Current mood:	irate
Current music:	the hype from the upcoming Trinidad v. Wright fight!
Entry tags:	current events

Midget Monkey Pirate Clown in a battle of wits with the NYT
UPDATE: Welcome Carnival of the Capitalists Readers!.  Please leave a comment to let me know you stopped by. If you enjoy the piece, by all means, have a look around.. 

Well, the article is here. 

BENTONVILLE, Ark. - With most of Wal-Mart's workers earning less than $19,000 a year, a number of community groups and lawmakers have recently teamed up with labor unions in mounting an intensive campaign aimed at prodding Wal-Mart into paying its 1.3 million employees higher wages.

Initially, this just doesn't make any sense.  No one has to work at Wal-Mart.  If Wal-Mart didn't pay enough, people wouldn't work there. 

Among workers at Wal-Mart's 3,700 stores across the United States, the debate is also heating up.
Frances Browning, for example, once earned $15 a hour, but now at Wal-Mart, where she is a cashier in Roswell, Ga., she is paid $9.43. She says she is happy to have the job.
"I was unemployed for two and a half years before I found my job at Wal-Mart," Ms. Browning, 57, said. "Like everybody else I'd love to make a lot more, but I have to be realistic."
But Jason Mrkwa, 27, a high school graduate who stocks frozen food at a Wal-Mart in Independence, Kan., maintains that he is underpaid. "I make $8.53, even though every one of my evaluations has been above standard," Mr. Mrkwa (pronounced MARK-wah) said. "You can't really live on this."

It is a very short list in this world of people who do not think they are underpaid.  Can Mr. Mrkwa master 10-key-by-touch?  Or the UPC/sku gun?  Because he might be able to make another 90 cents an hour.  I have no training in stocking frozen food, but I bet I could learn how in less than half a day.  (disclaimer - I was a world-class cashier as a teenager, before scanners.) 

"Wal-Mart should pay people at a minimum enough to go above the U.S. poverty line," said Andrew Grossman, executive director of Wal-Mart Watch, the coalition of community, environmental and labor groups running the series of ads criticizing Wal-Mart. "A company this big and this wealthy has the ability to pay higher wages."

Wal-Mart distributes products to consumers and sells them.  Andrew Grossman's JOB is to criticize Wal-Mart.  More on this later.

Michael T. Duke, chief of the company's stores division, said, "Wal-Mart is a very good place to work for our associates, and every day we make it even better."
Mr. Mrkwa, the food stocker, does not see it that way. With pay that brings him about $20,000 a year, he said he could not afford a decent apartment or a vehicle better than his 1991 Dodge Dakota. "I don't see why Wal-Mart can't pay more," Mr. Mrkwa said. "Unfortunately, in the market we live in there just aren't many jobs available."

Mr. Mrkwa doesn't see why Wal-Mart can't pay more.  He wants a better apartment and a better vehicle.  He takes frozen foods out of boxes and puts them in coolers.  Mr. Mrkwa apparently also doesn't see that it might just be up to him to improve his lot in life.  Although, if I were Michael T. Duke, I might be considering a bit of downsizing at Mr. Mrkwa's particular store.

Wal-Mart says its full-time workers average $9.68 an hour, and with many of them working 35 hours a week, their annual pay comes to around $17,600. That is below the $19,157 poverty line for a family of four, but above the $15,219 line for a family of three.

I just love this.  Here we see the glory that is America.  Full-time work at Wal-Mart is 35 hours per week.  I haven't had a 35 hour work week without taking a vacation day in 12 years.  I have only had 2 separate jobs once, for about a year.  I don't endorse it, but it certainly seems like there are a lot of hours left in the week to supplement one's income.  You know, to pay for that third dependent.  Since when is unskilled labor supposed to pay for a family?  Who has no skills?  The very young.  Who shouldn't have 3 dependents?  The very young.  Wal-Mart is full of 19-year-olds and retired people as their employees (note - previous statement based entirely on experience.  I have no statistical evidence).  These are starting jobs or 3rd career jobs.  The kind of jobs you might want if 50 hours / week seemed like it would cut into your fun time, or make you really tired.

Wal-Mart critics often note that corporations like Ford and G.M. led a race to the top, providing high wages and generous benefits that other companies emulated. They ask why Wal-Mart, with some $10 billion in profit on about $288 billion in revenue last year, cannot act similarly.
"Henry Ford made sure he paid his workers enough so that they could afford to buy his cars," said William McDonough, executive vice president of the United Food and Commercial Workers union. "Wal-Mart is doing the polar opposite of Henry Ford. Wal-Mart brags about how its low prices help poor Americans, but its low wages are helping increase the number of Americans in poverty."
Mr. Scott argues that retailers, with narrow profit margins, face a different competitive situation and cannot afford to be as generous to their workers as automakers and other capital-intensive companies.
"Some well-meaning critics," he said, "believe that Wal-Mart, because of our size, should play the role that General Motors played after World War II, and that is to establish the post-world-war middle class that the country is so proud of. The facts are that retailing doesn't perform that role in the economy as G.M. does or did. Retailing doesn't perform that role in any country in the world."

Well, let's see.  Mr. McDonough states that Wal-Mart, by paying wages that are too low, is increasing the number of Americans in poverty.  But the average Wal-Mart employee, working the average 35 hours, is above the poverty line for a FAMILY OF THREE.  I'm sure it's expensive to orient and train every employee, and Wal-Mart would prefer to keep employees rather than have high turnover, but don't you think that maybe, possibly, it's even more difficult to replace the guy who attaches the brake lines on Ford Tauruses all day long than it would be to replace, say, the guy who brings in the shopping carts from the parking lot over and over?  Do you think that when the shopping cart fetcher quits Wal-Mart, he runs out and gets a shoppingcartfetcher position at K-Mart or Target?  Is Wal-Mart at risk of that guy giving up the trade secrets?  That's why Henry Ford made sure.  Henry Ford gave his employees cheap loans to buy his cars, too.  An indebted employee is not as quick to tell you to go eff yourself.  Henry Ford was no fool.  Neither was Tennessee Ernie Ford:  "You load sixteen tons and what do you get?  Another day older and deeper in debt.  St. Peter don't you call me, 'cause I can't go.  I owe my soul to the company store."  Do you see Henry Ford's philosophy now, Mr. McDonough?  Do I have to sing it?

Many of those assailing Wal-Mart argue that the company can, and should, pay its workers at least $2 more an hour and add $1 or $2 an hour beyond that to improve its health benefits. A Harvard Business School study found that Wal-Mart paid $3,500 a year for each employee for health care, while the typical American corporation paid $5,600.

If Wal-Mart spent $3.50 an hour more for wages and benefits of its full-time employees, that would cost the company about $6.5 billion a year. At less than 3 percent of its sales in the United States, critics say, Wal-Mart could absorb these costs by slightly raising its prices or accepting somewhat lower profits.

I can't even believe the NYT would print this.  Why is Wal-Mart successful?  You in the back, yes? Exactly.  Wal-Mart is successful because all that crap they sell costs about 3 percent less than it does at Ace Hardware, Sears, CompUSA, and Winn-Dixie (The Beef People!).  If Wal-Mart raised its prices, is it possible they could lose some of their market share?  What happens when a company loses market share?  Reduction-in-Force.  Prices go up / people don't shop there as often / fewer frozen foods to be stocked / Mr. Mrkwa first to go. 

Wal-Mart argues that, as retailing companies go, it treats its workers better than average. It says 74 percent of its employees work full time, compared with fewer than 40 percent at many other retailers. But critics note that a leading competitor, Costco, pays $16 an hour - 65 percent more than the average wage at Wal-Mart stores and 33 percent more than the $12 average at its Sam's Club stores. At Costco, 82 percent of the workers are covered by company health insurance, compared with 48 percent at Wal-Mart.

I don't want to beat on a dead horse until I kill all the flies, but Costco and Sam's Club are warehouse stores.  First of all, Sam's Club is named after freakin' Sam WAL(-Mart)TON, and I  don't think you can buy stock in one and not the other.  On to Costco.  There are no greeters at Costco.  They  deal in bulk items.  They employ a lot of  forklift drivers, and hardly advertise at all.  Different profit margin?  I don't really know.  But it does seem like the positions that are available at Wal-Mart but not at Costco are the least-skilled positions.  Which means you have to pay more for skilled employees, so they don't quit to go drive the forklift at freakin' Sam's Club. 

George Whalin, president of Retail Management Consultants in San Marcos, Calif., said that Wal-Mart should ignore the attacks. "Retail has always paid poorly and it probably always will," he said. "Wal-Mart has a responsibility to serve their customers - to give them a good product - and to their shareholders. They don't have a responsibility to society to pay a higher wage than the law says you have to pay."

But Burt Flickinger, another retailing consultant, said it would be in Wal-Mart's long-run interest to pay better. "Wal-Mart's turnover will be close to half a million workers this year," he said. "By paying higher wages, Wal-Mart will make its employees happier and will reduce turnover. A lot of its new workers, for instance, don't know where to stock things. Higher wages will mean more productivity per person, and that should help raise profits."

Regarding Mr. Whalin's remarks:  Wal-Mart does not have a responsibility to society, etc.  PEOPLE, however, have a responsibility to contribute enough to society that they can support themselves.  Now, regarding Mr. Flickinger's comments:  All I can say is, if Mr. Flickinger knew enough about retail, he might be working for the nation's largest company, Wal-Mart, instead of consulting.  He's trying to help Wal-Mart's employees, by reducing turnover and improving productivity per person.  I'm going to type this very slowly, in case Mr. Flickinger is reading (the rest of you please don't be offended)  Increased....productivity...per...person...means...you...need...fewer...employees.  Some people will have higher wages, other people will get fired.  Or, we could have the nice balance of Wal-Mart paying its employees as little as they can, buying wholesale items in massive quantities, and passing the savings along to you, so with the 3 percent of the 100 bucks you spend per month at Wal-Mart, you can buy more things.  And so the beautiful cycle of life/market/life continues.

The debate is far from over. LaTasha Barker, a single mother who worked for two years as a cashier at a Sam's Club in Cicero, Ill., said she earned so little that she could not afford the $1,860 a year for family health insurance.
"They don't pay a living wage," said Ms. Barker, who quit her $8.40-an-hour job in 2004 to take a $15-an-hour social work job. While at Sam's, she said, she qualified for Medicaid and $139 a month in food stamps.
By contrast, Jamie Schifferer, manager of the health and beauty aids department at a Wal-Mart in Algonquin, Ill., said Wal-Mart was a terrific employer. She quit her $25,000-a-year post running a Cingular wireless shop to go to Wal-Mart.
After 20 months, she earns $12.50 an hour - close to her previous pay - but now works 40 hours a week rather than the 60 hours at Cingular.
"I was very miserable," she said. "As soon as I heard about this store opening, I jumped. It's perfect for me right now."

Ms. Barker first.  She went from a cashier job to a social work job.   Coincidentally, so did  I.  I went to college and graduate school in between, but our paths converge, nonetheless. Ms. Schifferer, on the other hand, left a 60 hour per week job to work forty hours.  Ms. Barker was trying to raise a family by doing a job that a 16 year old can do, but is disgruntled at the poor pay.  Ms. Schifferer chooses time over money and is happier. 

Ooh, I'm late.  Gotta run.

Best,
Mr. P.