Walmart raises their starting wage to $11 an hour

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: bigj_16
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
I hate to see this simple thread goes political but it looks like everything is political these days.

Self checkout and ship to store is really going to eliminate a lot of jobs. You can debate whether $11/hr is a ripoff or good money, but in the end of the day it is still $11/hr and employers and customers will do anything to save even 20c on each item sold.

And we haven't even talked about online only retailers like Amazon bankrupting many retailers like Toysrus and Sears.

Walmart is really pushing to go to scan and go only cashiering nationwide. Already have at some stores. They are also working on the stocking robot. Just these two things alone will eliminate jobs. They are also pushing their "Customer First" scheduling, which sounds good, but will really just cut employee hours, in many cases.
There are really only two major things which drive corporations in America these days. Stock prices and liability. Employees are a liability to most corporations. If they can raise stock price by showing a loss, they will do it. And I am not being negative, necessarily. It is just the way it is.


Robotics and automation will be replacing many low skill jobs in the near future. Most likely, including what I do.

That's technological progress. Would you expect any business to NOT take advantage of cost savings....or should they just fall behind other retailers and go bankrupt? Yes, it's scary to think that many low skill jobs will soon be gone, but people will need to adapt.

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted By: 28oz
Originally Posted By: madRiver
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
Lowering taxes has worked in the past for the economy. Every time. Now we get the chance to see if it works, again. Interesting.


Just have to figure out how to fund the government and the building debt. It has a pesky effect of driving up deficit.


Easy. The economy grows when you let people keep more of their hard earned money. Larger economy equals much greater tax income even if the tax rate is lower. When you unshackle companies of crippling tax rates, they are free to pay employees more or hire more.


Absolutely 100% correct!

 

[CKN]

Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: CKN
Their healthcare plan (according to him) is really just a catastrophic plan. Not too expensive.

That's the direction most employers are going these days... high-deductible health plans with $6K-$7K out of pocket deductible per person. For someone making minimum wage, having to fork over this amount of money in case of illness DESPITE having health insurance is not very realistic, IMO. It's a joke, in general, regardless how much you make.


Well....according to various health policy experts as well as the National Association of Health Underwriters (non-partisan)....the Walmart plan is more affordable and provides significant better access to high quality medical care than Obamacare.

While I'm no fan of Walmart, facts are facts and it's best to stick with them.


I will tell you another "seemingly fact". I walked in to our local Walmart Super Center the other night around 10p.m. and there were ZERO CASHIERS at their 20 registers. It was "mandated" that you use self checkout. So-while they may be raising their wages-they are most definitely eliminating employees.

At least at Walmart-I feel if I have to use a self checkout-it is a value thing because their groceries can be as much as 30 per-cent less than the local Kroger that also has self registers. Where is the savings there?

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: andrewg
Well....according to various health policy experts as well as the National Association of Health Underwriters (non-partisan)....the Walmart plan is more affordable and provides significant better access to high quality medical care than Obamacare.

While I'm no fan of Walmart, facts are facts and it's best to stick with them.

Nobody said anything about Obamacare, so I'm not sure where that came from.

What does "more affordable" mean?

What I wrote about having high deductibles still applies to Walmart, as far as I know. This is for 2017, and I wouldn't be surprised if the deductibles went up for 2018:
https://mybenefits.conexis.com/media/docs/CXD/CXD16478/SBC HSA_Final.pdf

This article is from 2014, when the deductibles were still lower:
Walmart Health Insurance Could Leave A Really Sick Worker Broke

Questions and Answers about Walmart


Anyway, not picking on Walmart specifically. Just saying this is the general state of employer-sponsored health insurance in our country.

 

[aquariuscsm]

I was really glad to hear that. I love to see people working.

 

[aquariuscsm]

Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: HemiHawk
Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: Linctex
Still well below poverty level on a single income.


You are 100% FALSE. Nice try though.

Now if a person had a family of FOUR....and only 1 adult was working, THEN you would be doing pretty poorly in many areas of the country.

Look it up.


Looks like its technically about $12,000. With $11 an hour being roughly $17k after taxes. You're right these people are so far from "poverty" they probably have in ground pools and gold statues in their yards.


Nobody is saying that working at Walmart is going to get you that condo in Manhattan. But facts are facts. A family of four (mother and father both working at Walmart, full time), can do pretty well in many areas of the country. To say otherwise is just negativity and a falsehood.


I agree Andrew. I know a girl who she and her husband (they're both my age,48) both have worked at Target for a long time (just as department associates) and they support their family of three just fine and they're a very happy family,and they're the nicest sweetest people you'll ever meet. Not everyone had rich bankrolling parents to put them through some uber expensive college so they could party and have fun. Working jobs like Target or Walmart doesn't make you less of a person. Someone who refuses to work and lives off of "our dime" is less of a person.

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: andrewg
Well....according to various health policy experts as well as the National Association of Health Underwriters (non-partisan)....the Walmart plan is more affordable and provides significant better access to high quality medical care than Obamacare.

While I'm no fan of Walmart, facts are facts and it's best to stick with them.

Nobody said anything about Obamacare, so I'm not sure where that came from.

What does "more affordable" mean?

What I wrote about having high deductibles still applies to Walmart, as far as I know. This is for 2017, and I wouldn't be surprised if the deductibles went up for 2018:
https://mybenefits.conexis.com/media/docs/CXD/CXD16478/SBC HSA_Final.pdf

This article is from 2014, when the deductibles were still lower:
Walmart Health Insurance Could Leave A Really Sick Worker Broke

Questions and Answers about Walmart


Anyway, not picking on Walmart specifically. Just saying this is the general state of employer-sponsored health insurance in our country.


Where did "Obamacare" come from? Just the most major sponsored healthcare plan that is readily available for current comparison.
What should I have compared Walmarts health plan to? Seemed appropriate to me.

Have deductibles gone up as a whole? Yes...but at least for many of us, so have wages. My own healthcare has increased as far as deductibles....and decreased in the amount of coverage. Not much I can do about it.....except voice my opinion.

But all in all, most people that work at Walmart are lucky to even have a job that pays what it does. Many are terrible at customer service and have the "skills" of a ten year old. If Walmart would increase the pay of it's good/more skilled workers than other employees....they could improve customer relations as well as attract better employees. But for most of them? Not so much. And as for healthcare....many of them don't exactly look like they take good care of themselves...yet expect premium healthcare benefits on low wages.

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete

Their healthcare plan (according to him) is really just a catastrophic plan. Not too expensive.

That's the direction most employers are going these days... high-deductible health plans with $6K-$7K out of pocket deductible per person. For someone making minimum wage, having to fork over this amount of money in case of illness DESPITE having health insurance is not very realistic, IMO. It's a joke, in general, regardless how much you make.


Well....according to various health policy experts as well as the National Association of Health Underwriters (non-partisan)....the Walmart plan is more affordable and provides significant better access to high quality medical care than Obamacare.

While I'm no fan of Walmart, facts are facts and it's best to stick with them. [/quot

I will tell you another "seemingly fact". I walked in to our local Walmart Super Center the other night around 10p.m. and there were ZERO CASHIERS at their 20 registers. It was "mandated" that you use self checkout. So-while they may be raising their wages-they are most definitely eliminating employees.

At least at Walmart-I feel if I have to use a self checkout-it is a value thing because their groceries can be as much as 30 per-cent less than the local Kroger that also has self registers. Where is the savings there?




This is what I tend to do with businesses that I don't like.........I don't shop there. And if I do shop in them and have a gripe, I email the manager and let them know how I feel. Believe it or not, many businesses will respond to you.

 

[aquariuscsm]

Every store I've ever been in late at night has only self checkout open (HEB,Albertson's,etc). I've known a few people who cashiered for grocery stores and they said the night shift doesn't generate enough traffic to need cashiers on duty after a certain time.

 

[JohnnyJohnson]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Every store I've ever been in late at night has only self checkout open (HEB,Albertson's,etc). I've known a few people who cashiered for grocery stores and they said the night shift doesn't generate enough traffic to need cashiers on duty after a certain time.


That's when they go to stocking shelves or go home.

 

[OVERKILL]

In Ontario, minimum wage just went up to $14/hr, it will be $15/hr this time next year. We were already paying $11.40/hr. So if you are a Walmart employee earning minimum wage in Ontario, the province gave you a raise. We are already seeing the effects of this with hours being cut, prices going up and benefits being slashed.

Also, anybody who started at minimum wage and has worked their way up to $15/hr will soon be seeing new hires get paid the same. So to equalize the effect of that, should those people not get a similar bump?

Driving labour costs up across the board is bound to have an effect. We'll see what that impact will be here soon enough.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Also, anybody who started at minimum wage and has worked their way up to $15/hr will soon be seeing new hires get paid the same. So to equalize the effect of that, should those people not get a similar bump?

If they complain about not getting a bump, they'll be replaced with new hires.

 

[SevenBizzos]

Wal-Mart also closing 63 Sam's Club stores. This will result in "thousands" of workers losing their jobs. Must be a reorganization/refocus of some kind.

So both good and bad today.

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
In Ontario, minimum wage just went up to $14/hr, it will be $15/hr this time next year. We were already paying $11.40/hr. So if you are a Walmart employee earning minimum wage in Ontario, the province gave you a raise. We are already seeing the effects of this with hours being cut, prices going up and benefits being slashed.

Also, anybody who started at minimum wage and has worked their way up to $15/hr will soon be seeing new hires get paid the same. So to equalize the effect of that, should those people not get a similar bump?

Driving labour costs up across the board is bound to have an effect. We'll see what that impact will be here soon enough.


Simple economics. Employers forced to pay more will shorten employee hours and/or lay off employees to compensate.

Yes, very much a slap in the face (from government intervention) when a hard working and long-term employee has to watch a new hire come in and make the same wages. It's not right at all. Not the employers fault either.

Great having the governments hand in everything, ain't it?

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
In Ontario, minimum wage just went up to $14/hr, it will be $15/hr this time next year. We were already paying $11.40/hr. So if you are a Walmart employee earning minimum wage in Ontario, the province gave you a raise. We are already seeing the effects of this with hours being cut, prices going up and benefits being slashed.

Also, anybody who started at minimum wage and has worked their way up to $15/hr will soon be seeing new hires get paid the same. So to equalize the effect of that, should those people not get a similar bump?

Driving labour costs up across the board is bound to have an effect. We'll see what that impact will be here soon enough.


Simple economics. Employers forced to pay more will shorten employee hours and/or lay off employees to compensate.

Yes, very much a slap in the face (from government intervention) when a hard working and long-term employee has to watch a new hire come in and make the same wages. It's not right at all. Not the employers fault either.

Great having the governments hand in everything, ain't it?

Employers will have to raise prices, which in the service sector is still a relatively even playing field. No off shoring or importing coffee pouring or burger flipping... And the modest increase in prices probably will be absorbed without much loss in volume. A dime more or less for a cup of coffee isn't going to make a difference with most of their customers.
Now my buddy has a Christmas tree farm which is competing with other farms outside Ontario, and a major cost is minimum wage labour, so he's a but nervous about how his local wholesale customers are going accept the 10-15% increase in tree prices. Previously no one in Ontario would work for a $11 minimum wage on a farm so he gets labourers from Mexico, and basically houses them for free. But perhaps now he will be able to get someone from Ontario for $15/hr and not have to pay for housing his labour and bringing Mexicans up here? That might break close to even for him, I don't know.

 

[LeakySeals]

Originally Posted By: IndyIan
Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
In Ontario, minimum wage just went up to $14/hr, it will be $15/hr this time next year. We were already paying $11.40/hr. So if you are a Walmart employee earning minimum wage in Ontario, the province gave you a raise. We are already seeing the effects of this with hours being cut, prices going up and benefits being slashed.

Also, anybody who started at minimum wage and has worked their way up to $15/hr will soon be seeing new hires get paid the same. So to equalize the effect of that, should those people not get a similar bump?

Driving labour costs up across the board is bound to have an effect. We'll see what that impact will be here soon enough.


Simple economics. Employers forced to pay more will shorten employee hours and/or lay off employees to compensate.

Yes, very much a slap in the face (from government intervention) when a hard working and long-term employee has to watch a new hire come in and make the same wages. It's not right at all. Not the employers fault either.

Great having the governments hand in everything, ain't it?

Employers will have to raise prices, which in the service sector is still a relatively even playing field. No off shoring or importing coffee pouring or burger flipping... And the modest increase in prices probably will be absorbed without much loss in volume. A dime more or less for a cup of coffee isn't going to make a difference with most of their customers.
Now my buddy has a Christmas tree farm which is competing with other farms outside Ontario, and a major cost is minimum wage labour, so he's a but nervous about how his local wholesale customers are going accept the 10-15% increase in tree prices. Previously no one in Ontario would work for a $11 minimum wage on a farm so he gets labourers from Mexico, and basically houses them for free. But perhaps now he will be able to get someone from Ontario for $15/hr and not have to pay for housing his labour and bringing Mexicans up here? That might break close to even for him, I don't know.

You have border control. Thats not politics its the truth.

 

[ZZman]

They actually are saying they needed to raise wages to keep and get good people with the low unemployment rate.

 

[ZZman]

Wage increases are legit, bonuses are not unless these other companies plan on giving bonuses every year since their tax liability is lower every year.

 

[Andrew1972]

Originally Posted By: andrewg
Originally Posted By: 28oz
Originally Posted By: madRiver
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
Lowering taxes has worked in the past for the economy. Every time. Now we get the chance to see if it works, again. Interesting.


Just have to figure out how to fund the government and the building debt. It has a pesky effect of driving up deficit.


Easy. The economy grows when you let people keep more of their hard earned money. Larger economy equals much greater tax income even if the tax rate is lower. When you unshackle companies of crippling tax rates, they are free to pay employees more or hire more.


Exactly right....and it works every single time. Even JFK knew this. Hard to convince some otherwise though as they are propagandized into robots.


I concur Hard to convince some otherwise because you are definitely blinded it works fully. It is a long debated topic with strong arguments and research on both sides. I simply stated the obvious that little done to address the reason we need the taxes in first place as of yet.

 

[double vanos]

The low tax environment always produces good results. But it needs a second step in the process to guarantee long term success - that is, balance the budget. And keep it that way. Now, having said that, let’s see, where could we cut to get to a balanced budget? We might as well do it, as the turnips in congress have no clue...

Start discussion now....