simply don't have the ability. But they are HARD WORKING people. People who deserve to be treated fairly.
Can't afford to learn a skill to get a better job?

Sorry but if you are trying to support a family on Wal-Mart wages, your RESPONSIBILITY TO YOUR FAMILY is to do what it takes to get a better job.

Yeah, it takes some effort.

As far as can't afford to, around here the community college system is very affordable and anyone can afford it. Worst case scenario student loans can be had.

Wal-Mart even has a scholarship program for its employees....

k2vhw

10-18-2006, 05:24 AM

Quote[/b] (n7zsd @ Oct. 17 2006,21:51)]p.s. #Just wondering since I haven't been in Wal-Mart for quite some time...do they have those self-checkout stands? #I hate those things. #For starters, I despise having to tell it which language I want to use, and second, It takes away jobs from the store. #At a Fred Meyer in Idaho Falls, they have 4 of these things. #They have one person monitoring the whole thing, and two more behind them telling customers when one becomes available to use. #Meanwhile there are 10 empty regular checkstands. #Why not just take those 3 employees and put 'em each behind a cash register?
I suppose it's inevitable. Technology changes the workplace and the marketplace. Like the need for firemen on the railroad or TVM's* instead of ticket sellers or e-mail instead of postal mail, etc.
It's not a bad thing to have self-checkout stands provided the customer doesn't lose good service.
Technology allows people to do more work and that equates to productivity. It also means that the company can cut costs and offer attractive pricing.
I have had some instances of difficulty using those self-checkout registers but there was always immediate help from a supervisor and it wasn't bad.

*Ticket Vending Machines

n7zsd

10-18-2006, 05:41 AM

Quote[/b] (k2vhw @ Oct. 17 2006,22:24)]Quote[/b] (n7zsd @ Oct. 17 2006,21:51)]p.s. #Just wondering since I haven't been in Wal-Mart for quite some time...do they have those self-checkout stands? #I hate those things. #For starters, I despise having to tell it which language I want to use, and second, It takes away jobs from the store. #At a Fred Meyer in Idaho Falls, they have 4 of these things. #They have one person monitoring the whole thing, and two more behind them telling customers when one becomes available to use. #Meanwhile there are 10 empty regular checkstands. #Why not just take those 3 employees and put 'em each behind a cash register?
I suppose it's inevitable. Technology changes the workplace and the marketplace. Like the need for firemen on the railroad or TVM's* instead of ticket sellers or e-mail instead of postal mail, etc.
It's not a bad thing to have self-checkout stands provided the customer doesn't lose good service.
Technology allows people to do more work and that equates to productivity. It also means that the company can cut costs and offer attractive pricing.
I have had some instances of difficulty using those self-checkout registers but there was always immediate help from a supervisor and it wasn't bad.

*Ticket Vending Machines
[QUOTE]

Oh, I suppose you are right...technology is a wonderful thing, I guess in my aging years I am longing for the old soda fountain days and the smell of linseed oil on the hardwood floors of the Western Auto store. #Mostly I miss the comradery with the shop owners. #Talking about fishing while fondling a new reel. #Seems that retail has got to be quite impersonal.

k2vhw

10-18-2006, 05:43 AM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,22:22)]Yeah, it takes some effort.

As far as can't afford to, around here the community college system is very affordable and anyone can afford it. Worst case scenario student loans can be had.

Wal-Mart even has a scholarship program for its employees....
Well just try and go to 'school' when you're earning minimum wages (or nearly) and working 3 jobs or even only 2. Putting in 18 hours/day and supporting a family.

You're thinking SINGLE, NO RESPONSIBILITIES other than yourself. Rent, food, clothing, transportation medical..........how?

There are families of 3 (mother, father 1 child) where both mother and father work and add to their costs is child daycare.
You make it sound so easy, so 'do-able'. What about the millions of those out in the workforce who simply aren't capable of high skill learning. #Shall we just 'dispose of them'? Shall we simply say 'let them rot away'? Or can we offer them FAIR/LIVING wages for hard work to enable them to at least give their children a shot at what you and I have.
You want to see the welfare rolls shrink? Put more people to work with FAIR/LIVING wages and they'll be putting money INTO THE WELFARE BUDGETS. (taxes)

We are not going to solve the problems of our economy by isolating and disenfranchising those workers.

k2vhw

10-18-2006, 05:59 AM

Quote[/b] (n7zsd @ Oct. 17 2006,22:41)]Oh, I suppose you are right...technology is a wonderful thing, I guess in my aging years I am longing for the old soda fountain days and the smell of linseed oil on the hardwood floors of the Western Auto store. #Mostly I miss the comradery with the shop owners. #Talking about fishing while fondling a new reel. #Seems that retail has got to be quite impersonal.
Ya know, I agree. I remember those days too. (I'm 64)
I remember the old soda fountain in the drug store or down in the 5 & 10 store! The barber shop and that 'comraderie' exchanging stories.
They are only memories for most of us. Every once-in-a-while I'll be driving through a small village that still has the soda-fountain and 'malt-shop'. I can't help myself from stopping and enjoying.
I remember when the largest store around was an A & P* market! No Wal-Mart or K-mart. but we did have SEARS Roebuck & Co.

*The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea company I think!

n7zsd

10-18-2006, 06:06 AM

Man, talk about a memory jogger! I remember the A & P stores. Seems there was one in one of the nearby towns. (we had to drive a ways to do almost anything).
This has inspired me to start a new topic on the forum...enough of Wal-Mart for me..I'd rather live in the past!http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

k2vhw

10-18-2006, 06:25 AM

Quote[/b] (n7zsd @ Oct. 17 2006,23:06)]Man, talk about a memory jogger! #I remember the A & P stores. #Seems there was one in one of the nearby towns. (we had to drive a ways to do almost anything).
This has inspired me to start a new topic on the forum...enough of Wal-Mart for me..I'd rather live in the past!http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I believe they were 'happier' times. But don't get lost in the past, Craig, we have a lot to be thankful for here in the present.
I grew up in a friendlier time. When I (and still do) loved the Christmas holiday. The spirit of 'good cheer' and 'peace' and fellowship.
I enjoyed spending time with friends setting up their Christmas trees.
I feel we've drifted away from that 'old-time' ideal.
We've extended life into the 70's on average (up from 40's & 50's), beat diseases that took thousands of lives like Polio (infantile paralysis) but we've become hardened to human needs and feelings.
Sometimes I believe it is good to take a look back and remember where we came from so we can reaffirm where it is we want to go. But don't spend too much time in the past or risk getting lost!! LOL

k2vhw

10-18-2006, 06:48 AM

KF4PEP

I just remembered another story to support unions.

I was at my physician's office last week having an exam. The 'technician' came to draw my blood and in a conversation I found out she was working in the doctor's office (8 hour day) after just getting off duty at the local hospital (another 8 hour day overnight.)
Now here's a woman WITH education and SKILL but because there is no union at the hospital or doctor's office, she cannot get a decent pay to work a standard day! There isn't anyone to help her avoid abuse and usery. So she puts in a 16 hour day + travel time and must go home to care for children and be a homemaker.

This to help pay for all the needs of her family. Now I don't know what she is earning but if you add up all the costs and taxes on her earnings you find it is not good if she needs to work 2 jobs.

Or how about a coworker who was injured on the job and was discharged avoiding liability of medical and disability. Take a look at your local workers' comp.law benefits........sickening.
Having worked at a job covered by a union, I have heard a thousand stories of abuse by employers over my 30 year tenure. You would be amazed at the attempts by my own former employer to deny due compensation even WITH a union and signed contract. Without a union workers have zero chance of help.

n2ize

10-18-2006, 08:30 AM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,17:09)]Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Oct. 17 2006,16:57)]Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Oct. 17 2006,16:43)]I always wonder why the union thugs are singling out Wal-mart other than having the prospect of forcing several hundred-thousand employees to pay union dues. Which that is all a union does for you, the right to strike and pay dues and takes away your right to negotiate your own wages.

Secondly, I found that Wal-mart pays just as well or better than Target, Sears, or any other competitor.

Shall I say greed?
Quote[/b] ]
I alwas wonder why the union thugs are singling out Wal-mart other than having the prospect of forcing several hundred-thousand employees to pay union dues. Which that is all a union does for you, the right to strike and pay dues and takes away your right to negotiate your own wages.

Puleeeze !! You have got to be joking me. Negotiate their own wages ?? Yeah right. Go quit your present job , go work for Wal mart, and then go negotiate a wage with them and see how long you last. As far as the idea that all a union does is make you pay dues I would advise you enroll in a course in American History and pay close attention to the industrial era and labor relations in America.

As far as union thugs go talk to the unionized firemen and first responders who died while trying to save lives during 911.
As a volunteer firefighter I can tell you that the firefighters union, the IAFF, cares more about creating more union members than the safety of the public.

Nice strawman arguement, but even in this case it does not wash.
Maybe but it also gets them better pay, health benefits, retirement pensions and the abilkity to negotiate for improvements when and where needed.

n2ize

10-18-2006, 09:27 AM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,21:42)]Quote[/b] (k2vhw @ Oct. 17 2006,21:36)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,21:19)]Yup, I have. Well it was $7.45. I was even able to go to school part time doing it and save some money.

How? Responsibility. I don't smoke, I didn't pay $65 a month for 100 cable channels, I didn't go into debt for a flashy new car I really couldn't afford. My entertainment was ham radio/sw listening with used radios I saved for, fishing where I ate my catch, and mountain biking where I also rode my bike often to save gas and auto maintenance. I rented an apartment I could afford. I sold stuff at flea markets to make extra $$$ or worked overtime when I could.

I made it fine. Of course I didn't spend $300 a month of beer and smokes, $65 on cable, $300 on a car payment, I cooked at home insteda of eating out, I was responsible enough not to have kids I could not afford, etc.

And I did not see that $7.45 job as a career, but a temporary point while I was preparing for better.
Very good! You were a responsible youth. But you were SINGLE. You didn't have a family to support. You were young and growing. YOU HAD NO OTHER RESPONSIBILITIES.
We're talking FAMILIES. Again.....stop thinking that rhetoric, 'to hell with them........I have mine' or "I deserve it, they don't".
You deny the American dream of having family? Again, I am not saying that we must pay inflated wages, but please think about paying workers enough to live a simple life as I have outlined in this thread before.
Sure have a family.... WHEN YOU CAN AFFORD IT.

Popping out a child does not make your labor worth more than before you had the child. And having a child when your most lucrative career oppertunity if Wal-Mart or Waffle House is irresponsible... so should we reward irresponsibility by saying "lets make sure they can raise a child?'

I say we encourage responsibility.

Oh, and I could easily with two people making that much have raised a child were I forced to. It would have meant working opposite shifts so we did not have to pay for child care (of course making that much you can get it free, but I don't go for handouts from the.gov) or me working two jobs, but it can be done.
Quote[/b] ]
Popping out a child does not make your labor worth more than before you had the child. And having a child when your most lucrative career oppertunity if Wal-Mart or Waffle House is irresponsible... so should we reward irresponsibility by saying "lets make sure they can raise a child?'

Oh thats how it happens ?? A child just pops out ? And once that child does "pop out" the argument that the top Fortune 500 company in the world which earned 288 billion in 2004 (topping Exxon) and which employes over 1.1 million Americans in 2004 shouldn't have to pay a decent wage or offer it's employees affordable health care but rather they should collect social services (as Walmart encourages them to do) and thereby shift the burden to taxpayers. Sorry, somethings very wrong with that equation.

Likewise your argument that all the average Walmart employee needs to do is simply attend a community college and get a better job is flawed. First and foremost there are many people who have done just that and guess where they are working.... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif . Secondly you are leaving an enormous number of variables out of your argument and you are also ignoring several working concepts of basic economics. One thing I have learned from this thread. A ham licence doesn't imply the slightest knowledge of basic economics.

I sincerely hope that Walmart workers do unionize. And I hope they are successful in getting Americas top employer to pay decent wages and decent benefits that a person WITH A FAMILY can survive on. especially in a day and age where retail work is fast becoming the norm for many Americans with families. It would be one of the great moments in American history since the founding forefathers invented America.

w2amr

10-18-2006, 09:30 AM

As I mentioned in another thread, #I worked in a factory for over 20 years. Our wages were almost 30% higher than non union factories, and we had benefits that they could only dream of. Large corporations have teams of lawyers and lobbyist protecting #their interest. I see nothing wrong with employees having unions to protect theirs as well. And please don't give me any of that horse #### about unions forcing companies to move their operations to other countries. Union membership is at an all time low, yet companies continue to send jobs overseas at a record pace. As corporations make record profits and corporate executives continue make outrageous sums of money, #lower tier employees are having their salaries cut and benefits slashed.
American workers have a right to collective bargaining, it's the LAW. #
taft/hartley (http://vi.uh.edu/pages/buzzmat/tafthartley.html)

KC2KFC

10-18-2006, 09:51 AM

Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 17 2006,16:50)]Maybe the workers are LOOKING for a union to help improve their quality of life. Better wages, health care, etc. So it cuts into Wal-marts bloated bottom line a bit, who cares.
Walmart's bottom line won't be cut. The management knows what they need to make a profit. Prices will simply go up to cover the higher cost of labor. In the end it's the poor folks who shop there who will end up paying for the wage increase. It's kind of like saying we need to tax those evil big corporations more, so they pay their fair share. Problem is they just factor that into their product costs and raise the price WE pay to cover it. Corporations don't pay taxes, they merely collect them. WE pay the taxes.

w2amr

10-18-2006, 09:55 AM

Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 18 2006,02:51)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 17 2006,16:50)]Maybe the workers are LOOKING for a union to help improve their quality of life. Better wages, health care, etc. So it cuts into Wal-marts bloated bottom line a bit, who cares.
Walmart's bottom line won't be cut. The management knows what they need to make a profit. Prices will simply go up to cover the higher cost of labor. In the end it's the poor folks who shop there who will end up paying for the wage increase. It's kind of like saying we need to tax those evil big corporations more, so they pay their fair share. Problem is they just factor that into their product costs and raise the price WE pay to cover it. Corporations don't pay taxes, they merely collect them. WE pay the taxes.
All the more reason to vote for a democrat.

K8TEK

10-18-2006, 12:22 PM

Walmarts problem is the number of worthless employees they have working per shift. When their is nobody shopping at the store, they still have cart pushers outside, greeters inside and a number of worthless casheers doing nothing.

Their problem is they are over-employing. I could care less if I walk into a store and I have to get my own shopping cart, eliminate that position around the country and think of how many millions of dollars could be saved. It's not like they are losing money, they just aren't making enough!

KC2KFC

10-18-2006, 12:23 PM

Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,02:55)]Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 18 2006,02:51)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 17 2006,16:50)]Maybe the workers are LOOKING for a union to help improve their quality of life. Better wages, health care, etc. So it cuts into Wal-marts bloated bottom line a bit, who cares.
Walmart's bottom line won't be cut. The management knows what they need to make a profit. Prices will simply go up to cover the higher cost of labor. In the end it's the poor folks who shop there who will end up paying for the wage increase. It's kind of like saying we need to tax those evil big corporations more, so they pay their fair share. Problem is they just factor that into their product costs and raise the price WE pay to cover it. Corporations don't pay taxes, they merely collect them. WE pay the taxes.
All the more reason to vote for a democrat.
How do you figure? What can democrats do differently?

w2amr

10-18-2006, 12:40 PM

Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 18 2006,05:23)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,02:55)]Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 18 2006,02:51)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 17 2006,16:50)]Maybe the workers are LOOKING for a union to help improve their quality of life. Better wages, health care, etc. So it cuts into Wal-marts bloated bottom line a bit, who cares.
Walmart's bottom line won't be cut. The management knows what they need to make a profit. Prices will simply go up to cover the higher cost of labor. In the end it's the poor folks who shop there who will end up paying for the wage increase. It's kind of like saying we need to tax those evil big corporations more, so they pay their fair share. Problem is they just factor that into their product costs and raise the price WE pay to cover it. Corporations don't pay taxes, they merely collect them. WE pay the taxes.
All the more reason to vote for a democrat.
How do you figure? What can democrats do differently?
"Corporations don't pay taxes, they merely collect them. WE pay the taxes".
I think a democrat is more likely to help that situation.

KC2KFC

10-18-2006, 12:57 PM

Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,05:40)]Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 18 2006,05:23)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,02:55)]Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 18 2006,02:51)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 17 2006,16:50)]Maybe the workers are LOOKING for a union to help improve their quality of life. Better wages, health care, etc. So it cuts into Wal-marts bloated bottom line a bit, who cares.
Walmart's bottom line won't be cut. The management knows what they need to make a profit. Prices will simply go up to cover the higher cost of labor. In the end it's the poor folks who shop there who will end up paying for the wage increase. It's kind of like saying we need to tax those evil big corporations more, so they pay their fair share. Problem is they just factor that into their product costs and raise the price WE pay to cover it. Corporations don't pay taxes, they merely collect them. WE pay the taxes.
All the more reason to vote for a democrat.
How do you figure? What can democrats do differently?
"Corporations don't pay taxes, they merely collect them. WE pay the taxes".
I think a democrat is more likely to help that situation.
I guess we have to agree to disagree. I don't see democrats doing anything differently. They rely on donations from corporations just as much as republicans. Actually the republicans get more small money donations from individuals than the democrats do. Even when the democrats had control of congress union membership was waning. Both parties take our money and make all kinds of promises, but in the end they do what they damn well please.

w2amr

10-18-2006, 01:22 PM

Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 18 2006,05:57)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,05:40)]Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 18 2006,05:23)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,02:55)]Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 18 2006,02:51)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 17 2006,16:50)]Maybe the workers are LOOKING for a union to help improve their quality of life. Better wages, health care, etc. So it cuts into Wal-marts bloated bottom line a bit, who cares.
Walmart's bottom line won't be cut. The management knows what they need to make a profit. Prices will simply go up to cover the higher cost of labor. In the end it's the poor folks who shop there who will end up paying for the wage increase. It's kind of like saying we need to tax those evil big corporations more, so they pay their fair share. Problem is they just factor that into their product costs and raise the price WE pay to cover it. Corporations don't pay taxes, they merely collect them. WE pay the taxes.
All the more reason to vote for a democrat.
How do you figure? What can democrats do differently?
"Corporations don't pay taxes, they merely collect them. WE pay the taxes".
I think a democrat is more likely to help that situation.
I guess we have to agree to disagree. I don't see democrats doing anything differently. They rely on donations from corporations just as much as republicans. Actually the republicans get more small money donations from individuals than the democrats do. Even when the democrats had control of congress union membership was waning. Both parties take our money and make all kinds of promises, but in the end they do what they damn well please.
Democrats WERE labor friendly at one time. If they gain control of the House and/or Senate we will see if that has changed.

K9QJ

10-18-2006, 01:31 PM

I read somewhere that each Walton is worth 19 BILLION dollars. Ok this is America ETC.ETC . Even Bill Gates spreads it around. How rich do you have to be? Money is a lot like manure...if you pile it up in one place it stinks like hell, but if youspread it around, it does a lot of good.

10-18-2006, 02:34 PM

Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,05:40)]Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 18 2006,05:23)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,02:55)]Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 18 2006,02:51)]Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 17 2006,16:50)]Maybe the workers are LOOKING for a union to help improve their quality of life. Better wages, health care, etc. So it cuts into Wal-marts bloated bottom line a bit, who cares.
Walmart's bottom line won't be cut. The management knows what they need to make a profit. Prices will simply go up to cover the higher cost of labor. In the end it's the poor folks who shop there who will end up paying for the wage increase. It's kind of like saying we need to tax those evil big corporations more, so they pay their fair share. Problem is they just factor that into their product costs and raise the price WE pay to cover it. Corporations don't pay taxes, they merely collect them. WE pay the taxes.
All the more reason to vote for a democrat.
How do you figure? What can democrats do differently?
"Corporations don't pay taxes, they merely collect them. WE pay the taxes".
I think a democrat is more likely to help that situation.
You do not grasp the reality of it.

No matter how much you raise taxes on that corporation, they are going to pass that cost on to the consumer just like any other expense.

The only way to "help" is lower taxes on corporations.

10-18-2006, 02:55 PM

Quote[/b] (k2vhw @ Oct. 17 2006,22:43)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 17 2006,22:22)]Yeah, it takes some effort.

As far as can't afford to, around here the community college system is very affordable and anyone can afford it. Worst case scenario student loans can be had.

Wal-Mart even has a scholarship program for its employees....
Well just try and go to 'school' when you're earning minimum wages (or nearly) and working 3 jobs or even only 2. Putting in 18 hours/day and supporting a family.

You're thinking SINGLE, NO RESPONSIBILITIES other than yourself. Rent, food, clothing, transportation medical..........how?

There are families of 3 (mother, father 1 child) where both mother and father work and add to their costs is child daycare.
You make it sound so easy, so 'do-able'. What about the millions of those out in the workforce who simply aren't capable of high skill learning. #Shall we just 'dispose of them'? Shall we simply say 'let them rot away'? Or can we offer them FAIR/LIVING wages for hard work to enable them to at least give their children a shot at what you and I have.
You want to see the welfare rolls shrink? Put more people to work with FAIR/LIVING wages and they'll be putting money INTO THE WELFARE BUDGETS. (taxes)

We are not going to solve the problems of our economy by isolating and disenfranchising those workers.
No, I know many people in just that situation who are still going to school to better thier lot in life.

It is very possible to go to school while earning minimum wage with a family. I have a married couple I am friends with doing just that. It is called discipline and responsibility.

People not capable of high skill learning? It does not take that much to learn many "high skill" trades, but if your IQ is indeed such that the cash register at wally world is the most complicated skill you can grasp, well maybe you have reached the pinnacle of your career. Then again do we really want folks that stupid raising kids?

But even for these "slow learning" types there are alternatives. There is a huge demand nationwide for CNA's, Certified Nursing Assistants. You can get your CNA in 6 months, or even less, of night classes, and the most complicated task is taking blood pressure. I have met some really, really dense CNA's. And with the baby boomers aging and various care facilities growing the demand for CNA's will only grow for the next 20 years.

BTW when you talk about welfare, paying somone more than thier labor is worth is just another form of welfare, but instead of the government taking your taxes to pay for it the employer raises his prices to pay for it.

10-18-2006, 03:04 PM

Quote[/b] (k2vhw @ Oct. 17 2006,23:48)]KF4PEP

I just remembered another story to support unions.

I was at my physician's office last week having an exam. The 'technician' came to draw my blood and in a conversation I found out she was working in the doctor's office (8 hour day) after just getting off duty at the local hospital (another 8 hour day overnight.)
Now here's a woman WITH education and SKILL but because there is no union at the hospital or doctor's office, she cannot get a decent pay to work a standard day! There isn't anyone to help her avoid abuse and usery. So she puts in a 16 hour day + travel time and must go home to care for children and be a homemaker.

This to help pay for all the needs of her family. Now I don't know what she is earning but if you add up all the costs and taxes on her earnings you find it is not good if she needs to work 2 jobs.

Or how about a coworker who was injured on the job and was discharged avoiding liability of medical and disability. Take a look at your local workers' comp.law benefits........sickening.
Having worked at a job covered by a union, I have heard a thousand stories of abuse by employers over my 30 year tenure. You would be amazed at the attempts by my own former employer to deny due compensation even WITH a union and signed contract. Without a union workers have zero chance of help.
That technician is a Phlebotomist, about 6 weeks of school around here. They make $9-12 an hour. Not bad for that little investment in education. But it is the very lowest entry level job in the medical field.

But even so, we need to see what her account of "needs of the family are". I have as a volunteer firefighter/first responder been in countless homes of the "working poor" that had digital cable, the big screen TV from the local rent-to-own place, bass boat, and the brand new pickup with the $400 a month payment. Had they lived within a responsible window they could have cut $600-1000 a month in bills. But then they default on the ambulance bill because "we can't afford that!", and they are going to the ER for something they should be seeing a family doctor for... but at least they have the big screen.

n2ize

10-18-2006, 04:06 PM

Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,02:30)]As I mentioned in another thread, I worked in a factory for over 20 years. Our wages were almost 30% higher than non union factories, and we had benefits that they could only dream of. Large corporations have teams of lawyers and lobbyist protecting their interest. I see nothing wrong with employees having unions to protect theirs as well. And please don't give me any of that horse #### about unions forcing companies to move their operations to other countries. Union membership is at an all time low, yet companies continue to send jobs overseas at a record pace. As corporations make record profits and corporate executives continue make outrageous sums of money, lower tier employees are having their salaries cut and benefits slashed.
American workers have a right to collective bargaining, it's the LAW.
taft/hartley (http://vi.uh.edu/pages/buzzmat/tafthartley.html)
Good points George. Let's also remember that there are also many non-union professional jobs being sent overseas as well.

What amazes me is that there are some people who seem to be so upset with the idea of an unskilled worker making a good wage and having decent affordable benefits. It's not a whole lot to ask for especially from the nations biggest employer and wealthiest corporation. I can usnderstand if we were talking about welfare in which some people might have odds with the idea of someone receiving benefits whilke out of work. But in this case we are talking about people who are WORKING, many of them working more than 1 job and struggling to make ends meet. These people are not asking for a freebee or a handout, they are EARNING the little bit that wall fart pays them. And still many wal fart employees end ip working and signing up for welfare as wall mart encourages them to do since it'shealth care plan is UNNAFORDABLE but most wall fart workers.

Again,. if the richest and biggest Fortune 500 company can't treat it's workers any better than that then somethings wrong.

k2vhw

10-18-2006, 06:05 PM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 18 2006,08:04)]That technician is a Phlebotomist, about 6 weeks of school around here. They make $9-12 an hour. Not bad for that little investment in education. But it is the very lowest entry level job in the medical field.

But even so, we need to see what her account of "needs of the family are". I have as a volunteer firefighter/first responder been in countless homes of the "working poor" that had digital cable, the big screen TV from the local rent-to-own place, bass boat, and the brand new pickup with the $400 a month payment. Had they lived within a responsible window they could have cut $600-1000 a month in bills. But then they default on the ambulance bill because "we can't afford that!", and they are going to the ER for something they should be seeing a family doctor for... but at least they have the big screen.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but this "technician" worked in the hospital as a 'PN', her job in the doctor's office was as 'medical assistant & phlebotomist'. (My wife is also a 'medical assistant/phlebotomist' which took her one year of schooling!

As for the family you refer to who had 'big screen tv'; so then you would deny poor families television? #What would you have them do......come up with $20 ~ $40 to take their family to movie theaters for entertainment? #What is it, they can't have some of the things YOU might have (or want).
That 'family' probably puts more labor into their days' work than you have in your last 10 years. (Or mine, for that matter.) As for the large ticket items like the truck you allude to might certainly be a fault on their part. We are all victims of 'mistakes' at times.
All this aside, I'm directing my comments to FAIR/LIVING wages paid to hard working people; not control of families lives. #Who are we to dictate to anyone else how to live? #
It appears that you believe in denying workers a FAIR/LIVING wage in order to determine how to live.
You would dictate what they buy, what they eat, where they live, how they live by limiting wages.
Did it ever occur to you that many employers pay the rates they do to keep unions away? #Do you really believe that your employer would not pay you less if they could? #There are thousands of jobs not covered by collective bargaining units being paid well to keep unions away. Absent unions they'd be paid a lot less.
So, let's put unions aside.( Even though unions exist to foster FAIR/LIVING wages.)
How do you determine that $7 ~ $9 is a FAIR/LIVING wage? #Arbitrarily, I'll bet.
Oh, it might work if we can just deny those people from having ANYTHING. Just cheap food (unhealthy), used clothing (if that much), no automobile to get around (just have them dish-out cash for taxi or public transp), no medical coverage (let them go to the emergency room at the hospital where you and I foot the bill), and if they really get sick........do we let them fade away? Heartless!
Even still, we can dictate where they'll live.......perhaps a crime-filled, diseased gehtto will do; cram the family into a one room flat! #Yes, we could do that......and for what reason.........so WE could be the ones to determine what they're 'entitled to'.
We've been fortunate, we succeeded but they didn't so we're better.....they're 'not like US'. Therefore, we'll show them and discriminate. We will not even give their children a shot at a better life. #So we'll just perpetuate the 'screw them.......I got mine' credo.
I DON'T THINK SO. #Everyone is entitled at a chance to work hard and advance; not to be suppressed by subjugation.
NO FREE LUNCHES.......FAIR/LIVING WAGES FOR HARD WORKING PEOPLE.

W6ECE

10-18-2006, 06:15 PM

What is a FAIR/LIVING wage? #How is it determined?
$12 an hour? $20 and hour? $25 would be better so lets make it $30. No $35.75 would be better. So how much is Fair??

w2amr

10-18-2006, 06:35 PM

Quote[/b] (k2vhw @ Oct. 18 2006,11:05)]Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 18 2006,08:04)]That technician is a Phlebotomist, about 6 weeks of school around here. They make $9-12 an hour. Not bad for that little investment in education. But it is the very lowest entry level job in the medical field.

But even so, we need to see what her account of "needs of the family are". I have as a volunteer firefighter/first responder been in countless homes of the "working poor" that had digital cable, the big screen TV from the local rent-to-own place, bass boat, and the brand new pickup with the $400 a month payment. Had they lived within a responsible window they could have cut $600-1000 a month in bills. But then they default on the ambulance bill because "we can't afford that!", and they are going to the ER for something they should be seeing a family doctor for... but at least they have the big screen.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but this "technician" worked in the hospital as a 'PN', her job in the doctor's office was as 'medical assistant & phlebotomist'. (My wife is also a 'medical assistant/phlebotomist' which took her one year of schooling!

As for the family you refer to who had 'big screen tv'; so then you would deny poor families television? #What would you have them do......come up with $20 ~ $40 to take their family to movie theaters for entertainment? #What is it, they can't have some of the things YOU might have (or want).
That 'family' probably puts more labor into their days' work than you have in your last 10 years. (Or mine, for that matter.) As for the large ticket items like the truck you allude to might certainly be a fault on their part. We are all victims of 'mistakes' at times.
All this aside, I'm directing my comments to FAIR/LIVING wages paid to hard working people; not control of families lives. #Who are we to dictate to anyone else how to live? #
It appears that you believe in denying workers a FAIR/LIVING wage in order to determine how to live.
You would dictate what they buy, what they eat, where they live, how they live by limiting wages.
Did it ever occur to you that many employers pay the rates they do to keep unions away? #Do you really believe that your employer would not pay you less if they could? #There are thousands of jobs not covered by collective bargaining units being paid well to keep unions away. Absent unions they'd be paid a lot less.
So, let's put unions aside.( Even though unions exist to foster FAIR/LIVING wages.)
How do you determine that $7 ~ $9 is a FAIR/LIVING wage? #Arbitrarily, I'll bet.
Oh, it might work if we can just deny those people from having ANYTHING. Just cheap food (unhealthy), used clothing (if that much), no automobile to get around (just have them dish-out cash for taxi or public transp), no medical coverage (let them go to the emergency room at the hospital where you and I foot the bill), and if they really get sick........do we let them fade away? Heartless!
Even still, we can dictate where they'll live.......perhaps a crime-filled, diseased gehtto will do; cram the family into a one room flat! #Yes, we could do that......and for what reason.........so WE could be the ones to determine what they're 'entitled to'.
We've been fortunate, we succeeded but they didn't so we're better.....they're 'not like US'. Therefore, we'll show them and discriminate. We will not even give their children a shot at a better life. #So we'll just perpetuate the 'screw them.......I got mine' credo.
I DON'T THINK SO. #Everyone is entitled at a chance to work hard and advance; not to be suppressed by subjugation.
NO FREE LUNCHES.......FAIR/LIVING WAGES FOR HARD WORKING PEOPLE.
Bravo, well done.

10-18-2006, 06:42 PM

Quote[/b] (W6ECE @ Oct. 18 2006,11:15)]What is a FAIR/LIVING wage? #How is it determined?
$12 an hour? $20 and hour? $25 would be better so lets make it $30. No $35.75 would be better. So how much is Fair??
Well, depends on how you do it.

If you let the free market deceide, you get a real amount.

If you let the unions push it, a guy with a GED who puts lugnuts on a car should get $35 an hour or more.

KC2KFC

10-18-2006, 06:47 PM

Quote[/b] (k2vhw @ Oct. 18 2006,11:05)]All this aside, I'm directing my comments to FAIR/LIVING wages paid to hard working people; not control of families lives. Who are we to dictate to anyone else how to live?
It appears that you believe in denying workers a FAIR/LIVING wage in order to determine how to live.
You would dictate what they buy, what they eat, where they live, how they live by limiting wages.
Did it ever occur to you that many employers pay the rates they do to keep unions away? Do you really believe that your employer would not pay you less if they could? There are thousands of jobs not covered by collective bargaining units being paid well to keep unions away. Absent unions they'd be paid a lot less.
So, let's put unions aside.( Even though unions exist to foster FAIR/LIVING wages.)
How do you determine that $7 ~ $9 is a FAIR/LIVING wage?...

...NO FREE LUNCHES.......FAIR/LIVING WAGES FOR HARD WORKING PEOPLE.
What would you consider a fair living wage? How much per hour?

w2amr

10-18-2006, 06:57 PM

Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 18 2006,11:47)]Quote[/b] (k2vhw @ Oct. 18 2006,11:05)]All this aside, I'm directing my comments to FAIR/LIVING wages paid to hard working people; not control of families lives. #Who are we to dictate to anyone else how to live? #
It appears that you believe in denying workers a FAIR/LIVING wage in order to determine how to live.
You would dictate what they buy, what they eat, where they live, how they live by limiting wages.
Did it ever occur to you that many employers pay the rates they do to keep unions away? #Do you really believe that your employer would not pay you less if they could? #There are thousands of jobs not covered by collective bargaining units being paid well to keep unions away. Absent unions they'd be paid a lot less.
So, let's put unions aside.( Even though unions exist to foster FAIR/LIVING wages.)
How do you determine that $7 ~ $9 is a FAIR/LIVING wage?...

...NO FREE LUNCHES.......FAIR/LIVING WAGES FOR HARD WORKING PEOPLE.
What would you consider a fair living wage? How much per hour?
How about, Whatever the union can negotiate. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

KC2KFC

10-18-2006, 06:59 PM

Quote[/b] (w2amr @ Oct. 18 2006,11:57)]Quote[/b] (KC2KFC @ Oct. 18 2006,11:47)]Quote[/b] (k2vhw @ Oct. 18 2006,11:05)]All this aside, I'm directing my comments to FAIR/LIVING wages paid to hard working people; not control of families lives. Who are we to dictate to anyone else how to live?
It appears that you believe in denying workers a FAIR/LIVING wage in order to determine how to live.
You would dictate what they buy, what they eat, where they live, how they live by limiting wages.
Did it ever occur to you that many employers pay the rates they do to keep unions away? Do you really believe that your employer would not pay you less if they could? There are thousands of jobs not covered by collective bargaining units being paid well to keep unions away. Absent unions they'd be paid a lot less.
So, let's put unions aside.( Even though unions exist to foster FAIR/LIVING wages.)
How do you determine that $7 ~ $9 is a FAIR/LIVING wage?...

...NO FREE LUNCHES.......FAIR/LIVING WAGES FOR HARD WORKING PEOPLE.
What would you consider a fair living wage? How much per hour?
How about, Whatever the union can negotiate. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
How about an actual dollar amount you think is a fair living wage? Seriously what should a stock person be paid per hour? How much should a cashier be paid per hour? How about a lot attendent how much should they be paid per hour?

W5HTW

10-18-2006, 11:27 PM

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Oct. 18 2006,11:42)]Quote[/b] (W6ECE @ Oct. 18 2006,11:15)]What is a FAIR/LIVING wage? How is it determined?
$12 an hour? $20 and hour? $25 would be better so lets make it $30. No $35.75 would be better. So how much is Fair??
Well, depends on how you do it.

If you let the free market deceide, you get a real amount.

If you let the unions push it, a guy with a GED who puts lugnuts on a car should get $35 an hour or more.
Actually, when Ford Motors recently announced they were cutting 30,000 hourly jobs, they mentioned that the AVERAGE houlry compensation package for those workers was $64 and some change. I could somehow manage, even at my age, to put lug nuts on a car at 40 bucks an hour. Might be a struggle, but I bet I'd survive.

Ah, but then I would be making that darned car so expensive, that the person who buys it has to have a 600 a month car payment for seven years. No darned wonder Ford Motors is having trouble.

And someone said Toyota, I think it was, in their US plants, is paying 35 dollars AVERAGE for hourly workers.

On Wal-Mart, there is a new Super-Dooper-Do-ALL Walmart coming to down. They will have not only car and gasoline sales, oil changes, and everything the Super Store carries now, but they also will have pets, medicines, doctors, lawyers, restaurants, apartments, condos, swimming pools, and farms, all under one roof. Once inside, you are never allowed to leave again.

And they will have an ER for the sticker shock.

However, WalMart did tell us around here that when their new super store moved in (and this is NOT a joke!) and caused some of the small family owned businesses to be shut down, not to worry - WalMart would provide those people jobs.

Ah, the American dream. Close your business and work for WalMart.

Ed

k2vhw

10-19-2006, 12:48 AM

Quote[/b] (W6ECE @ Oct. 18 2006,11:15)]What is a FAIR/LIVING wage? #How is it determined?
$12 an hour? $20 and hour? $25 would be better so lets make it $30. No $35.75 would be better. So how much is Fair??
A FAIR/LIVING wage is determined regionally. #It is determined by COST OF LIVING. It is the reason why sanitation workers in NYC may have to earn $20/hr while in a rural town in middle America they might only earn $12.00/hr.
But there aren't many (if any) places a family can survive in dignity on $7.00/hr. #That figure was mainly determined to be suitable for a single person with no dependents.
With an average of $10/hr, a family might survive IF only one member works and puts in over 60 hours/week. If two members work it makes it better-- but with children then daycare costs mount AND the children suffer from not having daily parental presence. (This could lead to social problems down the road. This adds to the public support of costly 'social programs'.......which should have been addressed by the parents to begin with).
A FAIR/LIVING wage is always that which allows the worker and their families to live with dignity and basic needs.....good food, decent housing, clothing, medical care and education. (If we can't teach the children to feed and care for themselves, we have failed.)

Here in the New York City/New Jersey region it is very difficult to achieve dignity with a gross income below $25,000. After federal, state, city taxes and all the 'hidden' taxes (excise) reduce a workers' spendable cash to about half ($12,000). THAT IS $33.00 PER DAY LEFT TO SPEND ON NECESSITIES!!
$25,000/year gross is about $12.00/hour (40 hour week)

KC2KFC

10-19-2006, 01:16 AM

Speaking of taxes, here is an interesting site for calculating the marginal and effective tax rates.
Marginal Tax Calculator (http://www.dinkytown.net/java/TaxMargin.html)

K3XR

10-19-2006, 12:55 PM

Corporations do not exist for employees, they exist to make a profit for their owners and stock holders. This is called CAPITALISM, which I realize most of you Leftists can't stand. #Last time I checked, the labor laws permit these workers to vote for union representation, apparently they have #chosen not to do so. #The hate Wal Mart crowd is like the hate America crowd, they complain about how bad the country is, when at the same time, people are digging tunels under our borders to get in to the country. #They complain about Wal Mart, which continues to expand, and somehow manages to find all these abused non-union workers to staff their stores.

Make no mistake about it, the union thugs want control over this group of people, and in particular, control of their of their union dues to further the Leftist agenda in this country.

N9XR

10-19-2006, 02:00 PM

Quote[/b] (K3XR @ Oct. 18 2006,23:55)]Corporations do not exist for employees, they exist to make a profit for their owners and stock holders. This is called CAPITALISM, which I realize most of you Leftists can't stand. Last time I checked, the labor laws permit these workers to vote for union representation, apparently they have chosen not to do so. The hate Wal Mart crowd is like the hate America crowd, they complain about how bad the country is, when at the same time, people are digging tunels under our borders to get in to the country. They complain about Wal Mart, which continues to expand, and somehow manages to find all these abused non-union workers to staff their stores.

Make no mistake about it, the union thugs want control over this group of people, and in particular, control of their of their union dues to further the Leftist agenda in this country.
I hope you enjoy large tax dollars going to entitlements for Wal Mart employees being underpaid.

Tell us how this plays into the Capitalism plan?

KC2KFC

10-19-2006, 04:04 PM

Quote[/b] (n9xr @ Oct. 19 2006,07:00)]Quote[/b] (K3XR @ Oct. 18 2006,23:55)]Corporations do not exist for employees, they exist to make a profit for their owners and stock holders. This is called CAPITALISM, which I realize most of you Leftists can't stand. Last time I checked, the labor laws permit these workers to vote for union representation, apparently they have chosen not to do so. The hate Wal Mart crowd is like the hate America crowd, they complain about how bad the country is, when at the same time, people are digging tunels under our borders to get in to the country. They complain about Wal Mart, which continues to expand, and somehow manages to find all these abused non-union workers to staff their stores.

Make no mistake about it, the union thugs want control over this group of people, and in particular, control of their of their union dues to further the Leftist agenda in this country.
I hope you enjoy large tax dollars going to entitlements for Wal Mart employees being underpaid.

Tell us how this plays into the Capitalism plan?
So Jerry I'll ask you. If you were the CEO/President or whatever of Walmart. How much would