| overall good company | 29% | 29% - 47 | ||||
| overall bad company | 16% | 16% - 26 | ||||
| I shop there but dont agree with their agenda | 13% | 13% - 22 | ||||
| I never shop there, I dont agree with their agenda | 18% | 18% - 30 | ||||
| dont care | 20% | 20% - 33 | ||||
| Total: 158 | ||||||
Last edited by IRONCHEF (2006-11-09 11:28:10)
I will debate this with you.IRONCHEF wrote:
** open for 1 on 1 debate **
I think their lack of respect for communities they rape shows their agenda..pure greed. Likewise, their benefit structure and poor track record for employment law adhesion make them very hated. Oh, they also outsource many of their products (including from child labor and other unethical labor sources) while portraying the idea that everything is american made or pro-america.
They are GREED embodied within large walls. Just google some of their criticisms. I do not shop there. The money I save will be taken back just in the form of taxes paying for their employee benefits, the bankruptcy of neighboring businesses shut down because of this inconsiderate business.
Oh, and they're communist now! --->see here<---
Last edited by IRONCHEF (2006-11-09 11:41:01)
Last edited by deeznutz1245 (2006-11-09 11:46:14)
lmao south park ftwMarlboroman82 wrote:
Last edited by -=raska=- (2006-11-09 11:42:26)
Last edited by RDMC(2) (2006-11-09 12:21:44)
HERE is an example of the rampant complaints against Walmart and their labor practices. They are always met with the same kind of PR "this allegation is not representative of our procedures..blah blah blah" and they're right. Their actual procedures as written do tell managers to only pay for clocked time. It does NOT, however, punish managers who do make their employees work off the clock..which is what is rampant. And further, it has been shown that walmart does have quota-type policies given to managers who will get in trouble if an employee does not clock out at their prescribed hour..so managers illegally alter time entries while the employee is secretly denied pay..such is what this class action suit speaks volumes about.-=raska=- wrote:
It's a business, they are there to make money, and they succeed..
now about the employees, Ive heared some and they said it was alright, and that they had advantages that other shops couldnt give. I dont remember which but it was about holidays and things like that. Anyway, if you dont like it, dont work there, there are plenty of other jobs...
for the consumers, wal-mart is pretty cool, everything is cheap there
about the workers in third-world countries, remember something, wal-mart treat them better than local companies do. In those countries, working conditions are always not that good, particularly for local companies. Multinationals too, but usually those impose rules.
Can you show me evidence that there is a quota policy for management pertaining to unpaid work. No you cannot because there is no such policy. As for the link you gave me, it showed zero evidence of facts. It stated that associates made claims which turned into a class action suit that WM lost. It does not mean that managers force employees to work unpaid, and certainly doeas not show there is a quota policy to do so. Employees are given their schedule and it is their duty to follow it. In the middle of a busy day one manager is not going to be able to decipher who is still scheduled and who is working off the clock. I can assure you that %90 of buisnesses have employees who work off the clock. That is their fault. The news stated that Wal mart cannot apprehend theives if the merchandise is under $25. Does that make it true? NO. Why not I can find a link for it? According to their policy number AP-09 any amount $.01 and up is grounds for apprehension. The news twists things.IRONCHEF wrote:
HERE is an example of the rampant complaints against Walmart and their labor practices. They are always met with the same kind of PR "this allegation is not representative of our procedures..blah blah blah" and they're right. Their actual procedures as written do tell managers to only pay for clocked time. It does NOT, however, punish managers who do make their employees work off the clock..which is what is rampant. And further, it has been shown that walmart does have quota-type policies given to managers who will get in trouble if an employee does not clock out at their prescribed hour..so managers illegally alter time entries while the employee is secretly denied pay..such is what this class action suit speaks volumes about.-=raska=- wrote:
It's a business, they are there to make money, and they succeed..
now about the employees, Ive heared some and they said it was alright, and that they had advantages that other shops couldnt give. I dont remember which but it was about holidays and things like that. Anyway, if you dont like it, dont work there, there are plenty of other jobs...
for the consumers, wal-mart is pretty cool, everything is cheap there
about the workers in third-world countries, remember something, wal-mart treat them better than local companies do. In those countries, working conditions are always not that good, particularly for local companies. Multinationals too, but usually those impose rules.
Last edited by jsnipy (2006-11-09 12:08:40)
The burden to show evidence of a quota policy is not mine to make since I was using the link in context of supporting the fact that it was an example of rampant complaints against walmart in the form of that class action suit.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Can you show me evidence that there is a quota policy for management pertaining to unpaid work. No you cannot because there is no such policy. As for the link you gave me, it showed zero evidence of facts. It stated that associates made claims which turned into a class action suit that WM lost. It does not mean that managers force employees to work unpaid, and certainly doeas not show there is a quota policy to do so. Employees are given their schedule and it is their duty to follow it. In the middle of a busy day one manager is not going to be able to decipher who is still scheduled and who is working off the clock. I can assure you that %90 of buisnesses have employees who work off the clock. That is their fault. The news stated that Wal mart cannot apprehend theives if the merchandise is under $25. Does that make it true? NO. Why not I can find a link for it? According to their policy number AP-09 any amount $.01 and up is grounds for apprehension. The news twists things.IRONCHEF wrote:
HERE is an example of the rampant complaints against Walmart and their labor practices. They are always met with the same kind of PR "this allegation is not representative of our procedures..blah blah blah" and they're right. Their actual procedures as written do tell managers to only pay for clocked time. It does NOT, however, punish managers who do make their employees work off the clock..which is what is rampant. And further, it has been shown that walmart does have quota-type policies given to managers who will get in trouble if an employee does not clock out at their prescribed hour..so managers illegally alter time entries while the employee is secretly denied pay..such is what this class action suit speaks volumes about.-=raska=- wrote:
It's a business, they are there to make money, and they succeed..
now about the employees, Ive heared some and they said it was alright, and that they had advantages that other shops couldnt give. I dont remember which but it was about holidays and things like that. Anyway, if you dont like it, dont work there, there are plenty of other jobs...
for the consumers, wal-mart is pretty cool, everything is cheap there
about the workers in third-world countries, remember something, wal-mart treat them better than local companies do. In those countries, working conditions are always not that good, particularly for local companies. Multinationals too, but usually those impose rules.
Human nature is murder and rape, I guess that justifies it, right?jsnipy wrote:
If they are bad, then there are a lot of bad people, since a lot of people shop there, which is what keeps Walmart alive. Human nature is greedy anyway ... which is we will burn.
Last edited by IRONCHEF (2006-11-09 12:33:20)
tru.datdeeznutz1245 wrote:
It is a good point, as well as the surfaced being scratched on other issues. My major problem is with people who jump on the wagon and crush them for issues they cannot debate because they are not informed. That is not the case with you, however, I am just pointing out that what is reported to the press does not make it true in many cases. On the flip side I bet there are things we have no idea about( that are bad) that we neglect to debate altogether. For Wal-Mart being as big as they are people will try and sue them over things out of Wal-Marts control, and we know that is true. I just feel that other companies have done much worse to employees and communities.
Last edited by Spearhead (2006-11-09 17:06:12)