"The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment is a truly important work-one that should be required reading not only for church leaders, but for all sober-minded laypeople as well."

John MacArthur (From the Foreword)

"If you were more discerning you’d probably buy this book. If you do read this book, you will be! This book on discernment is simple, clear, well-written and well-illustrated...

Mark Dever

Welcome to the online home of Tim Challies, blogger, author and web designer. My first book, "The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment," is now available everywhere.

Read about the book, about the blog or about the author.

03/29/06
Comments (36)

The Bully of Bentonville

The Bully of BentonvilleWal-Mart is the largest company in the world. It brings in revenues in excess of $280 billion, employs almost one and half million American workers, and controls a large share of the business done by almost every U.S. consumer-product company. More than 138 million shoppers stroll through its 5,300 stores each week. With a company so powerful and so immense, it is easy to find much to complain about. And really, grumbling about Wal-Mart has become popular—chic even.

The Bully of Bentonville is one in an increasingly long line of books, documentaries and articles detailing “how the high cost of Wal-Mart’s everyday low prices is hurting America.” It is written by Anthony Bianco, a senior writer at BusinessWeek who in 2003 coauthored an acclaimed cover story dealing with Wal-Mart.

To be honest, there is much about Wal-Mart that can and should concern us. Among the statistics Bianco wants American to know are:

  • The average Wal-Mart employee working full-time earns just $9.69 per hour, which adds up to less than $18,000 per year.
  • Only 44 percent of Wal-Mart employees are enrolled in the company medical plan. Most who are not enrolled cite the high cost of insurance premiums as the reason they are unable to enjoy the medical benefits.
  • 46 percent of the children of Wal-Mart employees are either uninsured or are on Medicaid.
  • The company has faced multitudes of lawsuits alleging that it forces employees to work extra hours without pay. Wal-Mart’s internal studies have reached similar conclusions, but the company has taken little or no action to correct this.
  • Wal-Mart is a strongly anti-union company. When a store in Jonquiere, Quebec voted to join the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, the company simply shut down the store and fired all of the employees.
  • Annual employee turnover is nearly 50 percent, meaning that Wal-Mart must hire almost 600,000 new employees every year.
  • Wal-Mart alone accounted for over 13 percent of the U.S. trade deficit of $162 billion. Studies have concluded that over 80 percent of Wal-Mart’s international suppliers are based in China where labor costs are very low. Wal-Mart is increasingly dealing with international suppliers for this very reason. This is done, of course, at the expense of domestic suppliers, and thus, domestic jobs.

Suffice it to say that Bianco sees Wal-Mart as a great danger to America. He is pro-union, Wal-Mart is anti-union. He appears to be strongly anti-Republican, while it seems that Wal-Mart is pro-Republican. He is clearly and unashamedly biased in writing this book. And from that perspective it is difficult, at times, to take him too seriously. Still, on the whole his attacks on Wal-Mart are measured and avoid falling into senseless rants (despite, at a few spots, using alarmist language and even comparing Sam Walton to the likes of Mao Zedong). He raises many interesting and important critiques of the company. He is more sympathetic with Sam Walton and the company he started, than his successors and the company Wal-Mart has become since Walton’s death. While he portrays Walton as a shrewd and calculated businessman, he seems to give him the benefit of the doubt more than those who are now responsible for the company.

While Bianco is long on diagnosis, he is quite short on cure. He seems to feel that many of the most pronounced of Wal-Mart’s problems would disappear if the company were just to allow its workers to unionize. And in many ways he is right, though such a move would also sound the death-knell for the company as the rising costs of employee wages would quickly eat up the thin margins and destroy Wal-Mart’s very niche. After all, people shop at Wal-Mart not for the experience or the atmosphere, but for the low prices. Unionization would inevitably cut deeply into these margins. As a Christian I have great difficulty with unions, or at least unions that encourage employees to rebel against their employers. He seems to sympathize with and even advocate the type of rebellion that has happened in many stores across North America, where employees have turned their backs on their managers and have tried to unionize. Yet the Bible tells us that we are to respect and obey our employers. If they are not treating us properly, we cannot advocate this type of open rebellion.

Bianco often compares Wal-Mart to COSTCO, a company that is, in many ways, similar. Yet COSTCO does not deal with the skyrocketing employee turnover and pays its employees far better wages. The difference, he feels, is that COSTO takes care of its employees. In the long-run, this lowers company costs, even as wages increase, for the cost of training new employees cuts deeply into Wal-Mart’s profits. While he does see some incremental improvements in the way Wal-Mart has run its business in the face of growing criticism, he cannot help but conclude that even Wal-Mart may be unable to survive in the world that it has helped create.

As I read the book, I began to wonder if Bianco is blaming Wal-Mart for something that is a product of American society more than the working of a single company. After all, America has become an increasingly consumer-driven nation. Americans (and most Westerners) want and demand stuff! We want it and we want it now. We want to fill our homes and our lives with gadgets and trinkets, the quantities of which would shock people of other nations and other generations. A few weeks ago I was at the local landfill site, emptying out another van-load of junk taken from my garage. I turned to the man beside me, who was also emptying a great load of trash into the bins and remarked that we truly are a wasteful society. We stood there, almost ashamed, looking at the vast mountains of junk - things we needed not too long ago, but now were tossing away.

And so I wonder, is Wal-Mart creating this consumerism, or is it doing little more than giving us what we demand? It seems to me that Wal-Mart caters perfectly to this Western mindset, giving us more for less. By reducing the costs of manufacturing, distribution and sales, they can give us items of moderate quality for a low price. A quick trip to the local store, and a look at the long lineups at the registers, will show us just how successful they have been in doing this. Wal-Mart’s shame is, in many ways, our shame.

The Bully of Bentonville is an interesting book, even if it is not required reading. It is the type of book that may convince people to stop shopping at Wal-Mart, and I am not convinced that this would necessarily be a bad thing. There is something to be said for good old-fashioned service - something that rarely exists anymore. But like most people, I am rarely eager or willing to pay extra for it.

The Bully of Bentonville

Comments (36) »


1. mikbry24
March 29, 2006
10:52 AM

I have seen in small towns in which I’ve served the effect of having a Wal-Mart nearby. The small clothing shops, drug stores with soda fountains, fabric stores and even dry cleaners as well as grocery stores dry up very quickly. It is sad, really, as part of “Americana” is rapidly disappearing from the US Landscape. In any event, if Bianco wants to completely eliminate Wal-Mart, certainly a great solution is to unionize. Nothing will kill a company, their motivation and their productivity and their value more quickly than a union!

Mike


2. wfseube
March 29, 2006
11:02 AM

An alternative opinion on Wal-Mart can be found here.


3. Ochuk
March 29, 2006
11:13 AM

Tim, you and I are on the same page (don’t you love it when we agree?)

http://www.ochuk.com/index.php?p=574

“It is my opinion that this conclusion falls short. Though Wal-Mart can be accused of all kinds of trade and industry ills it should not be necessarily be blamed for the problem. Wal-Mart simply would not exist if it were not for the rabid consumerism of the American economy. Think about it. Greed for more at less is the problem, and Wal-Mart brilliantly meets the need. Its the nature of free market. When I shop for books on a website that compares prices from major retailers such as Amazon, Barnes and Noble and Borders, Wal-Mart always comes out on top with the best prices. Why would I pay two or three dollars more when I can get it for less?”


4. Tim Challies
March 29, 2006
11:21 AM

“don’t you love it when we agree?”

Absolutely. It’s been happening a lot lately…


5. Dallas Pymm
March 29, 2006
11:44 AM

I have not shopped at Wal-Mart for some time now. It has not been for some great cause other than my wife and I have found the groceries to be very inferior to other stores such as Albertsons. You get what you pay for and my wife and are a blessed to have an option to pay a bit more. Also, it is always a zoo in there. Packed to the brim with poor mothers trying to control their 5 kids they brought with them. They have 47 check out lanes and only 3 open. Wal-Mart caused me to sin greatly while I was there, so I boycott to keep my sanity. Maybe that is a great cause.


6. Stone
March 29, 2006
12:28 PM

Wal Mart has committed the ultimate sin in the eyes of the socialists: they’ve succeeded. If they’re doing something illegal, they’ll get caught (recent INS raids). If they’re treating their employees badly, they’ll lose the lawsuits. If they engage in bad business practices, they’ll lose share. For all the “sins” cited against them, those checkout lines are still full…


7. david
March 29, 2006
12:31 PM

This is an issue I find myself on both sides of.

I have no interest in siding with the union goons. If my employees announced they weren’t coming to work, I’d fire them, too. I’ve told employers I had to have higher wages “or else,” and I’ve followed through by quitting when they didn’t come through. I’ve never said I’m not coming to work, but I expect to keep my job. That’s ridiculous.

On the other hand, stores like Wal-Mart are destroying small town economies. Our own local businesses are struggling because so many people are driving to a larger city nearby (80 miles - that’s “near” out here) to shop for everything from groceries to lumber and hardware. I often ask them how they’re going to like it when they’re forced to go that far every time they need a carton of milk or a 2x4 because the local store went under, and when everyone who lives here is an employee somewhere else because there are no jobs here. The nice little town that they enjoy living in will dry up and blow away.

Anyway, we stopped shopping at Wal-mart and similar stores a long time ago, except when we can’t find what we need anywhere else. Sure, it costs more, but eventually, we’ll end up paying a price for all this “saving.” We already are.

I wrote this from a completely different angle.


8. 4ever4given
March 29, 2006
1:05 PM

Okay, so I am next door to the Wal-Mart capital of America. There is even a “Wal-Mart” museum you can go to here. ha.
There are Wal-Marts on just about every corner. It is like a monopoly here… as a matter of fact, it seems the attitude is that if you go anywhere but Wal-Mart in this area, you are likened to an apostate.
It is the Mecca for low-cost shopping. Beware: You really do get what you pay for.
Whenever I watch “Madame Blueberry” by VT, the Stuff-Mart portrayed there is Wal-Mart.
When you mentioned the piles of stuff by the garbage can… you should have seen my husband and I when he was done with his medical residency. Our furniture consisted of particle board Wal-Mart furniture that we literally pile by the dumpster because in the slightest attempt to move it, it fell to pieces… plus the cost of moving it was far greater than what it was worth.
It is a hard thing to decide how far to go here. We should be frugile-wise with our money no matter how little or how much we make. As Christians, the money we make really boils down to God’s provision… so what is the most God-honoring thing to do? I have found that even though Wal-Mart clothing horridly shrinks and becomes tattered more quickly, I have 6 children and they seem to last fine for the season, but not long enough to pass on to another child or other families.
THere are products that I think are best to get there for our family, like hygiene and cleaning products and certain food items, etc. But other products are not worth it quality-wise.


9. Brian Thornton
March 29, 2006
1:07 PM

I am completely confused by the anti-WalMart mentality here and elsewhere. It’s so much easier to look at the big bad company and blame it for all our troubles. Stone made a great point…amidst all these apparent bad things at WalMart, those checkout lines are still full, and more and more people apply for employment there.

To me, this blaming of a company for the ills of the nation is akin to blaming guns for people getting murdered, or blaming a certain type of vehicle (big, bad SUV’s) for the death of people.

It is simple supply and demand. If there is no demand for a place like WalMart, then WalMart will die out. Also, nobody’s forcing these people to work there or shop there.

(ps. I hope subjects like this don’t begin to overtake ones such as what the real gospel is.)


10. wfseube
March 29, 2006
1:11 PM

Brian wrote: It is simple supply and demand. If there is no demand for a place like WalMart, then WalMart will die out. Also, nobody’s forcing these people to work there or shop there.

Precisely. And to my knowledge, Wal-Mart has done nothing illegal in the process. Borderline? Maybe, with respect to the avoidance of union activity - they’ve probably violated the spirit of the law, if not the letter. IANAL, so I couldn’t tell you for sure.

If Wal-Mart starts losing business because of the benefits and union issues, they’ll change. We do still live in a capitalist democracy, much to the chagrin of some of the socialists in our midst, and that is the primary driving force behind entities such as Wal-Mart.

——
bill


11. philip
March 29, 2006
1:12 PM

Shortly after Tim reviewed ‘The Rest Of God’ written by Pastor Mark Buchanan, I decided to purchase this book. Here in Toronto, one of the big ‘box’ store book sellers is called Chapters/Indigo. I went online and priced it there to find although listed for a very reasonable 19.99, it was ‘tempoarily out of stock’. I waited a week rechecked for stk, ‘still tempoarily out’ another week, multiple outlets throughout the city, all ‘tempoarily out’. I could order it and have it shipped as it ‘usualy ships in 24 hours ‘. The value and convenience of doing so were obvious.
Recently, I had occasion to be in a large mall that had a store so out of curiousity I took a browse to look for it ‘just in case’. When I got to the Christian living /
Spirituality section I found myself surrounded by Da Vinci Code rubbish, Purpose Driven rubbish and the like. John MacArthur or any other doctrinaly sound authors were conspicuously absent.
Upon returning home I searched out a family owned Christian bookseller (Mitchells’ Family Books) and found that they had it in stock and although their location was acroass town and not convienient at all, I decided to make the trip. The price was listed at 23.99, some four dollars more. Add five bucks worth of gas for the old Oldsmobile and were looking at about 30.00. Sure, I still found all the rubbish that could be found in the big box store but I found a huge selection of worthwile teachings that weren’t and probably never will be available at the other.
Will I continue to spend ten dollars or so more to assist in keeping this resource available, even if i don’t have to, for sure.
philip

p.s. I’m really loving the book. Tim is quite right,’the guy can write’.


12. 4ever4given
March 29, 2006
1:30 PM


13. wfseube
March 29, 2006
1:36 PM

philip wrote Recently, I had occasion to be in a large mall that had a store so out of curiousity I took a browse to look for it ‘just in case’. When I got to the Christian living /
Spirituality section I found myself surrounded by Da Vinci Code rubbish, Purpose Driven rubbish and the like. John MacArthur or any other doctrinaly sound authors were conspicuously absent.

Philip actually brings up a point that’s directly relevant to the Wal-Mart argument and “market pressures”. I’ve recently noticed a signifcant increase in the size of the Christian book section at our local Borders. So why do you think this is? I suppose there may be a Christian store manager, but I doubt that. Rather, I believe that Borders and the other “brick and mortar” bookstores have figured out there is a sizeable market for Christian books, and the “Christian bookstores” make money at it. So why shouldn’t they profit from it also?

I can get 30% off at Borders but not at my local bookstore. Yeah, I might continue to patronize the locals, but I must be a good steward of the money that God has gifted me with, so I am going to look for the best deal I can get - so I am likely to buy from (at minimum) Borders if I can find stuff there. And at least at MY Borders, I DO see good stuff from John MacArthur, John Piper, etc. - in fact, my Borders has more stuff from Francis Schaeffer than I’ve seen at ANY non-online bookseller (5 different titles last I checked).

Market forces work, as long as laws are not broken. Wal-Mart WILL respond to market forces, if they come.

——
bill


14. Stephen Wylie-Young
March 29, 2006
1:48 PM

Tim - those facts are interesting but are only of “concern” to the extent that there is somethng wrong going on here.

1. The salary of an employee, any employee, is a function of supply and demand for their skills. When we start rewriting the fundamental rules of doing business in a free market economy then we’ll start to be concerned about the salary of a WM employee.

2. Any WM employee is likely ‘better off’ in terms of medical coverage and salary than the people who made the goods they sell. The more we have the more we want.

3. WM should comply with all workplace regulations. Where they do not, I am thankful that, in this country, an independent judiciary is likely to review the facts and make a judgement.

4. Employee turnover rate of 50%…High turnover rates are commonplace in retail, esp. low wage, low skill retail. If you compare this rate to other similar retailers you’ll likely find this is no worse

5. Wal Mart’s contribution to the US trade deficit…what an irrelevant fact. I trust Beb Bernanke and Alan Greenspan a lot more than this writer and I don’t think they’ve ever cited WM as a concern.

6. Finally, the most concerning “concern” is the fear & reality of the loss of domestic jobs. While for those who are affected it clearly causes considerable hardship, WM are not ultimately to blame. This “short term” pain is a reality of free trade - nobody should be in any doubt, free movement (trade) of labour, goods, materials & services benefits ALL (study any basic Economics textbook if you doubt it). This country has been shielded from this kind of international, global competition for too long and WM is begining to bring about the kind of change that will BENEFIT the US, in the long run. The US needs to develop the skills, products and services that China wants, in order to offset the plastic trinkets we’re importing - we’ll all be better off! In the meantime, welcome to the global economy…guess what? we’ve had it all our own way for so long and now it’s time for those guys to play catch up. And did someone say that the US (free market King?) was going to stop them? How foolish if we try… I hope this attitude will not be the beginning of the end of economic properity in this country - if this kind of attitude gets any traction (e.g. Dubai ports deal or Chinese bid for Maytag) I fear it will.


15. Tim Challies
March 29, 2006
2:06 PM

One thing I found amusing was the assumption that people at Wal-Mart deserve to be paid more. I’m not so sure. A Wal-Mart cashier or stock-person is working a job that requires little skill. No one has to spend money on four years of college to do it. So do they deserve to be paid more? I don’t know. At any rate, they new the pay structure when they took that job and in my mind that makes most arguments for better pay a moot point.


16. Stone
March 29, 2006
2:37 PM

Exactly: “What do you deserve?” “What do you earn?” Almost the same question…


17. david
March 29, 2006
2:49 PM

Tim wrote:

One thing I found amusing was the assumption that people at Wal-Mart deserve to be paid more.

That’s the socialist idea that needs more=deserves more. A guy who sells bicycles may need as much money as a car dealer, but Schwinn isn’t going to sell at the same price as a Chevy.


18. Tim Challies
March 29, 2006
2:53 PM

“Exactly: “What do you deserve?” “What do you earn?” Almost the same question…”

“That’s the socialist idea”

That’s about it, isn’t it? The book has this underlying assumption that people, even those working relatively unskilled jobs, deserve more than they are getting. What the book doesn’t even attempt to do is prove why this is the case. A person working at Wal-Mart may not be able to support a family of four on the average hourly wage, but I’m not so sure that this is really a legitimate complaint!


19. david
March 29, 2006
2:58 PM

By the way, Stone is right that the lefties hate Walmart because they represent the succes of capitalism. I definitely do not hold that against them, except for the fact that their success is largely dependent on virtual slaves in China and elsewhere. Their capitalist success depends on the largest socialist system in the world.


20. Tyler
March 29, 2006
3:03 PM

I was born in Bentonville and have lived in Bentonville my entire life. My grandmother was hired by Sam Walton himself and was one of the first thirty employees of Wal-Mart. My father was hired there in ‘76 and comfortably retired after twenty-five years of working for them. I have multiple family members that still work at Wal-Mart and have only been benefited by there employment there. I went to high school with Sam Walton’s grandchildren, I have worked on Jim and Lynn Walton’s home- which for multi-billionaires- the home is quite modest (legend has it that Jim debated during construction about installing central heat and air). The nitty-gritty fact of the situation is this: Sam Walton figured it out- he made the consumer king, rather than the manufacturer. He fashioned a company that catered to the demand rather than to the supply and it worked. It seems to me that all of the supposed ‘atrocities’ Wal-Mart commits makes headline news because they are an easy target- they are the largest company in the world- they can’t possibly get everything right and who are we to expect that they should? When you employ 1.5 million people, I imagine a good portion of those employees are goof-balls that get things screwed up. To get a job at Wal-Mart, as a cashier or a stocker, demands that you are able to fog up a mirror. I have seen the ‘small-town’ americana businesses get crushed by Wal-Mart, but that is the result of capitalism- that is what happens- every business cannot succeed- that doesn’t make shopping at Wal-Mart a bad thing. I may condone every ethic that apply— I also don’t impose godly standards upon a company of which I know has had some A-1 scumbags in very powerful positions.
Wal-Mart has greatly affected this country— it has totally transformed the area in which I live- but as there are negative affects of there power— believe me, there are tons of positive effects. We hear about all of the ‘job’ loss that Wal-Mart creates, but what about all of the people they do employ? Show me one person that Wal-Mart has ‘hurt’ and I will show you one hundred people they have helped. Northwest Arkansas is one of the fasting growing areas in the country and that is because Wal-Mart is here, Tyson is here, and J.B. Hunt is here. If Wal-Mart were so bad, why doesn’t everyone stop going there? Why do all of the manufacturers and venders of products instinctively flock to Bentonville from across the world for business? Because as Wal-Mart brings in a ton of money they also spend a ton. They don’t get it all right— that is a given. But they do help and employ a great deal of people. I am pretty biased, seeing that my family has been extremely benefited by God through Wal-Mart employment. But my family is not the only Wal-Mart ‘success story’ out there. If the employees have it so bad, why don’t they quit? Because someone else is always waiting to be hired.


21. Tyler
March 29, 2006
3:06 PM

I said—

“I may condone every ethic that apply”

I meant to say—

I may not condone every ethic that they apply


22. francisco
March 29, 2006
3:16 PM

David,
If globalization has allowed interpendence of economic systems that are at odds with each other, then guess what will happen when the socialist country embraces capitalism to the fullest. I hear the Armaggedon horses making their way to the Supercenter…. just kidding


23. Evan
March 29, 2006
3:43 PM

The whole anti-Wal-Mart crowd is about protectionism. It is the idea that my job should be protected. There should be no competition for my efforts. Even if I don’t work very hard or other people are willing to the same job for less, I have a right to not have them do it, because it means less money for me and I need and deserve more.

The problem is that for every one person that is ‘protected’ due to regulation, trade restrictions, geography, etc. - all the people that use that person’s products or services are negatively impacted by having to pay more.

It might be great for a small town store owner to charge $100 for a bicycle. It might make him a living or even rich. But for the few hundred parents and children in town, they would be better off buying those same bicycles for $50 at Wal-Mart, leaving $50 in each of their pockets rather than all in the store owner’s pocket.

Quite simply, protectionism always costs the masses at the expense of the relatively few who benefit from the protection. Rather than attack Wal-Mart, what we need is a new Wal-Mart type enterprise to enter areas like health care and education where protectionism reigns and costs rise for the masses to unaffordability.


24. Jabbok
March 29, 2006
5:56 PM

I deliver a lot of merchandise to Wal-Mart distribution centers. I could tell you some horror stories but it would take too long to type it all out here. Suffice it to say that the wife and I do our shopping anywhere but Wally World.


25. wfseube
March 29, 2006
6:27 PM

Y’all should read “The World Is Flat” by Thomas Friedman. It covers a lot of what we’re talking about here in great detail, and there are several lengthy sections on Wal-Mart. Friedman, while a lefty by nature, understands what is going on here and covers it quite effectively.

I’m about 1/2 way thru the book - read about 200 pages on the plane from Orlando on Monday. Fascinating piece of work. Tim, I’m looking for a review of it from you some time… ;-)

——
bill


26. Jim
March 29, 2006
7:22 PM

Walmart has simply perfected the import retail business and is making money by driving sales with low margins. If that is a great example of capitalism then I think we can all look forward to minimum wage jobs.

True capitalism is about creating a product that meets a genuine or assumed need. Quality must be a core ingredient to maintain longevity.

We are/will be paid for our respective value to society.


27. GeneMBridges
March 30, 2006
2:35 AM

>>>Employee turnover rate of 50%…High turnover rates are commonplace in retail, esp. low wage, low skill retail. If you compare this rate to other similar retailers you’ll likely find this is no worse.

I used to worked in HR Management for Marshalls. Let’s be clear on this one.

High turnover rates are common in low wage retail. This much is true. However, $9.69 / hr is, compared the wages in other off price retailers, a higher wage. Ergo, they should not have this high a turnover rate. In large metro areas like Atlanta, the average hourly @ Marshalls is making much less than this, and, unless they are doing some really good things with their associates (and many do in Marshalls), their turnover is higher.

The turnover is no worse here, but, at the same time, those other retailers do tend to have better benefits even with the higher turnover. The average hourly TJX associate is getting a Blue-Cross Blue Shield Preffered Provider Progam or HMO or Kaiser Permanente, both offered with an excellent drug benefit, Life Insurance, Short Term disability, and an IRA benefit, all at a minimal premium cost. Compare this to Walmart, a much larger company, but with more resources. They very certainly are not taking as good care of their employees as they could when it comes to benefits, when I know other off-price retailers with comparable prices that do a much better job. On top of this, I know by experience that they are spending money on stores that are open 24 hours for no good reason in some areas. Would somebody kindly explain why Walmart is spending money to run its Superstore in Murphy, NC, literally in the middle of a small town with nothing else around? I’ve actually been in that store at 3am…not a soul was in there. The only reason I was there was to see a Walmart deserted on a lark.

Moreover, just because there is a high turnover, that does not justify the practice of allowing it to continue. If they could cap their turnover rate, and I worked in a Marshalls as HR Mgr. where our turnover rate was about 20 percent because of the way we hired and learned to retain our people, they’d do much better and save more money, because the outlay in time and money for new hires expends a great deal in the way of assets.


28. David Pat
March 30, 2006
3:01 AM

I would’t feel too bad if Walm-Mart wasn’t around =op


29. holmegm
March 30, 2006
5:56 AM

>Wal-Mart simply would not exist if it were not for the rabid
>consumerism of the American economy.

?

Personally, I shop there because I have three (almost four) kids, and lots of adoption-related debt :)

Yes, we “rabidly” crave luxuries like food, clothing (though we get most of that at used stores), cleaning products … somebody stop us! ;)


30. Joe
March 30, 2006
7:31 AM

See, I HATE Wally-World. But for different reasons.

Everytime I buy something in the SW corner of the store, the next item I need is in the NE corner. As soon as I go get it, I remember something I forgot to get while in the SW corner.

Grrr!


31. Tony Konvalin
March 30, 2006
8:55 AM

Here is an article from World Magazine on the subject of Wal-Mart: Steward’s helper.


32. Brendt
March 30, 2006
10:03 AM

Have to go. Three guys just broke into my house, put a gun to my head, and said I have to work for Walmart. ;-)


33. Brian Thornton
March 30, 2006
10:09 AM

Should we glean anything from observing that a discussion about a retail chain has generated more comments than one on the gospel?

Please don’t post any replies to this here. My intent is not to divert attention away from this thread, but just to make that observation.


34. Conibear Trapp
March 30, 2006
10:45 AM

Regarding unions, I was once very much pro-union. Being a member of two different unions turned my mind around. However, I beg to differ with your understanding that unions are encouraging rebellion against employers. The union and the company negotiate a collective bargining agreement which governs the work being done. Work is covered by the provisions of this agreement. If I am in one work category and am asked to do the work of another even though the agreement forbids it, it is the company which agreed to this provision that is in violation.

Unions have served a very beneficial role in our society until the last quarter of the 20th century when they became organizations that guaranteed jobs to those who do not wish to work. What set me against them was continually having to “work” with people who just wanted to milk the system, do as little as possible, and then collect a nice fat paycheck. If unions would agree to what I call a “deadwood clause” which would allow companies to fire (without being contested by the union) employees who don’t do their jobs, I think it would help them tremedously in the long run.


35. wfseube
March 30, 2006
5:01 PM

Tony wrote: Here is an article from World Magazine on the subject of Wal-Mart: Steward’s helper.

See post #2 in this thread for a link to Jason Furman’s full report on Wal-Mart.

Brian wrote: Should we glean anything from observing that a discussion about a retail chain has generated more comments than one on the gospel?

You read my mind. I was about to post the same observation. I could draw all sorts of conclusions, most of which would be cynical and (likely) incorrect speculation. But since I’ve posted several times to this thread and only once to the Gospel thread, I’ll stop now… ;-)


36. Jeff Cavanaugh
April 5, 2006
5:55 PM

Thoughts from another perspective on some of the things Stephen Wylie-Young talks about above:

1. The effects of supply and demand on workers’ wages is undeniable. However, that Wal-Mart’s wages are lower those provided for similar jobs at similar stores may be significant. Market laws can sometimes be abused, or made an excuse for wrongdoing.
One thing that should be disturbing is that Wal-Mart reportedly makes a practice of giving employees additional responsibilities without upping their pay—even against its own stated company policies.

2. By what are an employer’s obligations to its employees defined? Worldwide standards? The minimum that laws of supply and demand require for the corporation to stay in business? I’m not sure, but there must be some ethical standard below which a company can clearly be said to be treating its employees wrongly. It seems that a corporation which makes claims upon its employees’ time and compensates them for it should be willing to provide a living wage. As far as I can see, Wal-Mart doesn’t, at least not for its lower-paid employees.

4. Wal-Mart’s turnover rates are so high in part because the company seems to have a practice of regularly hiring as many employees as possible as “temporary” workers. The company doesn’t have to provide benefits for temporary workers. These temps, as I understand, are often rehired again and again as temporaries after their original term of employment ends. Clearly the employees who keep coming back would rather be full-time and be provided with benefits and some job security.

An interesting, and insightful, perspective on some of these issues, as well as Wal-Mart’s practices, can be found in the blog of a man who worked for the company for a time and determined to write about his observations there: http://workingatwal-mart.blogspot.com/


Post Your Comment Here »

It's generally preferred that you use your real name. 
This is just to perturb spammers. It won't be visible. 
You can include a link to your own blog (if you have one). 
Click here and you won't have to enter your personal information every time you comment. 

You may use HTML to style your comment.
Your comment will appear on the site immediately, so think before posting! 
This is to guard against spam. Please forgive the inconvenience. 
 
Please click once and wait patiently!