Big Box Employees are officially serfs - flexible scheduling means no outside lives allowed

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=2766819&Business=true

The link above is to an ABC news story which goes nowhere near as in-depth as a recent WSJ article which unfortunately I can provide no links for but which I read in a local paper today, which did not include it in their online edition.

The WSJ article describes how many big box retailers (primarily WalMart in the article although apparently other chains do this as well) are embracing the concept of automated "flexible" "just in time" scheduling in order (so they say) to improve their customer service.

This means no more set schedules for these employees. They have no idea how many hours they will work or when these hours will fall. The WSJ article mentioned one woman who saw her usually scheduled 35 hours go to 12. The employees are expected to be available at just about any time and even to be on call. Of course, this means that many of these employees will have childcare issues, since they will never know exactly when they will need a sitter. They will never again be able to take a class in some topic they are interested in or that might lead to a better future because they know they cannot guarantee their attendance.

I have worked in retail and I have been a small business owner. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out when your peak hours are or that you might need extra coverage during the holidays and for big sales events. I also don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out that these automated employment systems are designed to make maximum use of part-time employees with no benfits.

The only people who would agree to draconian, abusive employer practices like these are the most defenseless who have absolutely no other options. I would think this would lead to massive employee turnover for these chain stores who are now literally trying to chain their employees to the store.

Customer service will DROP because employee morale will drop. Unhappy employees are not usually noted for their great customer service. When customer service drops - customers will drop and sales will drop and then stocks will drop. This is a textbook example of idiots at the top killing off companies under the guise of "efficiency". But, they will be out the door with their golden parachutes and off to the next company to suck dry. Their companies will suffer, their employees will suffer and their communities will suffer.

[Davis_X_Machina]

1. The very people most likely to work two jobs...

...will have had that task made far more difficult.

[PA Democrat]

4. That's a very valid point.

It will also make it more difficult for other people who don't have flexible lives. People dependent upon child care, students, etc.

[Deja Q]

9. But they're only families. Wal-mart is pro-family. Their CEO's only, it seems.

[lectrobyte]

2. With just-in-time inventory,

could just-in-time labor be far behind? At least in China, Wal Mart employees have the legal right to unionize, so perhaps they will set a good example for the rest of the world.

[Larkspur]

3. High turnover rate will give the Big Box stores an excuse to import labor from

Asia. They'll say Americans are too lazy to work and need to import slave labor from Asia.

[whistle]

5. WalMart could set up tent cities next to their stores where they could keep

....an army of sub-contractor employees waiting in the ready

[Deja Q]

7. That would cost walmart too much.

[OKthatsIT]

35. They need to set up a town dump next to WALMART...

no running water, of course.....too many diseases.

[truedelphi]

59. I have read that WalMart lets people cmp in the parking lot

In their RV's

That's not much different than a tent city.

[question everything]

6. See more of the story

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=114x23328

(I posted on the Economy forum so it won't sink to the next pages...)

[SoCalDem]

8. Instead of sitting on a retaining wall at a Home Depot, hoping to be picked up

these pink-blue collar workers are sitting at their table waiting/hoping for the phone to ring..

what's the difference?

not much

[hlthe2b]

10. I went into a WalMart months ago for the first time in years...

It was one of the "Super" mega WalMarts, but upon entering, I felt the most overwhelming blow back of negative "energies" I think I've ever gotten from a retail establishment. You could just feel the stress and anger permeating. The store was big but crowded, and many aisles were jumbled messes of opened or out-of-place merchandise everywhere. Children, of course, were there in large numbers--equally tired, crying, or begging for toys or candy, as would be expected.. BUt, their liveliness did nothing to make the atmosphere seem normal.

The lines of people waiting to check out were clearly tired, irritable, frustrated, but compliant. The checkers didn't greet or say much of anything except that absolutely necessary to complete the transaction. They seemed TOTALLY dehumanized and demoralized. Everywhere, the prevailing atmosphere was barely contained frustration and simmering anger.

So, even though I'd wasted 15 minutes walking across the megastore for two items I'd been unable to find elsewhere, after 5 minutes in line, I tossed the items and walked out. My first visit in five years, a waste of time, but quite enlightening just the same. Back to Target...I'll gladly pay more
(or do without).

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

11. Target was also mentioned in the WSJ article

but it was unclear if they were implementing similar requirements,or if just that they too were using automated scheduling.According to WSJ, Target's outsourced automated scheduler, a company called Workbrain, generates schedules for 350,000 US employees at 1500 locations in less than six hours."Target declined to comment on its scheduling system."

I greatly prefer Target as my discount resource, but if I found their practices were similar to those ascribed to WalMart, I would have no problem stopping any shopping there. I concur absolutely with your description of what it's like to shop at my local WalMart. I have been there exactly twice, looking for specific items, and left each time without buying because of the chaos in the aisles and an atmosphere of dejection that was practically wafting out of the air vents.

These stores seem to have eliminated any concept of human interaction as concerns scheduling and store management. I bet their managers feel just as downtrodden as the clerks and stockpeople.

[Kindigger]

13. I've started shopping for those little things at

Dollar General. They have the same crap, but the employees are upbeat, helpful, and just plain nice. The downside is that the store is often completely torn up by inconsiderate shoppers, but it doesn't seem like the employees have a deadline to clean it up. :shrug:

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

50. Yep, there's something kind of hellish about WallyWorld.

I haven't set foot in one in ages, hope I never have to again. But the last time I went inside one it was not a pleasant shopping experience (I bought some shampoo and left as quickly as possible). The lighting is weird and harsh; the aisles are cluttered and too close together; and everything, including the customers and employees, looks sad and shabby. It's kind of like you died and went to Hell and were condemned to shop in a grim, hopeless place for something you couldn't find, forever.

[Kindigger]

12. A "big box" hardware store

...which I will not name (hasn't been named in this thread & does not begin with L).

I used to love wandering around that store. It was so clean, organized, and the employees helpful. Seems as if they have cut out the middle of the night stocking crew. Looking down long aisles full of wheeled carts stacked with boxes, or coming around a corner to find the aisle totally blocked.

I believe the employees are now supposed to be stocking the shelves, when they aren't being bothered by a customer who can't find something (its probably behind that stack of boxes over there!) Instead, they are huddled in giggling little cliques in less traveled areas of the store. If they're not giggling they're having a bitchfest, and they do not stop when a customer comes around.

[peacetalksforall]

14. This country can design and fly commerical aircraft to fly remotely.

This country can figure out to make billions or trillions of money disappear from the DOD.

But, this country can't figure out how to determine and anticipate peak hours in a retail store.

[GOPFighter]

15. If you are desperate enough, you will take this job and do whatever they ask

That's the strategy of WalMart. Go into a small town, sell everything cheaper than the local stores. The local stores go out of business, putting people out of work. Soon the only major source of jobs is WalMart. Once there is a large enough labor pool of desperate people, WalMart tells you you must agree to be on call if you want to keep your job. If not, there are 10 workers waiting to take your place. Now they own you.

This is classic capitalism, in fact if you don't do it, your competitor (an even bigger box store) will, and put YOU out of business. This is the future Republicans envision for most of us. And if you really want to get sick to your stomach, read George F. Will's column in last Thursday's WaPo about his view of the minimum wage controversy (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/03/AR2007010301619.html). He writes:

"But the minimum wage should be the same everywhere: $0. Labor is a commodity;..."

Get that? The minimum wage should be $0.00! That is what every corporation in America is shooting for. After all, as Will says, labor is just a commodity. It's not a human being, it is a natural resource - to be used and discarded when it is no longer productive. No wonder conservatives have to get their votes by misdirection - keeping the populace scared and angry, because if the public ever figured out what the Republicans REALLY want...

[nashville_brook]

16. for me, the worst part about this is "parent-less" children

the serfdom officially removes parents from having a regularly-scheduled life. i've been a juvenile and a juvenile delinquent -- there's nothing more certain that the ability to get away with murder when there's no mom or dad around.

and here's the rub -- parents who have to work this sort of job are (more often than not) already living in less-than desirable neighborhoods where every other family shares the burden of working absurd schedules. this is what makes these lower economic areas less desirable places to live. it's not the absence of INCOME. it's the absence of PARENTS. of PEOPLE, who would otherwise MAKE the neighborhoods a NICE place to live -- instead they are greeting you at wal-mart.

"have a nice day."

[phylny]

30. A friend of mine has worked at Walmart for over a year. She worked at nights

and on weekends to make the extra money that her family needed, and worked those hours because her husband would be home to watch their child. She is a good, hard-working employee who doesn't call off unless she's deathly ill, and who keeps busy throughout her entire shift.

Now, she doesn't know what shifts she'll be working, and will have a difficult time finding another job that gives her the flexibility she used to have with Walmart.

I don't think it's possible for many consumers to avoid shopping there. At the two Walmarts near us, the parking lots are always packed, and I see many Hispanic families, Hasidic families, elderly people and young couples shopping there. I know they go there for the "low prices" and perhaps cannot afford a bit more.

It's a shame. I don't go to Walmart anymore, but try to do lots of my shopping locally. We can afford to, and we have a lot of local shops around. Many people are in different situations, though.

[nashville_brook]

61. i wonder if shopping anywhere is "socially safe" -- living wage defined

in the last few months i've shopped at the Walmart grocery store b/c i couldn't afford to go anywhere else. BUT -- i refused to change my prescriptions there even tho at $4 a pop, i'd save about $36 a month. just can't commit to it! and, Walgreens isn't THAT much better in terms of how they treat their employees -- but at least -- at least i have some kind of peace of mind going there.

it breaks my heart that people can no longer "be poor" and not be treated with respect and dignity.

moreover (and maybe more to the point) -- i'm sick and tired of it taking TWO parents to make ends meet. if someone wants to stay home and be a full-time parent that should be within the grasp of reality. imagine how it would impact society if at large if the trend were toward more stay-at-home households.

i'm as lefty and feminist as they come, but i think parentless families are destroying our country. if even a few more per every hundred families were able to swing an at-home parent, that would impact way more than the children of that family.

it's a fantasy of mine. i don't have kids and prolly won't be able to. when i was married i got sick and was unable to work during a time when it was hard -- but due to my ex getting a raise, it became do-able. it made me realize that it's not just kids that make a single-earner family make sense -- illness, elderly parents, and many other extenuating circumstances can necessitate a single-income household.

we should be able to make that lifestyle choice without going bankrupt. i'm pushing past a living wage -- i want a living family wage.

[sandnsea]

32. And then be blamed

when they can't supervise their kids because of a system they didn't create. Or worse, told they should just be a permanent childless cog in the corporate wheel. People thought 'flex time' would mean more time with their kids, people tried to tell them, but nooooo. Family values Republicans would never lie. I remember arguing about flex time right here at DU on more than one occasion.

[nashville_brook]

62. flex-time is a LIE -- i want a living "family" wage

we need to be able to choose a single-income lifestyle without going into bankruptcy. i'm way to the left of a "living wage." i'm so far left on this i might be leaning right because i WANT to go back to the *opportunity* to choose a stay-at-home lifestyle. see my post above -- but there's plenty of reasons beyond children that can necessitate a single-income lifestyle. for me it was illness. many families take care of aging parents. there's many things we could be doing with our time instead of selling ALL OF IT for the ability to make ends meet.

[Pierzin]

17. I will Never Ever go Walmart, Not for Anything!!!!

Because I worked in retail, and I had to put up with that bullshit. Retail is the worst. Most retailers do this, and they have been doing it for YEARS. It is not new. I worked for a retailer for almost 3 months at 32 hours, and after so many weeks at 32 hours+ per week you got Healthcare benefits. Guess what happened the week I was supposed to be eligible for benefits??? Yep, I was cut back to 28 hours.
As recently as a few years ago, I worked for another company who required that their people be available whenever 24/7. God I hated it.
But what took the cake was how managers totally expected you to kiss their ass and have a great attitude and be cheerful and happy and tell people to have a nice day, and yada yada yada.

It really blows my mind how people that I know urge me to shop at Wal-Mart because everything is so cheap, when Walmart is one of the biggest corporate welfare suckers in the nation!!!

[TreasonousBastard]

18. This is not a Wal-Mart invention...

as I posted in another thread on this.

Those limo drivers you see holding signs in the airport were told the night before whether they have to get up at 4 AM to do an early ride, and may be sent home after two rides. They get paid by the ride, not by the hour, averaging less than 20 bucks a ride, and have no idea how much they'll make each day, or how long it will take them to make it-- a typical day is 12-14 hours and 4 to 6 rides. They get one day off a week.

Couriers and delivery drivers have the same deal, although they have to pay their own gas and tolls and use their own vans.

The person serving you your dinner gets paid 2 bucks an hour in my area, with tips making up the rest of it. She can be called in at any time to cover a dinner crowd or sent home at any time when it looks like it's slow.

Local store employees around here can be called in at any time and sent home at any time. None make more than 8 bucks an hour.

Benefits? You gotta be kidding. No paid days off, no paid vacations, no nothing. Some are forced to incorporate and become contractors, which ends up costing them more-- even paying for their own workmen's comp. And no unemployment if laid off.

Slow season? You're just not working, or your hours are cut to shit.

These are the highly vaunted "small businesses" that the Borg is driving out. Not all are that way, but the only difference between many of them and the Borg is that the employee knows personally the owner who is screwing them. The small owner may not be a bad guy but every penny he pays comes out of his pocket and maybe he really can't afford thousands a year in benefit packages on top of his other costs.

And Wal-Mart is not the worst of the big guys. I was in line at Big Lots and heard a cashier say she was lucky to get a better job at Wal-Mart.

Wal-Mart is the most efficient retailer that ever existed, and in line with it's efficiency is following the US trend backward to treating labor as a commodity.

But, it's not a Wal-Mart trend, it's a US trend.

[brook]

22. It's endemic in society today.

I work p/t for a non-profit. Nobody thinks it's an inconvenience to request me to do something on my days off or other 'free' time. It's depressing. I'm looking forward to better paychecks next year when the California minimum wage goes up to $8 - which is what my job paid 6 years ago - to my predecessor!

[WinkyDink]

23. Because we've been "governed" by REPUBLICANS for too long.

[mcking]

24. You are absolutely correct

Wal-Mart may be in the vanguard of this trend, but my sister received the same treatment by Sears. She was a 15-year employee and in the last two years they eliminated her (full-time) office job, transferred her to sales, lowered her hourly salary, and changed her schedule to the point she could not predict how many or when her hours would be. Some weeks her check did not cover the outrageous amount they deducted for health insurance. She eventually ended up taking a second night-shift job at a nursing home so she could have a predictable, if small, weekly income.

Of course it got to be too much for her so now she is in an entry-level electronics fabrication job, which has the virtue of being a predictable, day-shift, 40 hours per week. This at the age of 47 -- she works side by side with our 22-year-old nephew. The only thing they have to worry about is WHEN (not if) these jobs will be shipped to Asia.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

27. I specifically did not reference WM in my title - it is wider and broader

WalMart's specific practices and changes were the major subject in the WSJ article, but they made it clear that WalMart was not alone. It sounds like the limo drivers are independent contractors since they are not guaranteed an hourly wage. It sounds like a bad deal. The same with courier and delivery drivers. They know the deal they are getting into and they agreed to it. They are different from employees who are dependent upon and relying on a certain number of hours at a set hourly wage. That's why they are called employees.

Really, who in their right minds would go to an interview and agree to be hired by a company that says, "I can't tell you when you'll work and I can't tell you how much you'll work. And, no benefits. Sound good? Great! Let me just put you into our Turbo Serf 2000 software."

It is a good business practice to be a good employer. There is value in happy employees, lower turnover, greater expertise and product knowlege. A community learns who are the a@#holes in town, and sooner or later that reputation catches up. It is wrong - professionally and morally, and a bad business practice to treat employees like dirt.

When talking about efficiencies in labor costs, why do none of these businesses ever address the bloated, insane salaries of the upper managements and boards? These are the people that are using American publicly traded companies as private cookie jars to be pilfered at will. The head of Home Depot(once a retail superstar - now struggling under his tenure)just left with a 200 million dollar severance package. Sickening.

[hatrack]

53. And the clown at Home Depot got his $214 million after pounding the stock into the ground

Sales are off, the company just canceled a planned major expansion in workforce (Gee, I wonder what they see that they're not telling us about) and the guy took home more money for doing a really shitty job than any 1,000 DUers collectively will see in their lifetimes.

Freakin' ridiculous.

[Rex]

19. Big Box doesn't want educated employees.

They want dumb, pack mules. Serfs is a very good description.

[ray of light]

20. I left Barnes and Noble for that reason exactly!

I have a degree, like many in my area who are still unemployed, and was a home-school parent, so I had some difficulty getting back into the job market.

When Barnes and Noble hired me I thought it would be great. Except it wasn't.

They wanted me there anywhere from 7 am until midnight (depending on when they were to schedule me) and they were un-negotiable about allowing me to come in even at 7:15am when it would have made it possible for me to actually drop my kids off at school first! They claimed it set "bad precedent for the other employees". This meens they were NOT FAMILY FRIENDLY in my book because most of the staff who arrived at 7am still had no children.

Additionally, when I wanted a day off I had to practically beg for it; otherwise they scheduled me no more than 20 hours per week BUT would schedule me DURING the time I specifically asked to be off! Then they'd be ticked when I had to find a replacement.

My hours routinely were boucing up and down and I couldn't rely on a set amount or a set time frame. Some weeks I was 20 hours and some weeks I was 6 hours.

I left there after less than two months because I felt exactly like a serf! I felt like I was NOT ALLOWED a LIFE because I had to be available to THEIR 'flexible' schedule! To this day, I do not shop at Barnes and Noble, even though I've heard it's 'blue'.

[pacalo]

28. I'm curious about how you were scheduled...

You were scheduled for 20 hours a week. How many days of the week were you scheduled?

The reason I'm asking is that I'm currently working part-time for a high-end ladies' boutique at the mall & I have been working on the average of 24 hours per week, but scheduled for 5 days a week, working 4 hours per day. If I'm not going to get more hours, my preference would be to work three 8-hour days.

The managers allow us to make requests for particular days off during the month by making notations on a calendar & they're okay with us switching days with each other. I do find, however, that when the store's business is slow, which has been a lot since Christmas, our hours have been cut drastically.

There's more to the story in regard to the future of this store. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out, but I don't know if I'm willing to stay for the outcome. There are currently three managers for the store. One manager was expecting to leave due to the fact that her husband was going to be relocated to Hawaii. The husband's deal fell through, so this manager seems to be staying, at least for the time being. Because she was expected to be leaving, her junior assistant became a manager & one of the employees was promoted to junior assistant.

I was hired at the time that the first manager was expected to leave. Four of the employees, including me, who are their most recently hired, have had their hours cut dramatically. With three managers' salaries to meet, they are having to cut hours to the extent that it seems no longer worthwhile to work there. The first manager's flub in her personal life has really affected the newer employees' opportunity to work.

Funny thing was, I wasn't looking for a job when the opportunity came up; an old friend recommended me for the job & I looked at it as a chance to get out of the house. I love being around people & I have to say I enjoy the job, but it just doesn't seem worth it.

[ray of light]

33. They usually only scheduled approx. 5 hours/day unless you were

one of the 5 or 6 fulltime employees. The rest of us were "part-time" and as such we got nothing. Then they would schedule the 5 hours approx. 5 days per week and it could be different shifts ie. 7-12, 9-2 or 3, 3-8, 12-5, 6-midnight. The shifts somewhat overlapped during key business hours to provide coverage for those coming or going. Make sense?

We were also all paid slightly above minimum wage which is the going rate where I live.

edited to add:

There was usually 20 or more part-timers. And they hired extra xmas help which brought in even more and which resulted in even less hours!

Also, I would have rather worked 3 days at 8 hours each than 5 days at 5 hours too. But the worst was just not being allowed to PLAN a life because you had to wait to see which days/times work would schedule you!

[pacalo]

40. I totally agree -- not being able to make plans is most frustrating.

They should provide a calendar for the employees to request certain days off, but then, there are times when the employee needs a day off that wasn't anticipated. Character is definitely lacking these days in companies who don't consider their employees' needs.

The 5 days at 5 hours/day is the same way I had been working during the holiday season. My hours, along with 3 other employees' hours, were cut entirely for last week "when business slowed"; however, I suspect the cuts were used to compensate for the need to pay for the additional manager they weren't anticipating in their budget.

For this next week, I'm scheduled for 19 hours, spread out in 4 days.

I don't understand why the retailers insist on scheduling employees for 5 days at 5 hours/day instead of showing some respect by having them work less days of 8 hours each. Is this a way to prevent their employees from having second jobs so that they'll be "more alert" on their time?

As for pay, I didn't really care if I got the job or not during my interview, so I gave them a figure I didn't really expect to get & they gave it to me. I do have experience with visual merchandising, though, & they have a lot of mannequins. The irony about that aspect of the job is that the managers enjoy doing that & have given me very little to do in that regard. I'm not complaining about it; I just think they are squandering a resource that a lot of stores don't have, plus, they don't seem to grasp the objectives of visual merchandising.

[ray of light]

41. Well, also...

They insist that an employee MUST work a weekend like Friday night, or a Saturday and/or Sunday. They don't pay more if you work both days.

And even if they only scheduled me 6 hours--that 6 hours was on a day when they knew I wasn't in town and would have to make a special trip in.

[pacalo]

43. It's fair that all employees take a turn working a weekend day

but scheduling you on a day that they knew you would be out of town is wrong. Bring up the idea about providing a calendar for the employees' needs to make personal plans. See if they might be open to it; suggest it in a way that the company would benefit by reducing the necessity by employees to miss work.

Yesterday at work I overheard a conversation between one of the managers & an employee who works only the weekends. The employee told the manager that other people should take turns closing the store on Saturday nights, that she had a life. Up until then, I had assumed the reason she worked weekends was because those were the only days she was available to work, so I thought, good for her in speaking up.

If they continue to cut hours as drastically as they have been, however, there may not be too many left to take turns closing on Saturday nights. ;)

[NotGivingUp]

54. thanks for the heads up. i'm an avid book reader. they'll not get my business.

[pacalo]

21. That's too much to ask of workers, especially at that rate of pay.

As little as they are paid, it would seem that most who are working there are going to school or have a second job on their off hours. Regardless of the level of pay, they all are entitled to have lives. Managers live for their jobs, but they are paid to make their allegiance to the company worthwhile.

I'm sure these companies already project what their peak hours generally are & base their schedules accordingly. Taking their efficiency to the level of expecting employees to work at the managers' pleasure is simply inhumane.

I know from experience that the lower the pay is, the more they expect. They assume the lower paid employees are the ones that need the job & can be more easily manipulated. Unions, who fight for the workers' rights, are very much needed in this country.

[The Backlash Cometh]

25. That's just inhuman

[high density]

26. I could see banks doing the same thing

It was a fairly rare situation, but when the bank I worked for was in trouble because of a technical problem or something, situations like this would come up. They expected the lowly, but critical, $8/hr employees that kept the backend of the bank running to be there basically on demand when the system came back up. It was a really nasty environment to be in when something went wrong. I don't mind being on call 24/7 if I'm getting paid a decent wage, but they expected the lowest and cheapest employees to modify their schedules with no notice to meet the demands of the bank.

[Strelnikov_]

29. Newspeak Translation - "Improve Customer Service" "Improve Profits"

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. And why we need all these jobs to be UNIONIZED

but that will only happen when the employees themsevles DO IT

And I know it is not easy ok

[skids]

34. Serfs had it better.

http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~rauch/worktime/hours_workweek.html

Congratulations America, you've borrowed and politically acquiesced yourself into slavery. I only pray there is still time left for your people to finish waking up to it, before the promises you used to hold are lost to the footnotes of history.

[NashVegas]

36. PayLess Shoes And Radio Shack Are Moving to the Same Model

http://www.fool.com/investing/value/2007/01/04/orwellian-schedules-at-walmart.aspx

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

39. That is a great link. 1% of the American workforce!!

"What happens to these employees as their steady work turns into an on-again, off-again lottery? Wal-Mart employs 1.3 million Americans, or about 1% of the nation's workforce. There's bound to be a hefty portion of this very large population that can't adjust to an unstable schedule, or to the erratic paychecks that follow." from Motley Fool link Crisco's post.

Wal-Mart ALONE has consigned 1% of American workers to their "work lottery". I think John Edwards and everyone else will have lots of hot buttons to campaign on. The upcoming election issues: war, evironment, healthcare, labor issues like those in this thread. The Republicans will lose on every single one of these issues.

Companies that are crappy to their employees are bad. Period. End of story. I don't care how many feel-good phoney commercials they air. If given a choice I will stay away from every company in this thread. It's gonna be hard to give up Barnes and Noble, but I will.

[NashVegas]

58. I Think This Might Be Okay For Young, Unmarried Workers

But for over 25s? Forget it.

They give you three weeks notice, which isn't so bad. But, it's retail, for chrissakes!

When I was starting in radio, I was often requested to do odd hours and fill ins as a part-timer and didn't mind at all, but that was because a) I wanted to be in consideration for a full-time gig (regular hours) and was willing to be a dog to get it, b) I was given 4 weeks notice and it was in the form of a request, not a demand, and c)it was a career I was passionate about!

For people with children, this would be a nightmare. It's not just a matter of finding a sitter, it's that the unexpected always comes up.

[ray of light]

37. well, when I applied at a job that advertised "FLEXIBLE HOURS"

they meant THEY NEEDED people with flexible hours--not that they OFFERED FLEXIBLE HOURS.

I didn't apply after hearing that.

[alarimer]

38. Union Now

That's the only remedy for this bullshit.

[Robson]

44. Agree, but need a new union culture

My friend I agree 100% that the only way to turn this exploitation of America around by Wal-Mart and the other big box stores is to unionize the work force with a union that is interested only in the workers welfare, and not turning union management into "labor executives" via high dues and high compensation.

I'd suggest a brand new union structure that would be based upon motivation, volunteerism, activism and a cap on all perks and salaries for union officers at relatively modest levels, and with a headquarters somewhere in a small city in middle America with a low cost of living and no culture of exuberance.

Unions need a complete PR makeover where they are looked upon by workers as fighters for their rights, and frankly many of the unions turned into cushy jobs for union management.

Greedy corporate management in this country sorely needs the offsetting effect of organized labor.

[alarimer]

45. You are probably right about that

And I think that people forget that they would not have a 40 hours week or benefits or vacation without the past work of unions. Now a lot of those benefits are going away but people are still not as likely to join unions.

[NotGivingUp]

42. track 'em...publicize...boycott

[B3Nut]

46. And then report it to our Dem reps/senators

Keep their feet to the fire. Big Business has gone too far for too long...they need a smackdown and they need it NOW.

Especially Wal-Mart...spawn from hell they are...

Todd in Beerbratistan

[Virginia Dare]

47. Very soon the day will come when these companies..

will own the property that their "employee"s live in, and "employees" will get credit at the company store instead of pay, etc. Just like the good old days.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

48. I would laugh, but that seems all too possible.

Another aspect of the company store concept is that a lot of these employees are enticed by their employee discount into buying a lot of unnecessary stuff they don't really need, because hey, it's on sale and with the discount, they'd lose money if they didn't buy it, or so they think.

Is it too much to ask for American companies to provide reliable scheduling at a living wage with basic benefits for their employees? Yes, apparently it is too much to ask. Indentured servitude, here we come! Third world living status here we come!

[RedEarth]

49. A "just in time work force" ... wonder how long it will take to spread

to other industries.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

51. When offered (threatened with?) a job like this -

people have to just say no. Why demean yourself for a job with no schedule, no benfits, no decent pay, where you work at the whim of companies who obviously care nothing for their employees (you). I am not being facetious when I say - you would be better off babysitting, or scouting yard sales to sell on EBay or having a lemonade stand in your front yard. These policies are beyond the pale and these companies need to be called on these practices. Public embarrassment combined with strong employee resistance will put an end to this.

[Jcrowley]

52. Practical men are usually the slaves

The problem is, to quote John Maynard Keynes once again, "Practical men are usually the slaves of some defunct economist."

To put the problem of these "practical" — aka "common" — men in more practical terms here's iconoclastic economist Thorstein Veblen presciently explaining the situation:

...the ownership of property in large holdings now controls the nation's industry, and therefore it controls the conditions of life for those who have to resort to the markets to sell or buy. In other words, it has come to pass with the change in circumstances that the rule of Live and Let Live now waits on the discretion of the owners of large wealth. In fact, those thoughtful men in the eighteenth century who made so much of these constituent principles of the modern point of view did not contemplate anything like the system of large wealth, large-scale industry, and large-scale commerce and credit which prevails today. They did not foresee the new order in industry and business, and the system of rights and obligations which they installed, therefore, made no provision for the new order of things that has come on since their time.
⋅ ⋅ ⋅
...the population of these civilised countries now falls into two main classes: those who own wealth invested in large holdings and who thereby control the conditions of life for the rest; and those who do not own wealth in sufficiently large holdings, and whose conditions of life are therefore controlled by these others. It is a division, not between those who have something and those who have nothing — as many socialists would be inclined to describe it — but between those who own wealth enough to make it count, and those who do not.
⋅ ⋅ ⋅
A vested interest is a legitimate right to get something for nothing, usually a prescriptive right to an income which is secured by controlling the traffic at one point or another... is common in the respect that he is not vested with such a presciptive right to get something for nothing. And he is called common because such is the common lot of men under the new order of business and industry; and such will continue (increasingly) to be the common lot so long as the enlightened principles of secure ownership and self-help handed down from the eighteenth century continue to rule human affairs by help of the new order of industry.
⋅ ⋅ ⋅
The maintenance of law and order still means primarily and chiefly the maintenance of these rights and ownership and pecuniary obligation.
⋅ ⋅ ⋅
Whereas makes his peace with the established run of law and custom, and so continues to be rated as a good man and true, he will find that his livelihood falls into a dubious and increasingly precarious case. It is not for nothing that he is a common man.

So caught in a quandary, it is small wonder if the common man is somewhat irresponsible and unsteady in his aims and conduct, so far as touches industrial affairs. A pious regard for the received code of right and honest living holds him to a submissive quietism, a make-believe of self-help and fair dealings...

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

55. Run! Run to another town!

http://www.britainexpress.com/History/Feudalism_and_Medieval_life.htm

The Serf's Life. Although not technically a slave, a serf was bound to a lord for life. He could own no property and needed the lord's permission to marry. Under no circumstance could a serf leave the land without the lord's permission unless he chose to run away. If he ran to a town and managed to stay there for a year and a day, he was a free man.


The Peasant's Life. Villages consisted of from 10-60 families living in rough huts on dirt floors, with no chimneys or windows. Often, one end of the hut was given over to storing livestock. Furnishings were sparse; three legged stools, a trestle table, beds on the floor softened with straw or leaves. The peasant diet was mainly porridge, cheese, black bread, and a few home-grown vegetables.

Peasants had a hard life, but they did not work on Sundays or on the frequent saints' days, and they could go to nearby fairs and markets. The lot of serfs was much harsher.

Should not American workers of American companies strive for at least peasant status? At least they had a fixed schedule. Heck - they got Sundays off!

[sendero]

56. Home Depot..

.... has been doing this for a long time. The idea is to make it impossible for employees to have a second part-time job.

[Freddie Stubbs]

57. Serfs weren't allowed to quit

Big Box employees are.

[sandnsea]

63. window dressing

Serfs could escape and take their chances in the wilds. They had a choice. Just like low income workers have a 'choice'. Or illegal immigrants. Or legal immigrants who signed contracts with labor brokers who cheat them out of their money or turn them into sex workers. Yeah, starving people have a 'choice'. :eyes:

[Rosemary2205]

60. Americans have this coming to them. You get what you ask for.

I'm NOT saying low paid employees deserve this. I'm saying American in general - and it WILL spread. As a society we have done everything in our power to weaken unions. We've gone long past the "me first" mentality to "me only". The whole union ideal of solidarity is just laughed at now.

Well by golly, when working conditions get back to the pre-union days (and they will) a lot of people are going to be squealing for the government to DO something. Well they won't. That's why unions rose up in the first place people. You should have thought of that before going out of your way to patronize non-union businesses and voting in anti-union politicians.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

64. Just saw the first cozy cuddly Wal-Mart ad aired tonight

about how wonderful they are and how they bring jobs and save American families money. They say in the ad every employee has access to healthcare for $1.00 a day. Could we have any WM employees kick in here and verify that? It specifically said "every". As in EVERY full and part-time employee? I would interpret that to mean that every single employee can buy into the company plan for $30.00 a month. Who can verify this claim for us? I really want to know.

(Of course, if you're paid next to nothing, you can't afford ANYTHING towards healthcare since you might opt for food, and a roof first.)

[pitohui]

65. the $1 a day plan only pays up to $1000 per person

in other words it is no plan at all, since there is no cancer, no heart disease, probably not even a common cold or flu that can be treated at a capped price of $1000

don't believe me, here is a write-up of the $1/day plan:

http://www.dsausa.org/lowwage/walmart/health.html

you would be an idiot to spend a dollar a day on insurance that is capped at $1,000

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

66. Thanks so much - I was sure there was a lot more to the story.

How deceptive the ad, and what a piece of crap this plan is. Thanks for the info. Maybe you could start a thread on just this fact - especially with the big cozy cuddly Wal-Mart media push. People need to know this.