quote: LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world's largest retailer, and its chief executive, Lee Scott, went on the offensive Thursday against critics of its employment policies and the impact its stores have on communities where they are located.
The company took out more than 100 full-page newspaper ads Thursday, outlining the wages and benefits it pays its employees and the good the Bentonville-based company says it brings to communities.
Scott said he wants Wal-Mart overcome its reputation as a company that does not pay well and has minimal full-time workers.
"We want to get those myths off the table, set the record straight," Scott said in a phone interview from New York City where he was making a round of media interviews Thursday.
Wal-Mart has been the target of lawsuits accusing the company of bias against women and not paying employees for all the hours they worked. Wal-Mart has vigorously fought the court actions.
The ad says the company's average pay is nearly twice the minimum wage, that 74 percent of its hourly workers are full time and that Wal-Mart offers health and life insurance, company stock and a 401-k retirement plan. Wal-Mart has more than 1 million domestic employees.
"We're taking this time to say, 'Hold on a minute, we have good jobs,'" Scott said.
Wal-Mart spokeswoman Mona Williams would not say how much the company spent on the advertising. The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal were among the papers in which Wal-Mart paid for the full-page ads.
The company has also been criticized by the United Food and Commercial Workers union, which continues to try to organize Wal-Mart workers. And Wal-Mart's failed attempt to put a store in Inglewood, Calif., where the retailer lost a referendum last year, painted the company as an unwanted source of traffic and low-paying jobs.
"I thought it was ridiculous," Scott said of the attention drawn by the Inglewood failure. "We had a record number of stores open this past year ... (and) this year we will open a record number of stores."
Scott said no one source of criticism prompted the new offensive. "I liken it to being nibbled to death by guppies," Scott said.
The company's Thanksgiving weekend sales failed to meet expectations, and Scott said that prompted Wal-Mart to become more aggressive in merchandising and the way it gets its message across.
But Scott said he does not dismiss concerns that people express when Wal-Mart wants to open a new store.
"I think there's lots of questions when Wal-Mart comes to a town that need to be answered. Not all of those questions are frivolous," he said.
Scott said he planned meetings with a variety of groups not associated with government to help explain Wal-Mart's employment practices, environment-related policies and how it deals with its suppliers. He would not name the organizations, saying did not want the groups to feel they were being used to garner media attention.
"We touch so many lives ... there is almost not a (non-government organization) that does not have an interest in what we as a company are doing," Scott said.
On this forum I've seen Wal-Mart really get trashed for being this all consuming, oppressive monster that cares nothing about worker rights or the welfare of the community. So are the numbers presented by the CEO meaningless? Is 74% full time actually a low number? I understand the issues of Wal-Mart forcing small businesses into bankruptcy because they can't compete, but putting that (which may also be debatable aside) is Wal-Mart really that bad of an employer?
Posted by Vána (Member # 6593) on :
[ January 13, 2005, 04:57 PM: Message edited by: Vána ]
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Agreed
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
In the version of the Sun Times I read today, the entire wal-mart add page was printed blurry like when you are seeing double vision. I was wondering if it was on purpose...
AJ
Posted by Architraz Warden (Member # 4285) on :
quote: Scott said no one source of criticism prompted the new offensive. "I liken it to being nibbled to death by guppies," Scott said.
Please say I'm not the only person who laughed out loud at this... The very limited number of employees I've known from there have said it was still not the worst place to work, but that it had gone steadly down hill ever since Sam Walton died.
Feyd Baron, DoC
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
You haven't seen that South Park episode have you??? Posted by Vána (Member # 6593) on :
That was an excellent South Park episode. Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Kind of the opposite of the Starbuck's episode.
Step 1...
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
"I can take many forms. Any form you like."
(Removes a fake mustache and puts on a top hat)
"How about this form?"
(Skipping alot of dialogue)
"Just tell us where the hell the heart is!"
(Walks over and opens a safe revealing a mirror)
"Whats with the stupid mirror?"
"You see......the heart of The Wall-Mart is the customer."
(Mirror smashed by one of our favorite South Park boys)
"What........no!!!!"
(Skipping alot)
(Wall-Mart disappears in a vortex and craps after it dies)
"Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa"
(Cartman walks off after laughing)
Yeah..........I love that episode!
Posted by Danzig avoiding landmarks (Member # 6792) on :
No one is forced to work there. Certainly I would try to avoid it if possible, but if I worked there I would have some shred of honor.
The real reason Wal-Mart sucks is because they censor their electronic media. For this reason I try to boycott them as much as is convenient in all things, and completely in electronic media.
Posted by dread pirate romany (Member # 6869) on :
Let's not forget the many, many local businesses that have been put out of business by Wal-Mart's undercutting, and the sweatshop labor.
Posted by Annie (Member # 295) on :
I have three good friends who work at Wal-Mart. Yes - it is that bad.
Posted by Annie (Member # 295) on :
Down with Fox Books!
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Hmmm. I haven't seen the Wal-mart episode. I think I would like to.
I know I've heard a lot of people complain about Wal-mart, it's big hulking, life-sucking power, the cruddy way it treats its employees. But I just haven't been able to muster up any desire to boycott the place.
I admit it. I love Wal-mart! Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:The real reason Wal-Mart sucks is because they censor their electronic media.
What do you mean? Is it just that they won't carry certain movies/albums/books because they are offensive to some people?
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
My God, the old 'average wage' trick! Is anyone still falling for that chestnut? It's so old, my textbooks in junior high warned about it!
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote: It's so old, my textbooks in junior high warned about it!
IIRC, that doesn't mean it's that old. How old are you anway, KoM?
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
25. But we had seriously ancient textbooks in math.
Posted by Danzig avoiding landmarks (Member # 6792) on :
Not so much that, as editing out the naughty words on any CDs they do carry. When they do it on the radio, it is always jarring. Who on earth would pay for that?
Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
quote:Let's not forget the many, many local businesses that have been put out of business by Wal-Mart's undercutting, and the sweatshop labor.
Ralph Nader has a pretty nifty speech about how Americans do not understand how truly "expensive" Walmart products are.
That $2.99 towel you are purchasing is going to cost you your job, take away some poor foreign worker's human rights, bolster the economy of a totalitarian regime, and destroy the environment. Yeah, quite a bargain.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Not so much that, as editing out the naughty words on any CDs they do carry. When they do it on the radio, it is always jarring. Who on earth would pay for that?
I would. I pay extra money to see movies that have the "naughty words" edited out.
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
I'm not familiar with the "average wage" trick. I'm assuming it's something like they pay most of their employees minimum wage but the high pay of a select few inflates the average wage. Do they get to include salaries in average wage?
[ January 13, 2005, 06:47 PM: Message edited by: Shigosei ]
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
It's so freaking wrong for them to edit cds. That drives me insane. Not that I like cussing, but come on, they sell guns! And cheap ammo! That's so much worse than a few f words here and there. Also, thrift stores and fleamarkets are better. I just got a wok for just 3.50! I get glasses worth 20 dollars for 5 dollars. I do not understand the use of paying large amounts of money for things you can get for cheap!
Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
For now, I don't have a huge problem with distributors editing out stuff or refusing to carry offensive material. As long as there are other outlets where we can find the original version easily and at a comparable price.
Posted by dread pirate romany (Member # 6869) on :
quote: That $2.99 towel you are purchasing is going to cost you your job, take away some poor foreign worker's human rights, bolster the economy of a totalitarian regime, and destroy the environment. Yeah, quite a bargain.
As a mom, I cannot justify paying alittle less for a toy or shirt for one of my kids, that may have been assembled by a kid not much older than them, for less wages than they get in pocket money.
Posted by dread pirate romany (Member # 6869) on :
Added to that, the second hand clothes I get, often for less than Wal-Mart prices, are usually of better quality.
Posted by Danzig avoiding landmarks (Member # 6792) on :
quote:I would. I pay extra money to see movies that have the "naughty words" edited out.
Good for you, although with the exception of taking the Lord's name in vain, I think you are overreacting. Is darn really less of a sin than damn, or screw less than f*ck? As for me, I am only offended by cursing if the person uttering it would condemn me for doing the same thing. I am much more offended by the cheapened experience, so I boycott Wal-Mart.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:It's so freaking wrong for them to edit cds. That drives me insane. Not that I like cussing, but come on, they sell guns! And cheap ammo!
Every single one of these things (selling edited CDs, selling guns, and selling cheap ammo) are things that make me more likely to shop at Wal-Mart.
Posted by Danzig avoiding landmarks (Member # 6792) on :
I have no problem with guns and ammo, but I have heard from somewhere (not necessarily a reliable source) that Wal-Mart's guns are fairly low quality. Is there any truth to that?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
They aren't top-of-the-line, but they aren't of poor quality either. The lower priced ones are decent low-end guns.
caveat: I never looked at handguns at Wal-Mart. I'm just talking about rifles and shotguns.
[ January 13, 2005, 07:22 PM: Message edited by: mr_porteiro_head ]
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
The only thing I can thing of that's wrong with cheap ammo is if it tends to malfunction, particularly if it malfunctions in an explosive manner.
I'm sort of surprised that edited CDs can be sold, after the discussion on the other thread about edited movies. I guess if the artists don't like their songs being edited, then I'd have a problem with walmart selling them. And it would definitely be a problem if doing so were actually illegal. But since Wal-Mart is not the only place to get music, I can't say I really care if they censor things. They're big and powerful, but they aren't the government.
Posted by peterh (Member # 5208) on :
I haven't stepped into a wal-marts in over 18 months and haven't purchased anything in a wal-marts in over 2 years.
The are the devil.
[ January 13, 2005, 09:50 PM: Message edited by: peterh ]
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Everything's the devil to you, Mama!
Posted by Danzig avoiding landmarks (Member # 6792) on :
It should not be illegal, but I try not to directly reinforce policies I disagree with. I believe private businesses, including but not limited to restaurants and bars, should have the right to discriminate against race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, legal and illegal drug use, and pretty much anything else, but I would make even more of an effort to boycott those businesses than I do Wal-Mart. Only government positions and services/persecutions should be forced to deal fairly with everyone.
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
quote: I understand the issues of Wal-Mart forcing small businesses into bankruptcy because they can't compete
Let me repeat myself:
Wal-mart.
Does.
Not.
Have.
Everything.
Small businesses SPROUT UP around walmarts. If they can't compete, it's their problem.
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
I don't think that Wal-Mart sells handguns. At least none of the ones I've ever been to in GA or VA. I buy my target ammo there, but not my self-defense ammo.
I wouldn't buy a gun from Wal-Mart for a number of reasons, but I have no objection to them sellign them.
Posted by maui babe (Member # 1894) on :
I would never want to work for Wal-Mart - or any retail business for that matter - but the people I know who work there have been happy with it compared to the other jobs available to them.
I personally don't like shopping at Wal-Mart, but here on Maui there aren't a lot of other options. Before Wal-Mart opened in October of 2001, there was a K-Mart and a Costco and that was it. Since Wal-Mart opened, prices have decreased in every store on the island. An example - prior to WM, milk sold for $6-7 a gallon everywhere. Since they opened, it now sells regularly for $3-3.50 everywhere. Sometimes a little competition (or a lot even) is a good thing.
I do shop at Wal-Mart for household type things: cleaning products, basic toiletries and paper products, school supplies, cat litter, light bulbs, and some groceries. I never buy clothing, shoes, kitchenware, small appliances or home decor items there. Partly because of the child labor thing, but also partly because the stuff they sell is tacky and junk.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
If they don't sell handguns in Virginia, they don't sell them anywhere. Except maybe Florida or Texas. Those guys are nuts down there. Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
The ads tell only a small part of the story. Here is some of what the ads won't say.
quote:On October 23, 2003, federal officers from the Department of Homeland Security's Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (known as "ICE"; formerly known as the Immigration and Naturalization Service or "INS") entered 61 Wal-Mart® stores in 21 states nationwide and arrested more than 250 illegal immigrants. This plan of action was dubbed "Operation Rollback" undoubtedly as a pun on Wal-Mart's advertising emphasizing its rollback of prices. According to a press release posted on ICE's website on the day of the raids, the arrests were "part of an ongoing investigation into the illegal employment of unauthorized workers in this country."
According to law enforcement, these raids grew out of prior investigations in 1998 and 2001 concerning cleaning contractors at Wal-Mart retail stores. As for Wal-Mart, it has consistently maintained that the workers were employed by independent contractors that it hired to do cleaning services. However, the U.S. Attorney's Office issued a target letter to the retail giant that alleged that the company violated federal immigration laws, and a grand jury was convened in early December to consider the case against Wal-Mart. U.S. Attorneys and company representatives have remained closed-mouthed regarding the details of the grand jury meeting as required under federal rules surrounding grand jury secrecy. Whether or not Wal-Mart ultimately faces immigration-related charges or fines will likely turn upon whether Wal-Mart officials "knowingly employed" illegal immigrants. However, Wal-Mart officials have pledged their cooperation with federal prosecutors in the investigation.
RICO Charges
On November 10, some of the arrested immigrant janitorial workers filed a federal racketeering class action lawsuit against Wal-Mart in a New Jersey federal court, alleging that Wal-Mart violated the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. According to the allegations in the complaint, all of the plaintiffs were undocumented aliens who worked for a contract cleaning service hired by Wal-Mart. All of these workers claim they were paid weekly compensation of $350-500 in cash, worked at least 60 hours per week, and were obligated to work 7 days a week. They also claim they received no overtime compensation, workers' compensation, or other benefits, nor did they have taxes or Social Security (FICA) withheld from their earnings.
The workers' complaint includes claims that Wal-Mart (a) engaged in federal "racketeering activity," including mail fraud, wire fraud, and bringing in and harboring aliens; (b) engaged in a federal racketeering conspiracy "for the purpose of defrauding and injuring the plaintiffs"; (c) conspired to violate the workers' civil rights by failing to pay them minimum wage, overtime, and by failing to provide them with workers' compensation and Social Security coverage; (d) failed to pay minimum wage and overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act, and (e) committed other violations under New Jersey Wage and Hour Law and Anti-Discrimination Law.
The basis of the claims against Wal-Mart is that the company, as a joint employer of the workers, "engaged in and profited from a nationwide fraudulent scheme designed to defraud the United States government." In the lawsuit, it is alleged that Wal-Mart "routinely makes use of the labor of undocumented immigrants" and that these workers "present a ready pool of easily exploited labor."
Posted by Danzig avoiding landmarks (Member # 6792) on :
If this country had moral immigration laws, that could not happen. Besides, it might be illegal to pay less than the minimum wage and withhold part of the worker's earnings, but it is not immoral. Obviously they were doing better here than in their home countries.
It is another reason to boycott them.
Posted by JaimeBenlevy (Member # 6222) on :
quote: Everything's the devil to you, Mama!
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Wow. they make more than I do... But 60 hours a week? Damn...
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
As far as human resources go, I've heard the horror stories, but I've also heard the good stories. My guess is that they aren't any worse that any of their competitors in the cheap-made-in-China-low-quality-goods retail stores sector (e.g. Kmart and Target.)
I go there to buy milk and certain grocery items, like Mac and Cheese and Ramen noodles, but most of the time would prefer to support local retailers and specialty stores, as long as they have somewhat competitive prices and excellent customer service (one thing WalMart does not have is good customer service. You get what you pay for.)
As far as CD "censorship," it's a non-issue. If you want a CD with some material cut, then buy it at Wal-Mart. If you want it without edits, then go somewhere else. Screaming "censorship" is not only misleading (censorship is when someone in power forces an artist to alter their work or face serious repercussions,) but it does no good.
Final analysis: Walmart does not =
edit: Adam13 beat me to it re: definition of censorship. He also stated my point better.
[ January 13, 2005, 08:47 PM: Message edited by: Brian J. Hill ]
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:As far as CD "censorship," it's a non-issue. If you want a CD with some material cut, then buy it at Wal-Mart. If you want it without edits, then go somewhere else. Screaming "censorship" is not only misleading (censorship is when someone in power forces an artist to alter their work or face serious repercussions,) but it does no good.
Actually, it does harm. When people cry "censorship" because Wal-Mart sells edited CDs or radio stations stop playing Dixie Chicks for a day, we are less likely to pay attention when there are instances of real censorship.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
I agree with mph. "Censorship" is one of those words which is used incorrectly (with negative results) about 90% of the time. It's a pet peeve, kinda like calling the U.S. a democracy. It's a REPUBLIC, people. The difference is subtle, but ignorance of it reveals a gross misunderstanding of how our nation was set up, and does all a disservice.
Anytime someone says "censorship," I am reminded of Inigo Montoya:
quote: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Posted by peterh (Member # 5208) on :
I think wal-marts is where that alligator got it's toothache...
Posted by Danzig avoiding landmarks (Member # 6792) on :
Laziness has once again got the best of me, for which I apologize. I should have just typed out editing for objectionable words. However, I still do not support this policy, and while it is not important enough to start a crusade, it is important enough to both do my negligible part in making in unprofitable, and bring it up when the topic is about grievances with Wal-Mart.
Posted by JonnyNotSoBravo (Member # 5715) on :
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)