Live data from Hacker News

Life at Wal-Mart

boingboing.net

41–50 of 56 posts

Re: Life at Wal-Mart

#41
post #12

Its so annoying to me that many people (esp in Bay Area) loath Wal-Mart, and then turn around and gush over how cheap they got this or that crappy chinese made product for at Target. Both are massive big box retailers, both threaten smaller businesses by discounts and volume. Both pay their employees entry level low wages. Target def has better marketing and gives money to school. But that hardly accounts for the dif…

My main beef with Walmart is the service. Fry's and Walmart are the only 2 big stores in America I frequent where service is this bad.

Target is much better. Compare returning an item or disputing the scanned price with Walmart; it's night and day.

Re: Life at Wal-Mart

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keeping score here: At the branch where I worked, all the lowest-level employees were allowed this information and were encouraged to make individual decisions about inventory. I guess that means it's either a lie, a difference in local management, or true but misleading?

It's possible he meant they simply had the ability to control the number of items ordered for inventory, rather than their placement or marketing. If the floor employee knows what is selling, it makes sense to let them hit the 'reorder this' button. But this is entirely conjecture on my part.

Well, it's not even so much that. In general, corporate actually knows better than the local guy how many of an item are selling, they see it in the reports. Local guys don't have any better information.

Local guys don't control pricing either, in general. That too is set by corporate.

What was common, and I think what he may have been talking about, was employees discounting things for certain people. That's the only time I can think of when you'd look at profit margins. Maybe something placed in clearance, or resold open box after a return. Or, for instance, we'd give our bigger clients a discount on bulk orders of printer paper if they asked. Paper was pretty close to a loss leader anyway, so we'd sell it at "cost" or maybe even very slightly below.

The other thing that's ambiguous about what he said (and Wal-Mart's numbers in general) is exactly how they compute margins. Wal-Mart runs their own distribution chain, so unlike a mom and pop, who simply buys a product for a set price including delivery, Wal-Mart buys the product for a lower price and deals with getting it to the stores themselves.

So they pad their "cost" as seen by the employees by some amount to account for the supply chain, which can include a profit, or so I was told. Meaning that a store could still sell an item at what they consider cost, but corporate Wal-Mart might still make money on it.

Also, the lowest level employees are not empowered to change prices, though the supervisors (next to lowest level) generally can. However it's very common for the average floor person to ask the supervisor "hey can I sell this to this guy for $x because it's open box and I need that space for the new seasonal products tomorrow anyway" and the supervisor to simply approve it.

Wal-Mart pays generous bonuses to stores for achieving certain profit amounts, so employees, knowing the margin, are encouraged to not dip below it where possible. Otherwise for all an employee cared, he'd sell everything for $1.

Re: Life at Wal-Mart

#43
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for the purposes of a conversation about loathing, i think you're presenting a false equivalence here. in such subjective terms it's hard not to admit that despite whatever flaws it may have, target has at least not had books written and movies made [1] about their misdeeds. [1] on amazon, "target" had one result on the first page related to the company that was positive, whereas with walmart the second result is " H…

People attack the giant and the giant is Wal-Mart. They are bad because they are golliath. The truth is, they provide one stop shopping for millions of customers who previously had to drive to many different stores to buy groceries, clothes and other household items -- and gas too! In this way, not only does wal-mart save customers money, but they also save them time. This is true of Target, et al as well, but my poi…

Exactly, everyone with their knives out end up going for the biggest target. Same story with McDonald's, which gets dissed at every turn [1] while Burger King doesn't have to deal with any of that baggage and can happily, you know, sell burgers.

1 - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28967905/

Re: Life at Wal-Mart

#44

I've been defending Wal-Mart (not that they need my help) against idiots ever since I work there. People never consider the alternative. Wal-Mart may pay little, but the stores they replaced pay less. One Wal-Mart may use a lot of electricity, but the 20 stores they replace would have used more. And so on and so forth. It's very easy to look at Wal-Mart in a vacuum and call it an atrocity, but when you compare it to…

This is partly based on stuff said in the BB thread:

Wal-mart might treat it's employees better, but it's cut-throat treatment of suppliers forces them to cut their (the suppliers') employee treatment to the bone. When walmart might jump ship on sourcing from you (their purchasers are known to have zero loyalty) because it costs you $0.25 more per decorative lamp than the guy using questionable labor practices, you don't really have a choice on what to do. That $0.25 might mean very little to a small main-street (to beat the dead-horse) store, but to a company that does billions of decorative lamp sales a year, that's a ton of money.

So, sure, Walmart employees might be treated fine, but the people actually producing the goods walmart sells (their non-service, indirectly employeed workers) are hurting.

Re: Life at Wal-Mart

#45
post #43
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People attack the giant and the giant is Wal-Mart. They are bad because they are golliath. The truth is, they provide one stop shopping for millions of customers who previously had to drive to many different stores to buy groceries, clothes and other household items -- and gas too! In this way, not only does wal-mart save customers money, but they also save them time. This is true of Target, et al as well, but my poi…

Exactly, everyone with their knives out end up going for the biggest target. Same story with McDonald's, which gets dissed at every turn [1] while Burger King doesn't have to deal with any of that baggage and can happily, you know, sell burgers. 1 - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28967905/

MCD is still doing really well for itself despite the critics. The food there now is much better than I remember it being in years past. I have a lot of respect for how they handled the whole Super Size Me thing.

It's kind of sad that people would break up that statue like that. Regardless of your opinion of MCD, the Ronald McDonald house does a lot of good things for a lot of people.

Re: Life at Wal-Mart

#46
post #44

I've been defending Wal-Mart (not that they need my help) against idiots ever since I work there. People never consider the alternative. Wal-Mart may pay little, but the stores they replaced pay less. One Wal-Mart may use a lot of electricity, but the 20 stores they replace would have used more. And so on and so forth. It's very easy to look at Wal-Mart in a vacuum and call it an atrocity, but when you compare it to…

This is partly based on stuff said in the BB thread: Wal-mart might treat it's employees better, but it's cut-throat treatment of suppliers forces them to cut their (the suppliers') employee treatment to the bone. When walmart might jump ship on sourcing from you (their purchasers are known to have zero loyalty) because it costs you $0.25 more per decorative lamp than the guy using questionable labor practices, you d…

In theory, if that becomes a big enough hole, the market should rectify it on its own.

You can already go to Starbucks and buy $10/lb 'Fair Trade' coffee, and many 'hip' brands (American Apparel comes to mind) trade on their humane wages and treatment of workers.

I'm not saying it's a complete solution (some of the costs are still likely being externalized, although that's more a problem in the case of pollution than labor), but in general when a savings is made because of a negative externality (it's 'costing' others, instead of the just the buyers), a 'non-negative' version will spring up, and sell for a handy markup.

Re: Life at Wal-Mart

#47
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Migration has, over thousands of years, been the most effective antipoverty program. So yes, if you "can barely make ends meet" in a cold expensive place with no jobs, you should move to a warmer cheaper place with jobs. Steal bus fare, if you must.

Yes, that would be a good argument, but that wasn't the one made in the article. Ehrenreich had a job in Minnesota, which is slightly cheaper to live in than Phoenix, by most standards. Should she still have moved?

It was not that Ehrenreich "had a job in Minnesota". She chose the twin cities for her experiment. Here's the passage where she describes the deep thinking of her selection process:

I had thought for months of going to Sacramento or somewhere else in California's Central Valley not far from Berkeley, where I'd spent the spring. But warnings about the heat and the allergies put me off, not to mention my worry that the Latinos might be hogging all the crap jobs and substandard housing for themselves, as they so often do. Don't ask me why Minnesota came to mind, maybe I just had a yearning for deciduous trees. It's a relatively liberal state, I knew that, and more merciful than many to its welfare poor. A half and hour or so of Web research revealed an agreeably tight labor market, with entry-level jobs advertised at $8 an hour or more and studio apartments for $400 or less. If some enterprising journalist wants to test the low-wage way of lif if darkest Idaho or Louisiana, more power to her. Call me gutless, but what I was looking for this time around was a comfortable correspondence between income and rent, a few mild adventures, a soft landing.

At least she did 30 minutes of web research!

(If you read the chapter, you also see Ehrenreich chooses Wal-Mart at $7/hour over another retail job she was offered that paid at least $8.50 and perhaps $10/hour. It's page after page of her shooting herself in the foot so she has something to complain about.)

Also, the critique by Lamon does not suggest Phoenix but rather "the Sun Belt", which includes many of the cheapest places to live in the United States.

Re: Life at Wal-Mart

#48
post #44

I've been defending Wal-Mart (not that they need my help) against idiots ever since I work there. People never consider the alternative. Wal-Mart may pay little, but the stores they replaced pay less. One Wal-Mart may use a lot of electricity, but the 20 stores they replace would have used more. And so on and so forth. It's very easy to look at Wal-Mart in a vacuum and call it an atrocity, but when you compare it to…

This is partly based on stuff said in the BB thread: Wal-mart might treat it's employees better, but it's cut-throat treatment of suppliers forces them to cut their (the suppliers') employee treatment to the bone. When walmart might jump ship on sourcing from you (their purchasers are known to have zero loyalty) because it costs you $0.25 more per decorative lamp than the guy using questionable labor practices, you d…

on the flipside, you also have access to a company with many multiples the distribution than your average mom and pop, so while they may not care about $0.25, you're also not going to be selling a lot to them. closing a wal-mart purchase, though, means you are going to be selling a lot of whatever it is that you make.

Re: Life at Wal-Mart

#49

I've been defending Wal-Mart (not that they need my help) against idiots ever since I work there. People never consider the alternative. Wal-Mart may pay little, but the stores they replaced pay less. One Wal-Mart may use a lot of electricity, but the 20 stores they replace would have used more. And so on and so forth. It's very easy to look at Wal-Mart in a vacuum and call it an atrocity, but when you compare it to…

But did all the 20 stores they replaced bash workers' unions? (Downmod me for asking - like I care).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallmart#Employee_and_labor_rel...

Re: Life at Wal-Mart

#50
post #21

This is so cool, and great to hear. I've never quite understood the anti-Walmart sentiment. What do people have against low prices? Poorer people can afford to buy (or save) more if they are fortunate enough to have a Walmart nearby. One reason to despise the retailer: Walmart has recently been lobbying congress to raise minimum wage. If successful, this could force more small businesses to go under because they cann…

I hear this logic about low prices being good for poor people all the time, and I can never understand it. If prices are low because labor is cheap, then it seems that the employer/merchant will always make out. It's simple math. Try applying your logic to every wage earner in the world. If a price is reduced by 10% because wages are reduces by 20%, then the employee loses 10%. Sure they can buy everything they need 10% cheaper, but they lost 20% of their pay check. This only helps two types of consumers, investors and people on welfare.
Post reply on HN