While I personally do not like Wal Marts due to the environment there, I have usually been one to say they must be doing something right given all the customers that have.  Let the free market work its magic.

That said they have now just commited a COLOSSAL blunder.  I just read on the news wires that they have now published new "salary caps" based on job description and whatnot.  These salary caps were developed with the aid of some consultants who have probably never operated as much as a lemonade stand.

Predictably, employees are now p*ssed off because they fit into any number of categories as follows:  (a) Already being paid above the salary cap, which means they will not be getting a raise any time soon, (b) being paid LESS than the cap, which means they feel they are being cheated.  The absolute wage level of the typical worker does not change the perception of these pay scale schemes.  EVERYONE feels gypped.

It is amazing, in 27 years of business I have NEVER seen one of these salary cap schemes be received well by employees regardless of how Human Resources tries to spin it.  No matter what the numbers, no matter how much or how little an employee makes, they will rationalize that they got screwed.

I suspect that this UNBELIEVABLE blunder will be the event that causes unions to make inroads at Wal-Mart.

Thoughts anybody? ???

Wal Mart does treat it's employees like crap for the most part. I worked at a Wal Mart once and I regret it now.  They tell a bunch of white wash lies and get away with it.  I could go on and on, but I still shop at Wal Mart, so I'll save the rest of my complaints. 

Memo from hell--

Dear Loyal Wal-Mart Associate:

Tough sh*t.

--Sam Walton

See, that's what I was saying in the other thread about Wal-Mart being contemptuous of its employees.  It's swagger.  It's the old Machiavellian show of force.  We don't have to treat you no good 'coz we're the only game in town!  I think these days the Wallies are basking in the glory of being the biggest company in the world.  When General Motors had that distinction, they had one disadvantage Wal-Mart does not: organized labor.

GM is an automobile manufacturer, Wal-Mart is a discount retailer, so there's not much in common, but enough to make a point.

Sooner or later this sort of behavior backfires.  If you told me when I was 15 that General Motors would be practically defunct in 2006, I woulda said, "You're nuts!"  These days Wal-Mart seems unassailable.  They have the discount retail world in their pocket.  Can't touch 'em!  But as the demise of GM shows, you never know!

What could bring down Wal-Mart?  I don't know.  Retrospectively, you can see the warning signs for GM in the '80s--failure to compete with Japanese efficiency, outsourcing, union-busting, lay-offs...
Maybe the warning signs for the Wallies lie in their reliance on the Chinese cheap and the dominant dollar.  Hmmm.....

I don't think salary caps are a bad thing, though introducing them mid stream isn't a good idea.

When I worked as an operator in the wastewater treatment field, we started out at grade 5-D-1, which meant no license and no time in. Every license you got bumped up the letter one, until a class 1 meant you were just grade 5, and every year bumped up the second number until you capped out at a 5-9 paygrade. A 5-9 makes well over double what a 5-D-1 makes.

After you hit 5-9, you still get COLA adjustments, but if you want to make more money, you either work OT or try for a Lead Operator job, which is grade 6, and a healthy payraise.

When ads for this position come up in the paper, the pay rate will read something like $22,300- $49,700 per year, based on experience.

That said, I still strongly dislike Wal-Mart for other reasons.

Memo from hell--

Dear Loyal Wal-Mart Associate:

Tough sh*t.

--Sam Walton

See, that's what I was saying in the other thread about Wal-Mart being contemptuous of its employees.  It's swagger.  It's the old Machiavellian show of force.  We don't have to treat you no good 'coz we're the only game in town!  I think these days the Wallies are basking in the glory of being the biggest company in the world.  When General Motors had that distinction, they had one disadvantage Wal-Mart does not: organized labor.



I might be naive on this, but I do not know if Wal-Mat did this out of contempt for its employees or in a "sincere" effort to be competitive and fair.

All I know is that it is an ill-advised move when you are a company that is in the sights of organized labor.  Unions will use this program as a platform now and say "See what they did?  Vote us in and you will get the raise you DESERVE!".  Dumb, dumb, dumb!  If I were an exec at Wal Mart I would fire whoever did this... on the spot.

My guess is that what's happening to Wal Mart is what happened to GM.  It got so big that it became unmanageable and "professional managers" (read: bureaucrats) were brought in to run the company, which is of course the beginning of the decline.

Is GM failing due to "union busting"?  I seriously doubt that.  GM is a bloated organization (both production floor workers as well as management) and its product line generally speaking has been for crap.  Automation and more efficient maufacturing techniques were brought in and heads were cut.  Not enough mind you.  Same as the steel industry... what used to be 13000-employee steel plants now produce MORE STEEL with only 3000 workers.  It ain't union busting it is cost reduction.  (Note that in both of these industries, quality IMPROVED also)

When I worked as an operator in the wastewater treatment field, we started out at grade 5-D-1, which meant no license and no time in. Every license you got bumped up the letter one, until a class 1 meant you were just grade 5, and every year bumped up the second number until you capped out at a 5-9 paygrade. A 5-9 makes well over double what a 5-D-1 makes.

After you hit 5-9, you still get COLA adjustments, but if you want to make more money, you either work OT or try for a Lead Operator job, which is grade 6, and a healthy payraise.


Is pretty much like any Government job.

If you think this is bad, try workng for the Government.  There your pay is capped by position, and other then seniority and COLA raises, you make what you make, period.  And if there is no position to be promoted up into, that is just tough.

Myself, I see absolutely nothing to get excited about.  Government and big business has been doing this for decades.  So what?

And does anybody really think that would be any different if WM was unionized?  No, not a bit.  You would simply have a Union Rep saying "Sorry, you do not have enough seniority to get a raise, to bad.  Oh, and we hiked your Union dues 5%."

And does anybody really think that would be any different if WM was unionized?  No, not a bit.  You would simply have a Union Rep saying "Sorry, you do not have enough seniority to get a raise, to bad.  Oh, and we hiked your Union dues 5%."


You do have a point there 'Shroom.  Because when WM eventually gets unionized, of course the contract will be chock full of job classifications and salary caps!

That said, the union organizers will use this salary cap issue to their advantage, it is a psychological thing.

Of course the Union spin will be "my salary cap is bigger than yours."  As it should be because you gotta pay those union dues!

Is pretty much like any Government job.

If you think this is bad, try workng for the Government.  There your pay is capped by position, and other then seniority and COLA raises, you make what you make, period.  And if there is no position to be promoted up into, that is just tough.

Myself, I see absolutely nothing to get excited about.  Government and big business has been doing this for decades.  So what?

And does anybody really think that would be any different if WM was unionized?  No, not a bit.  You would simply have a Union Rep saying "Sorry, you do not have enough seniority to get a raise, to bad.  Oh, and we hiked your Union dues 5%."

Valid point.  I do believe organized labor is necessary for a secure and healthy workforce.  I do not believe that a union is automatically good.  Especially with retail.  You have to be very deft and sophisticated to successfully unionize a retail workforce.  Up here in New England we have a supermarket chain called Stop & Shop.  Stop & Shop is not only unionized, it's a closed shop.  You can't say no.  But you get hired for minimum wage with an "employment at will"* contract.  The union is rendered meaningless.  It's just a shill for management.  They take a big chunk out of your check every week, and if you're working part time for a net weekly check of $100, eight percent is a sizable chunk.  I never worked for them, but I know a lot of people who did.  Some of the took grievances to the union steward, and the scenario played out just as you described!

*ie. The boss can fire you if you so much as look at him cross-eyed!

Valid point.  I do believe organized labor is necessary for a secure and healthy workforce.  I do not believe that a union is automatically good.  Especially with retail.  You have to be very deft and sophisticated to successfully unionize a retail workforce.  Up here in New England we have a supermarket chain called Stop & Shop.  Stop & Shop is not only unionized, it's a closed shop.  You can't say no.  But you get hired for minimum wage with an "employment at will"* contract.  The union is rendered meaningless.  It's just a shill for management.  They take a big chunk out of your check every week, and if you're working part time for a net weekly check of $100, eight percent is a sizable chunk.  I never worked for them, but I know a lot of people who did.  Some of the took grievances to the union steward, and the scenario played out just as you described!

*ie. The boss can fire you if you so much as look at him cross-eyed!




Sounds like a corrupted Union.  No self-respecting union would negotiate a "minimum wage" contract or an "employment at will" contract.  Payola is no doubt involved in my opinion...

And 8% union dues is way out of line, especially if all they're getting you is minimum wage.

Valid point.  I do believe organized labor is necessary for a secure and healthy workforce.  I do not believe that a union is automatically good.  Especially with retail. 


I am actually "in the middle" when it comes to unions.  I see them a great force for good.  But at the same time, they can be a force of evil, exploiting the companies to fill their own pockets.  Or even worse, exploiting the workers to fill their own pockets.

There are jobs which I think should be unionized.  I have always supported unions in dangerous jobs, like mine workers, oil drillers, and the like.  There the union does several needed things, like help ensure job safety.  They also have pension plans, to take care of those injured on the job, or the survivors of somebody killed on the job.

Then you have the cases where unions were needed, but have largely outlived their need.  A good example of this is professional sports.  At one time, the players were treated like crap, and bought and sold like slaves.  Pay was at starvation levels, and they had to have second jobs in the off-season just to survive.

But today, even minimal players in Major League Baseball make $310,000 a year.  And for the "stars", the sky is the limit.  Does anybody really think that things would ever return to the "bad old days"?  My support of sports unions died after all of the strikes of the last 2 decades.  Am I really supposed to care that Oral Herschiser feels "exploited", making only $2 million a year?  He makes more money pitching half a game then I do in an entire year.  And during that strike, all of the vendors, janitors, and other support staff who do make low wages were out of work, because there were no games.  Thousand of people were out of work, because a few hundred wanted to make more then what is already an astronomical wage.

I believe in unions, if the workers are being exploited.  Especially if they are working in unsafe (or potentially unsafe) conditions.  But when I see grocery stock clerks starting at $18 an hour with free medical benefits, I know that the system is broken.

And all of the corruption scandals of the last decade have really given me a bad impression of most unions.  In many ways, corruption in unions has not improved since the days of Jimmy Hoffa.  6 times out of 10, they are more into filling their own pockets more then taking care of their members.

But when I see grocery stock clerks starting at $18 an hour with free medical benefits, I know that the system is broken.

Where the hell is this at? Rice Cube worked at a unionized grocery store and made a little above minimum wage...then he had to pay about $90 a month in union dues. The boss treated him like cr*p, he went to the union and complained, and what was done? NOTHING! And I will tell you right now that his wasn't the first complaint against the boss. Rice Cube is now gone from that store, and that a$$hole still lingers on, ruling over and making the employee's lives miserable.

And no medical benefits.

And no medical benefits.


Yeah, I think I told the boss to go to hell before my elimination period was up :P