Walmart pay.

A large number of Walmart hating liberals suggest that they should pay $15 per hour. They are apparently totally ignorant of any logical reason what that would mean to Walmart. According to some that have looked into this, the ave Walmart worker make $8.81 per hour. There are approx 2 million Walmart employees. If they all had a pay increase to $15 per hour it would cost Walmart an additional 36 billion dollars. Last year Walmart netted 16.8 billion dollars. NOW do you stupid people see how ignorant your idea really is. I dont know the numbers of all the fast food resturants, but the same would apply to all of them. This would drive all of these companies and corporations out of business. This is just another example of how liberals simply do NOT think of the consequence of their great ideas.

 

I would only require ALL businesses share a third of profits with the workers.

 

You would never see another business grow. "profits" are what expand businesses.

 

TKOLTER

Another dingy liberal idea.

 

And why would you want to ruin the economy for everyone just like that?

There's nothing stopping companies from being run in a socialistic cooperative way. They are fully free to do so under the law, but for some reason (and we all know why) there aren't many around. But you just want to force socialism on everyone..

 

I don't think that's totally unfair, so long as that is including wages, and not in addition to wages.

 

I think Walmart business could stand to shrink, really.

 

There is no need for walmart to upgrade employees further than $8.81/hr.
The US taxpayers do that for them.

 

Actually what I find incredable is why liberals and anyone else that doesnt understand business thinks some employees should be paid far beyond their job description. Minimum wage or a little more depending of the areas would seem to be fair for someone who has dropped out of school, and has no skills at all. Fifteen dollars an hour to put frozen french fries into hot oil and wait till the machine say they are done is NOT rocket scientist pay grade level.

The problem here is liberals seem to think everyone should get something they have NOT worked for.
You are NOT entitled to have something for nothing.

 

So close some of those Walmart. "Slim down" Tighten the belts" All that. Apparently, nobody thought of the consequences preceding Walmart becoming, what some seem to suggest "too big to fail". Stop building brand new stores right next to the old ones. Things like that, and maybe they could increase their pay.

 

Why couldn't Wal-mart and other stores like it raise their prices?

- - - Updated - - -

Profits enrich owners. Demand is what expands businesses. But no one suggested we eliminate profits.

 

How would it ruin the economy for Walmart workers/

Well there is -- competition. Tough to pay your employees $15/hr when your competitors are paying them $8. But if everyone has to pay their employees $15/hr, then you have a level playing field.

 

What does "paid beyond their job description" mean? Are you saying people are paid based on "job descriptions"?

I can certainly offer arguments why in some situations people should be paid more than their individual market value.

Why in your opinion is it "fair" that someone working hard full time at McDonald's get's paid a wage that doesn't even get them out of the poverty level? Because it's "fair" in your view for McDonald's owners to get more profit? Because it's "fair" in your view that the richest 1% of American's get 20% of the nation's income and hold 40% of the nation's wealth, double from 30 years ago?

Like stock dividends?

 

Ahh, more "logic". You seem to have as much business sense as Helen Keller had the sense of sight. Nice try though. I only need rudimentary high-school accounting to see your entire premise is massively flawed.

First off, not every one of the employees at Walmart is an hourly employee. The majority of managers make salary. Roughly 700,000 Walmart employees make salary.

Secondly, not every hourly worker at Walmart needs a pay raise, only those who are making less than a living wage. Another roughly 600,000 Walmart employees make enough.

Thirdly, the living wage isn't always $15/hr. In some places of the country it is, but in other places it's as low as $10/hr.

The average hourly pay for a full-time Walmart associate is $12.80, except not every Walmart employee is full-time. A significant amount of the Walmart workforce is part-time. Let's use that as the "living wage" threshold.

So, it's roughly 700,000 workers that are making under $25,000.

Now, how you calculate the increase in the expense is you take the new total wage expense and subtract it from the original wage expense.

Let's say, that those 700,000 workers make $7.45/hr (Walmart's starting wage for most adults). Now, that expense is $10,847,200,000. Increasing it to $12.80 is an increase of only $5.35/hr per worker. Thus, the increase is only one of around $7.7 Billion. However, that math doesn't account for the fact that every six months on average, a Walmart employee receives a raise of $0.25 to $0.50 per hour. The actual expense would be somewhat less, since not everyone makes minimum wage at Walmart.

I'm starting to think there's something significantly wrong with the brains of Republican voters, they don't seem to be able to comprehend many subjects How ironic that the people left the most behind by Bush's flagship legislation would be the people who voted for the guy.

 

I think people should get a cost of living increase if the cost of living is increasing.
If you make enough money that rising prices don't really affect you, then you don't need an increase. Minimum wage should go up, and so should everyone else's wage. Minimum wage is going up in my state, but my pay doesn't go up. Ssi recipients get a cost of living increase, but most people don't.

 

Speaking of business sense analogized to Helen Keller's sight....... Are you trying to say that more than 1 in 3 Wal Mart employees are salary?. I'm certainly not an expert in retail staffing, but I find that statistic to be nearly impossible to believe. How did you possibly derive this number?

 

I don't have the data for Walmart, but it doesn't surprise me. Some corporations like to categorize their employees as salaried employees so they don't have to pay them for overtime work.

 

Absolutely. You'd be amazed how much 'free OT' is "required" (when it's free). Paying time and a half? Suddenly....shockingly..the "required" OT somehow becomes 'unnecessary'. Funny how that works.

 

Liberals are just plain out of touch. When a Walmart opened in Washington I think they reported that over 3000 people applied. How do liberals explain that???

 

It's a typical trick to try to classify someone as being in management or administration and pay them a base salary that's not much more than minimum wage and then work them 80 hours a week without paying OT.

The income level at which someone can be considered part of management hasn't been updated in decades and the congress and courts have in many cases given broad scope to these definitions.

- - - Updated - - -

What is there to explain? People are desperate for work.

 

There isnt a snowballs chance in hell that over 1 in 3 Wal Mart Employees are salary. Thats utterly and inarguably preposterous.

 

No, what is suggested is that employees take a third of profits, then there are taxes to be paid, and then dividends are so low nobody will buy the stock. Demand is a by-product of marketing. There is no natural demand for half the crap we waste money on. The masses were not crying out for snuggies.

 

Yep, I've heard of that. A good friend of mine suddenly found himself working over fifty hours a week when he got promoted to a salaried position at Walmart. My store's managers would put in over 60 hours a week, too.

I meant to say "salary or are paid other ways". I didn't catch that. I had to do a bit of backwards math, Walmart gave data on how many hourly workers they have and how many hourly workers make $25K or more per year, I subtracted those numbers from the 2 million that the illogical one provided so I could at least connect my hard facts to his fantasy. Walmart's truck drivers are paid per mile, for example. Most drivers can make over the equivalent of $40/hr at their mileage rate.

 

While giving them more money, would not then prices increase to reflect more available money? Everything has relevance. As you stated, walmart would/could just raise prices to offset added costs. Then the added costs means others who did not get the increase in pay now have less money for other parts of spending. Unless they also get a pay increase and so on and so on, until things level out again and $15/hr is now to little to live on.

 

According to Simon's presentation, under the heading "Great job opportunities," he noted that more than 475,000 Walmart associates earned a salary over $25,000 last year. Using Walmart's statistic of 1.3 million U.S. associates, OUR Walmart members said that would leave 825,000 workers -- or nearly two-thirds -- who earned less than $25,000 for the year.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/23/walmart-salary_n_4151131.html

That's about 1/3. Do you have information that says differently?