|
Wal-Mart Bows to Unions, Copies GM Success Formula | by DesertRat66 | 2005-05-04 09:32:02 |
|
Nonsense. Retail needs unions. | by shminux | 2005-05-04 09:46:25 |
|
Large Retail Outlet Unionises | by MikeCDN | 2005-05-04 10:07:35 |
|
large retail outlet DOESN'T Unionize | by voxwoman | 2005-05-04 10:17:35 |
|
In other words lose, lose? | by DesertRat66 | 2005-05-04 10:35:32 |
|
What are you on? | by McNutcase | 2005-05-04 10:50:09 |
|
That's the way the world is now | by MikeCDN | 2005-05-04 10:55:12 |
|
My, someone here is brainwashed. | by shminux | 2005-05-04 11:01:24 |
|
um did I say there wasn't a problem? | by MikeCDN | 2005-05-04 11:07:04 |
|
Does the kool-aid taste good? (n/t) | by McNutcase | 2005-05-04 11:10:16 |
|
what? (n/t) | by MikeCDN | 2005-05-04 11:11:43 |
|
Summary of what you said: | by McNutcase | 2005-05-04 11:12:41 |
|
um no, read again, and think about it | by MikeCDN | 2005-05-04 11:14:21 |
|
Exactly. | by McNutcase | 2005-05-04 11:18:02 |
| There is a difference... |
by esbita |
2005-05-04 11:32:54 |
...between being indifferent to a situation, and admitting that a given course of action isn't going to work. About the only plausible thing in favor of "union wages" at Walmart is the idea of lower turnover/increased productivity.
This assumes that there are enough "productive" employees in your workforce, that would stick around long enough to learn the job well. I've worked retail, my boyfriend is currently a retail manager, and from anecdotal evidence I can say that the alleged productivity is rarely there. Will enough decent employees stick around long enough for the extra wage to be worth it? Maybe seniority wages are part of the answer there...
I will admit that if you're paying more than $6/hr, you may attract more part-timers who are half literate. But this does not solve the problem of those who make a career out of it. |
|
[ Reply ] |
