Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Robert Reich: Why You Shouldn’t Shop at Walmart on Friday [View all]Hissyspit
(45,790 posts)12. No. That's not the reason.
As it says in the article, they are the nation's largest employer. They invented a whole new form of monopolizing, engaging in unfair practices and undermining our economy. Read "End of the Line."
For the first time ever, a strike is taking place in America aimed at the most powerful company in the economy: Walmart. Workers at Walmart stores across the country, as Josh Eidelson reports, are threatening to walk out on Black Friday, the biggest shopping day of the year. These labor actions are coming on top of earlier labor actions at Walmarts warehouse contractors linked to non-payment of overtime, non-payment for all hours worked, and even pay less than the minimum wage.
The possible strike could be very significant, because the target of the strike is the most important driver of the race to the bottom economy. Walmart is massive the company is the largest private employer in the US, with more than 2 million employees. The average American household spends $3500 at Walmart, and in 2006, the company alone represented 2.3% of the American GDP. The company is so powerful that when a Walmart Supercenter comes into your community, the entire communitys obesity rate increases. It is also, as New America scholar Barry Lynn has argued in End of the Line, a force that has reshaped the American corporate world.
Though known for suppressing wages, I found evidence that the company is willing to change working conditions with sufficient pressure. According to St. Louis Federal Reserve President William Poole, the last time there was significant labor unrest at Walmart, in 2006, the company raised wages at 700 stores. Poole, like many at the Fed, regularly spoke with Walmart executives, and they gave him unvarnished views about their business practices because they believed (as did Poole) that the information would be used solely for macro-economic forecasting. On March 27-28, 2006, Poole said that his Walmart contact told him the company would not raise wages, and was planning on moving their work force increasingly towards part-time employment. Poole was interested in this because of its bearing on inflation. Wages, he said, and these are for hourly workers, are absolutely flat no increases whatsoever in the last year and no increases planned going forward. Poole continued, About 20 percent of their associates are part time and that they are going to be increasing that share to 40 percent so they can staff at peak times and get more productivity out of their workforce.
Just two months later, Poole offered some very different and shocking news, My Wal-Mart contact also said that Wal-Mart is in the process of raising starting wages in about 700 stores. This is the first time in eight years of talking with him that Ive heard any comment like that. He said that some of the raises are part of the Wal-Mart, Ill call it Social/political agenda because of all the controversy about Wal-Mart. The FOMC transcripts are as close as were going to get to internal corporate dialogue without discovery or leaks. The reason I found this information is because Walmart has become a significant presence at the Fed; forecasters at the key Federal Open Market Committee meetings increasingly rely on what the retailer tells them about the economy. Now, FOMC transcripts arent released for at least five years, so we dont know whether this strike is registering with those high level policymakers. But the last time there was a far less aggressive union-backed attack on Walmarts business practices, it did.
Read more at http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/10/walmart-the-most-powerful-company-in-the-world-admits-that-protests-and-strikes-lead-to-wage-increases.html#lKQ4K1Gol5qcRhKP.99
The possible strike could be very significant, because the target of the strike is the most important driver of the race to the bottom economy. Walmart is massive the company is the largest private employer in the US, with more than 2 million employees. The average American household spends $3500 at Walmart, and in 2006, the company alone represented 2.3% of the American GDP. The company is so powerful that when a Walmart Supercenter comes into your community, the entire communitys obesity rate increases. It is also, as New America scholar Barry Lynn has argued in End of the Line, a force that has reshaped the American corporate world.
Though known for suppressing wages, I found evidence that the company is willing to change working conditions with sufficient pressure. According to St. Louis Federal Reserve President William Poole, the last time there was significant labor unrest at Walmart, in 2006, the company raised wages at 700 stores. Poole, like many at the Fed, regularly spoke with Walmart executives, and they gave him unvarnished views about their business practices because they believed (as did Poole) that the information would be used solely for macro-economic forecasting. On March 27-28, 2006, Poole said that his Walmart contact told him the company would not raise wages, and was planning on moving their work force increasingly towards part-time employment. Poole was interested in this because of its bearing on inflation. Wages, he said, and these are for hourly workers, are absolutely flat no increases whatsoever in the last year and no increases planned going forward. Poole continued, About 20 percent of their associates are part time and that they are going to be increasing that share to 40 percent so they can staff at peak times and get more productivity out of their workforce.
Just two months later, Poole offered some very different and shocking news, My Wal-Mart contact also said that Wal-Mart is in the process of raising starting wages in about 700 stores. This is the first time in eight years of talking with him that Ive heard any comment like that. He said that some of the raises are part of the Wal-Mart, Ill call it Social/political agenda because of all the controversy about Wal-Mart. The FOMC transcripts are as close as were going to get to internal corporate dialogue without discovery or leaks. The reason I found this information is because Walmart has become a significant presence at the Fed; forecasters at the key Federal Open Market Committee meetings increasingly rely on what the retailer tells them about the economy. Now, FOMC transcripts arent released for at least five years, so we dont know whether this strike is registering with those high level policymakers. But the last time there was a far less aggressive union-backed attack on Walmarts business practices, it did.
Read more at http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/10/walmart-the-most-powerful-company-in-the-world-admits-that-protests-and-strikes-lead-to-wage-increases.html#lKQ4K1Gol5qcRhKP.99
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
78 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The UAW would only target one of the Big Three when it came time to negotiate a new
byeya
Nov 2012
#16
Yeah, Reich is correct most of the time. What is the current Sec'y of Labor doing to rebuild
byeya
Nov 2012
#17
Thanks for refreshing my memory. I think you are right that Prof Reich was pro-NAFTA
byeya
Nov 2012
#28
More: Increasing salary to $25K would lift 700K out of poverty and cost only 1% price increase
flpoljunkie
Nov 2012
#27
Wal-mart has assets of 194 billion and a profit of 16 billiion and yet they can't pay ...
Botany
Nov 2012
#65
For every 2 employees that work 40 hr/wk rather than 28, roughly 1 employee will lose a 28 hr job.
jody
Nov 2012
#75