General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums10 Biggest Myths About Retail Workers
http://www.alternet.org/10-biggest-myths-about-retail-workersMyth 1: Most retail workers are teenagers or young adults who do not really need the money
Reality: The average age of a retail worker is 37 years old (pdf), and more than half of year-round retail workers contribute a significant portion (pdf) of their family's total income. For example, researchers found that a third (pdf) of New York City retail workers support at least one dependent.
Myth 2: Retail workers are unskilled
Reality: 28% of retail workers (pdf) have completed some college, and 15% have a bachelor's degree or higher. Employers have deskilled a lot of the work, but still report in surveys that they want employees with both soft and hard skills, including product knowledge, ability to relate to customers, and increasingly, familiarity with technology for assisting with online sales.
Myth 3: Retail workers may earn a low wage, but most of them are only doing the job temporarily until they move up to higher level jobs or other careers
Reality: While the retail industry has higher turnover than many industries, most retail workers stay in the industry which means that the turnover is high for individual employers, particularly those that pay low wages and treat workers poorly. In a large national survey (pdf), about half of retail respondents said they were not very likely to try to change employers in the next year. Workers do not lack a work ethic or commitment to retail, but are often forced to look for another job that provides more hours or more predictable schedules.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)RockaFowler
(7,429 posts)Heck there were many of us that started our careers in the Retail business.
My husband is doing great right now in the Retail industry - Lowe's - where they hire people who have experience in Trades. My husband was a Trim Carpenter and now can give you detailed information about every inch of Lowe's. They need people like my husband there who understand how things work as a handyman (for instance)
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)Reality: Employers are not required by law to pay extra to workers working on holidays, unless that extra work puts their total work week above 40 hours. Retail workers report frustration that they have little control over their schedules, and some note that they could be penalized for refusing to work on holidays. Even if workers do get paid time and a half and holiday shifts are "voluntary," most retail workers are underemployed and need more work. Only with sustainable schedules and living wages, would the decision to work on a holiday truly be voluntary.
This completely blows the claims of some (here on DU) , that working holidays in retail is "no big deal" ... and that the workers receive "holiday pay"
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)When I worked at Walmart, they only paid holiday pay for people who worked full-time (34 or more hours/week). When I had to work on Thanksgiving and Black Friday, I didn't get holiday pay. I still made the same $7.85/hour as many other associates.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)My first career was as a nurse. i expected to work holidays ... everyone was paid "holiday" pay (Usually time and a half) and given an alternate day off as a holiday. My pay in that field was ~ 3x the amount you quoted 20 years ago. importantly, i knew I was working for a reason far more important than corporate profits.
I am really disconcerted by those that think it is "no big deal" for a Walmart (insert any retailer) worker ... to give up their holiday for very little pay and the knowledge that they are simply working to increase retail profits.
sheshe2
(83,757 posts)It damn well is a big deal.
kcr
(15,316 posts)But then there will still be people who think this. :/
Incitatus
(5,317 posts)They are closed on Thanksgiving and Christmas and they pay her a holiday bonus of 8 hours for each day. So yes, that Walmart line is BS. They could do the same thing, but they care more about making a little more profit.
Igel
(35,300 posts)So many details are lost in striving for the conclusion.
So take the first claim: average age is 37.
Yes. It is. But the distribution is skewed, so a disproportionate number of employees are under 28 and over 65. A smaller number in their 30s is working retail than you'd expect. The "average age is 37" is produced to show that the average employee age is younger in retail.
So the claim is true, but a very large percentage of the retail workers are younger workers. Which is what the stat is claiming to refute. Then again, there's that "who don't need the money," which simply isn't addressed. There's no good info in the source on need versus age, nor even a definition of "need" on which to base a claim.
Next claim: More than half of year-round retail workers contribute more than 50% of their family's total income.
Yes. 54% of (a) year-round retail workers (leave out temporary workers) (b) over age 20 (remember the age skew) who (c) work for large employees (leave out smaller, non-chain stores) contribute at least 50% of their family's total income (one wonders if this is just earned income--no definition provided).
With the caveats that were left out, is the claim still true? Doesn't matter. It's that kind of article. It preachers to the choir, who don't really much notice if the minister says he cites II Galatians or Matthew 30:12.
And on it goes.
xchrom
(108,903 posts)Johonny
(20,850 posts)For instance by using an average age they are creating a misleading vision of the typical worker. This is because most people assume a normal distribution around the average. However when the statistics don't have a normal distribution then using the average can be misleading. Take a case in point. Bill Gates walks into a soup kitchen with 10 homeless people inside. The average net worth in the room is over a billion dollars. But the average is meaning less to tell you anything about the typical person in the room. The vast majority of people in the room are broke. The writer is claiming the distribution of ages is skewed to the young and the old. Thus the typical worker is not 37 years old even if the average is. In this case the average is not a good representation of the age distribution and can lead a reader to a misleading conclusion. I haven't look at the data itself but I understand their complaint. I'm not sure the complaint exactly hurts your conclusion in the end but I think they would argue using better statistical methods would help make a better argument.
Is this myth in there: Retail workers are mothers that just need to get out of the house for something to do.
TBF
(32,060 posts)volunteer at their children's school or at their church or something.
The thing with retail jobs is that many high school & college students have used them for decades for spending $$ (I sure did and that was 25 years ago) ... but today the breakdown is likely a little more complicated. Unemployment is higher so I suspect you find folks who take them for short-term $$$, or keep at them after college until they find something in their major, or go to them in their 60s because they are retired but find that it's nice to add a little extra income to help with prescription costs etc.
We used to have so many more manufacturing jobs in this country that had the potential to pay better (especially with unions negotiating wages) but those jobs have moved overseas. People have to do something. Walmart is getting rich off of that in multiple ways ...