Wal-Mart To Union: Fine, We'll Just Close Up Shop

[IDBillzFan]

Union wins, Wal-Mart says "Can't do it. We're closing the store."

[erynthered]

Union wins, Wal-Mart says "Can't do it. We're closing the store."

234011[/snapback]

 

 

Oh, Canada our home and native land, anyway.

 

 

I'm not suprised. Sometimes extortion doesnt work. Where's Lori? Probably downloading.............

[GG]

Profit = Bad

[Hogboy Swine]

Union wins, Wal-Mart says "Can't do it. We're closing the store."

234011[/snapback]

 

 

Good...Close the stinking store. Wal Mart is garbage. they have destroyed small towns in the USA and I am sure they are also doing it in Canada.

 

They have their commericals (propaganda) where they act like they are nice to these oldsters who pass out the smiley stickers. The truth is they treat these poor old buzzards like garbage as they do the rest of their employees

[IDBillzFan]

The truth is they treat these poor old buzzards like garbage

234037[/snapback]

Yeah...all the WalMart bigwigs probably stand around doing mean things to them...like calling them poor old buzzards.

[Johnny Coli]

From the article, it sounds like Wal-Mart wanted to bail on that location already.

 

"The retailer had first discussed closing the Jonquiere store last October, saying that the store was losing money."

 

 

Also, doesn't sound like Wal-Mart tried real hard to negotiate anyway.

 

“We were hoping it wouldn’t come to this,” said Andrew Pelletier, a spokesman for Wal-Mart Canada. “Despite nine days of meetings over three months, we’ve been unable to reach an agreement with the union that in our view will allow the store to operate efficiently and profitably.”

 

 

Maybe Wal-Mart is just using the Union as a scapegoat here. It sure would help their effort to squash any and all unionization of their stores in the homeland.

 

We tried, we really tried, but it was the evil union that brought down that store. Don't let the unions force us to close shop in Reagantown, USA. (Even though our presence destroys your local retailer's business). Remember, Buy American!(products made overseas).

[Alaska Darin]

“We were hoping it wouldn’t come to this,” said Andrew Pelletier, a spokesman for Wal-Mart Canada. “Despite nine days of meetings over three months, we’ve been unable to reach an agreement with the union that in our view will allow the store to operate efficiently and profitably.”

234042[/snapback]

Perhaps they're using the same negotiators as the NHL.

[erynthered]

Perhaps they're using the same negotiators as the NHL.

234062[/snapback]

 

 

You brought up the NHL, shouldnt this be on the Wall?

 

 

Stop that Darin

[GG]

We tried, we really tried, but it was the evil union that brought down that store.  Don't let the unions force us to close shop in Reagantown, USA. (Even though our presence destroys your local retailer's business).  Remember, Buy American!(products made overseas).

234042[/snapback]

 

Ahh, the eternal battle between the consumer and the producer.

 

In my book, let the consumer decide (the producers will follow).

[IDBillzFan]

We tried, we really tried, but it was the evil union that brought down that store. 

234042[/snapback]

And the beautiful part is, most of the people who work for Wal-Mart throughout the US will learn about this more likely from each other than from actually reading about it online or even beyond the local headline. Besides, whatever the story says, they won't care. All they'll realize is "People at WalMart are losing their jobs because of the union. Shut up and go to work."

 

Great work if you can get it.

[BILLS4LIFE]

Perhaps they're using the same negotiators as the NHL.

234062[/snapback]

 

Priceless!

[ExiledInIllinois]

Yeah...all the WalMart bigwigs probably stand around doing mean things to them...like calling them poor old buzzards.

234039[/snapback]

 

Must be and Arkansas thing? Thought they only locked 'em in at the poultry plants?

 

Actually worse:

 

Looking back to that night, Michael Rodriguez still has trouble believing the situation he faced when he was stocking shelves on the overnight shift at the Sam's Club in Corpus Christi, Texas.

 

It was 3 a.m., Mr. Rodriguez recalled, some heavy machinery had just smashed into his ankle, and he had no idea how he would get to the hospital.

 

The Sam's Club, av Wal · Mart subsidiary, had locked its overnight workers in, as it always did, to keep robbers out and, as some managers say, to prevent employee theft. As usual, there was no manager with a key to let Mr. Rodriguez out. The fire exit, he said, was hardly an option — management had drummed into the overnight workers that if they ever used that exit for anything but a fire, they would lose their jobs.

 

"My ankle was crushed," Mr. Rodriguez said, explaining he had been struck by an electronic cart driven by an employee moving stacks of merchandise. "I was yelling and running around like a hurt dog that had been hit by a car. Another worker made some phone calls to reach a manager, and it took an hour for someone to get there and unlock the door."

 

The reason for Mr. Rodriguez's delayed trip to the hospital was a little-known Wal · Mart policy: the lock-in. For more than 15 years, Wal · Mart Stores Inc., the world's largest retailer, has locked in overnight employees at some of its Wal · Mart and Sam's Club stores. It is a policy that many employees say has created disconcerting situations, such as when a worker in Indiana suffered a heart attack, when hurricanes hit in Florida and when workers' wives have gone into labor.

 

"You could be bleeding to death, and they'll have you locked in," Mr. Rodriguez

said. "Being locked in in an emergency like that, that's not right."

 

Mona Williams, Wal · Mart's vice president for communications, said the company used lock-ins to protect stores and employees in high-crime areas. She said Wal · Mart locked in workers — the company calls them associates — at 10 percent of its stores, a percentage that has declined as Wal · Mart has opened more 24-hour stores.

 

Ms. Williams said Wal · Mart, with 1.2 million employees in its 3,500 stores nationwide, had recently altered its policy to ensure that every overnight shift at every store has a night manager with a key to let workers out in emergencies.

 

"Wal · Mart secures these stores just as any other business does that has employees working overnight," Ms. Williams said. "Doors are locked to protect associates and the store from intruders. Fire doors are always accessible for safety, and there will always be at least one manager in the store with a set of keys to unlock the doors."

 

Ms. Williams said individual store managers, rather than headquarters, decided whether to lock workers in, depending on the crime rate in their area.

 

Retailing experts and Wal · Mart's competitors said the company's lock-in policy was highly unusual. Officials at Kmart, Sears, Toys "R" Us, Home Depot and Costco, said they did not lock in workers.

 

Even some retail industry experts questioned the policy. "It's clearly cause for concern," said Burt Flickinger, who runs a retail consulting concern. "Locking in workers, that's more of a 19th-century practice than a 20th-century one."

 

Several Wal · Mart employees said that as recently as a few months ago they had been locked in on some nights without a manager who had a key. Robert Schuster said that until last October, when he left his job at a Sam's Club in Colorado Springs, workers were locked in every night, and on Friday and Saturday nights there was no one there with a key. One night, he recalled, a worker had been throwing up violently, and no one had a store key to let him out.

 

"They told us it's a big fine for the company if we go out the fire door and there's no fire," Mr. Schuster said. "They gave us a big lecture that if we go out that door, you better make sure it's an emergency like the place going up on fire."

 

Augustine Herrera, who worked at the Colorado Springs store for nine years, disputed the company's assertion that it locked workers in stores in only high-crime areas, largely to protect employees.

 

"The store is in a perfectly safe area," Mr. Herrera said.

 

Several employees said Wal · Mart began making sure that there was someone with a key seven nights a week at the Colorado Springs store and other stores starting Jan. 1, shortly after The New York Times began making inquiries about employees' being locked in.

 

The main reason that Wal · Mart and Sam's stores lock in workers, several former store managers said, was not to protect employees but to stop "shrinkage" — theft by employees and outsiders.

 

Tom Lewis, who managed four Sam's Clubs in Texas and Tennessee, said: "It's to prevent shrinkage. Wal · Mart is like any other company. They're concerned about the bottom line, and the bottom line is affected by shrinkage in the store."

 

Another reason for lock-ins, he said, was to increase efficiency — workers could not sneak outside to smoke a cigarette, get high or make a quick trip home.

 

Mr. Rodriguez acknowledged that the seemingly obvious thing to have done after breaking his ankle was to leave by the fire door, but he and two dozen other Wal · Mart and Sam's Club workers said they had repeatedly been warned never to do that unless there was a fire. Leaving for any other reason, they said, could jeopardize the jobs of the offending employee and the night supervisor.

 

Regarding Mr. Rodriguez, Ms. Williams said, "He was clearly capable of walking out a fire door anytime during the night."

 

She added: "We tell associates that common sense has to prevail. Fire doors are for emergencies, and by all means use them if you have emergencies. We have no way of knowing what any individual manager said to an associate."

 

None of the Wal · Mart workers interviewed said they knew anyone who had been fired for violating the fire-exit policy in an emergency, but several said they knew workers who had received official reprimands, the first step toward firing. Several said managers had told them of firing workers for such an offense.

 

"They let us know they'd fire people for going out the fire door, unless there was a fire." said Farris Cobb, who was a night supervisor at several Sam's Clubs in Florida. "They instilled in us they had done it before and they would do it again."

 

Mr. Cobb and several other workers interviewed about lock-ins were plaintiffs in lawsuits accusing Wal · Mart of forcing them to work off the clock, for example working several hours without pay after their shifts ended. Wal · Mart says it tells managers never to let employees work off the clock.

 

Janet Anderson, who was a night supervisor at a Sam's Club in Colorado from 1996 to 2002, said that many of her employees were also airmen stationed at a nearby Air Force base. Their commanders sometimes called the store to order them to report to duty immediately, but she said they often had to wait until a manager arrived around 6 a.m. She said one airman received a reprimand from management for leaving by the fire door to report for duty.

 

Ms. Anderson also told of a worker who had broken his foot one night while using a cardboard box baler and had to wait four hours for someone to open the door. She said the store's managers had lied to her and the overnight crew, telling them the fire doors could not be physically opened by the workers and that the doors would open automatically when the fire alarm was triggered.

 

Only after several years as night supervisor did she learn that she could open the fire door from inside, she said, but she was told she faced dismissal if she opened it when there was no fire. One night, she said, she cut her finger badly with a box cutter but dared not go out the fire exit — waiting until morning to get 13 stitches at a hospital.

 

The federal government and almost all states do not bar locking in workers so long as they have access to an emergency exit. But several longtime Wal · Mart workers recalled that in the late 1980's and early 1990's, the fire doors of some Wal · Marts were chained shut.

 

Wal · Mart officials said they cracked down on that practice after an overnight stocker at a store in Savannah, Ga., collapsed and died in 1988. Paramedics could not get into the store soon enough because the employees inside could not open the fire door or front door, and there was no manager with a key.

 

"We certainly do not do that now," Ms. Williams said. "It's not been that way for a long time."

 

Explaining the policy, she said, "Only about 10 percent of our stores do not allow associates to come and go at will, and these are generally in higher crime areas where the associates' safety is considered an issue."

 

Mr. Lewis, the former store manager, said he had been willing to get out of bed at any hour to drive back to his store to unlock the door in an emergency. But he said many Sam's Club managers were not as responsive. "Sometimes you couldn't get hold of a manager," he said. "The tendency of managers was to sleep through the nights. They let the answering machine pick up."

 

Mr. Cobb, the overnight supervisor in Florida, said he remembered once when a stocker was deathly sick, throwing up repeatedly. He said he called the store manager at home and told him, " `You need to come let this person out.' He said: `Find one of the mattresses. Have him lay down on the floor.'

 

"I went into certain situations like that, and I called store managers, and they pretty much told me that they wouldn't come in to unlock the door. So I would call another manager, and a lot of times they would tell you that they were on their way, when they weren't."

 

Mr. Cobb said the Wal · Mart rule that generally prohibits employees from working more than 40 hours a week to avoid paying overtime played out in strange ways for night-shift employees. Mr. Cobb said that on many workers' fifth work day of the week, they would approach the 40-hour mark and then clock out, usually around 1 a.m. They would then have to sit around, napping, playing cards or watching television, until a manager arrived at 6 a.m.

 

Roy Ellsworth Jr., who was a cashier at a Wal · Mart in Pueblo, Colo., said he was normally scheduled to work until the store closed at 10 p.m., but most nights management locked the front door, at closing time, and did not let workers leave until everyone had straightened up the store.

 

"They would keep us there for however long they wanted," Mr. Ellsworth said. "It was often for half an hour, and it could be two hours or longer during Christmas season."

 

One night, shortly after closing time, Mr. Ellsworth had an asthma attack. "My inhaler hardly helped," he said. "I couldn't breathe. I felt I was going to pass out. I got fuzzy vision. I told the assistant manager I really needed to go to the hospital. He pretty much got in my face and told me not to leave or I'd get fired. I was having trouble standing. When I finally told him I was going to call a lawyer, he finally let me out."

 

One top Wal · Mart official said: "If those things happened five or six years ago, we're a very large company with more that 3,000 stores, and individual instances like that could happen. That's certainly not something Wal · Mart would condone."

 

 

 

[VABills]

Mr. Cobb and several other workers interviewed about lock-ins were plaintiffs in lawsuits accusing Wal · Mart of forcing them to work off the clock, for example working several hours without pay after their shifts ended. Wal · Mart says it tells managers never to let employees work off the clock.

 

[/i]

 

235313[/snapback]

 

 

Guess they don't have to worry about working off the clock now do they? Now they get in line for unemployment.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Guess they don't have to worry about working off the clock now do they?  Now they get in line for unemployment.

235327[/snapback]

 

 

Take it easy there champ... We don't want any hurt feelings!

 

[RuntheDamnBall]

Profit = Bad

234014[/snapback]

Nice equation. These ones also apply in this situation.

 

28 hours = Full time work week

Female employees = worth 50% less

Living wage = not an option

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

And the beautiful part is, most of the people who work for Wal-Mart throughout the US will learn about this more likely from each other than from actually reading about it online or even beyond the local headline. Besides, whatever the story says, they won't care. All they'll realize is "People at WalMart are losing their jobs because of the union. Shut up and go to work."

 

Great work if you can get it.

234126[/snapback]

 

That's hardly fair.

 

Union leaders are no better than racketeers. I think the problems with unions during the 60s, 70s and 80s proved that.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Living wage = not an option

235333[/snapback]

 

So let's see....Think these people could find a job somewhere else?

 

Why don't they? Could it be it's not as bad as people would like us to believe? Nah.

 

It's the evil business world preying upon innocent retards, that's what it is.

[VABills]

That's hardly fair.

 

Union leaders are no better than racketeers. I think the problems with unions during the 60s, 70s and 80s proved that.

235337[/snapback]

JSP, that is what LA is saying, I think. He is basically saying the employees won't get the right story they will get what they are told by other employees and union people, not the facts.

[VABills]

 

Take it easy there champ... We don't want any hurt feelings!

 

235330[/snapback]

I wouldn't know. Never had my feeling hurt here before. I'd say ask RCOW but he seems to be in a ward somewhere after the media lied about the poll results.

[VABills]

Where is he anyway?  Sure he hasn't been "locked out" over some arbitrary, over-officious ruling?

 

235350[/snapback]

No everyone is looking for him. I am sure he isn't locked out. He just disappeared. Like I said he is sitting in a bin somewhere, in a white jacket, banging his head on the wall saying, "CNN said John Kerry won the exit polls".

[RuntheDamnBall]

So let's see....Think these people could find a job somewhere else?

 

Why don't they? Could it be it's not as bad as people would like us to believe? Nah.

 

It's the evil business world preying upon innocent retards, that's what it is.

235339[/snapback]

Could be that we're living in an era where people are told they're just lucky to have the jobs that they do have, and if they have to work 3 of them, well, that's their lot in life and they should suck it up. And if you really don't like it, the company can always move to Mexico.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Could be that we're living in an era where people are told they're just lucky to have the jobs that they do have, and if they have to work 3 of them, well, that's their lot in life and they should suck it up.  And if you really don't like it, the company can always move to Mexico.

235356[/snapback]

 

Social Darwinism.

 

Likely these people didn't finish school. Likeyly they're uneducated and less intelligent.

 

In order for some to succeed, others must fail. It's a natural law.

[VABills]

Social Darwinism.

 

Likely these people didn't finish school. Likeyly they're uneducated and less intelligent.

 

In order for some to succeed, others must fail. It's a natural law.

235358[/snapback]

Not entirely fair there JSP. I work with someone who is very smart, masters degree, making 6 figures. She actually likes people and works every weekend at the local grocery store as a checkout clerk, just to associate with regular people. I am sure there are some who enjoy their jobs at Walmart, etc... because of the people interaction. But be sure that a lot are truely highschool dropouts who have made bad decisions in life to put them at this point. But not all.

[KD in CA]

Could be that we're living in an era where people are told they're just lucky to have the jobs that they do have, and if they have to work 3 of them, well, that's their lot in life and they should suck it up.  And if you really don't like it, the company can always move to Mexico.

235356[/snapback]

 

 

I thought we were living in an era were people were told that it's their "right" to have a job (and health insurance), not to mention some invented figured called a "living wage", which bears no relevance to the value for the service being performed by the employee.

[RuntheDamnBall]

Social Darwinism.

 

Likely these people didn't finish school. Likeyly they're uneducated and less intelligent.

 

In order for some to succeed, others must fail. It's a natural law.

235358[/snapback]

Tell me then, why Wegman's does what it does and has happy employees. Why do they help people out who are trying to better their lives and go to school where Wal-Mart does not, knowing that these people might leave the company because they aren't 'trapped?' Is Wegman's a stupid company for being one of the best places to work in the country, and perhaps eschewing some profit for it?

 

On another note, I know plenty of people who just had it drilled into them by family and schools that they would never amount to anything, and so they end up working at a place like Wal-Mart. That doesn't seem so natural to me. I know some people can be really strong and rise above that kind of mentality, but most, when environmentally surrounded with the idea that they are worthless, will actually believe it. I think Wegman's believes otherwise, and they have a lot of happy people who want to work for them.

[RuntheDamnBall]

I thought we were living in an era were people were told that it's their "right" to have a job (and health insurance), not to mention some invented figured called a "living wage", which bears no relevance to the value for the service being performed by the employee.

235369[/snapback]

The 'value' for the service is just as invented, my friend, by people who are making a lot more money. It would not cut significantly into Wal-Mart's gigantic profit margins to provide people with a wage above poverty level, which isn't high at all to begin with. And if you've ever had to work three jobs to keep afloat, you should understand the merits of a living wage. People wonder why parenting is so bad but don't make any connection to the fact that a lot of parents are working endlessly to make ends meet.

[VABills]

The 'value' for the service is just as invented, my friend, by people who are making a lot more money.  It would not cut significantly into Wal-Mart's gigantic profit margins to provide people with a wage above poverty level, which isn't high at all to begin with.  And if you've ever had to work three jobs to keep afloat, you should understand the merits of a living wage.  People wonder why parenting is so bad but don't make any connection to the fact that a lot of parents are working endlessly to make ends meet.

235386[/snapback]

 

Maybe it is "invented", and while I don't agree completely with KD or JSP, it is imperative for each Walmart store to be competative within their market. If a stor is losing money, they fire the managers. The managers have to keep employee costs in line with profits for their store. Why else would a Walmart stay in a market? If they are losing money or just barely making a profit, in that store, they either the employees need to work a little harder to help make a profit or the store should close, hence the employee has no job.

 

Walmart overall and each individual store has to be considered seperately.

[KD in CA]

The 'value' for the service is just as invented, my friend, by people who are making a lot more money. 

 

No, it's not 'invented'. It's the level at which one party is willing to pay and the other party is willing to work. You are suggesting that the party who is paying the cash has no say in how much they have to pay. Long live freedom.

 

 

It would not cut significantly into Wal-Mart's gigantic profit margins to provide people with a wage above poverty level, which isn't high at all to begin with.

 

First of all comrade, the "because they can afford it" line is so counter to everything this country is supposed to be about, I don't even know where to begin on that concept.

 

Secondly, have you run the numbers? Do you really KNOW what the impact would be of what you are suggesting? Please tell me what the impact would have been on Wal Mart's profits last year.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

I think Wegman's believes otherwise, and they have a lot of happy people who want to work for them.

235375[/snapback]

 

 

While laid off I worked for Wegman's. And I'll tell you, there weren't a whole lot of happy people cutting fish at Wegman's.

[RuntheDamnBall]

No, it's not 'invented'.  It's the level at which one party is willing to pay and the other party is willing to work.  You are suggesting that the party who is paying the cash has no say in how much they have to pay.  Long live freedom.

235409[/snapback]

Ahh, throw in a buzz-word like freedom when it applies to making profit, and deny it when it applies to someone not having to work 100 hours a week to make it.

First of all comrade, the "because they can afford it" line is so counter to everything this country is supposed to be about, I don't even know where to begin on that concept.

 

Secondly, have you run the numbers?  Do you really KNOW what the impact would be of what you are suggesting?  Please tell me what the impact would have been on Wal Mart's profits last year.

235409[/snapback]

I suppose this is a gotcha. But let's discuss some numbers I have found. 70 percent of Wal-Mart's employees leave within the first year. The company considers full-time 28 hours a week, which is some logic for you, and a third of their employees work under that many hours. The company could afford to pay its employees an average of close to what is considered a living wage if it raised its prices 1%, or cut its profits by a third (admittedly a large margin, but considering Wal-Mart's figures the profit would still remain unbelievably high). You and I differ on what is important here, and that's fine, that's our freedom. I personally believe that companies have as much of a responsibility to their country as its citizens, and I think many are failing in that respect.

 

I appreciate the "comrade" remark, as well. It's nice to see that you can discuss civilly without any digs.

While laid off I worked for Wegman's. And I'll tell you, there weren't a whole lot of happy people cutting fish at Wegman's.

235410[/snapback]

Probably not a lot of happy fish-cutters anywhere! "Knife goes in, guts come out..." I'm sorry your experience wasn't good there.

But in general, I've never dealt with anyone there who wasn't more than pleasant.

[KD in CA]

Ahh, throw in a buzz-word like freedom when it applies to making profit, and deny it when it applies to someone not having to work 100 hours a week to make it.

 

Again, 'making it' as it applies to each of us is our own responsibility. We are all afforded guarantees to live, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (and fiscal success).

 

I suppose this is a gotcha.  But let's discuss some numbers I have found.  70 percent of Wal-Mart's employees leave within the first year.  The company considers full-time 28 hours a week, which is some logic for you, and a third of their employees work under that many hours.  The company could afford to pay its employees an average of close to what is considered a living wage if it raised its prices 1%, or cut its profits by a third (admittedly a large margin, but considering Wal-Mart's figures the profit would still remain unbelievably high).  You and I differ on what is important here, and that's fine, that's our freedom.  I personally believe that companies have as much of a responsibility to their country as its citizens, and I think many are failing in that respect.

 

I agree with you that companies have a responsibility to the country and its people, just like we all have a responsibility to our communities and fellow citizens. However, I disagree with the concept of attempting to legislate that. If someone wants to be a greedy prick, I believe that is their right.

 

I appreciate the "comrade" remark, as well.  It's nice to see that you can discuss civilly without any digs.

 

(What, no ‘Darin smirk’?) Sorry for the dig. I just sensed a whiff of that "the problem isn't that some people are poor, the problem is that some people are rich" mentality that so many on the left seem to have adopted. The answer of 'tax the rich' to solve all the country's problems is short sighted and unfair IMO, but it seems to be a centerpiece of the opinions of many people when it comes to domestic issues.