Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

The Black Friday Thread: Walmart Worker Trampled and Killed By Crowd

1151617181921»

Posts

  • TL DRTL DR Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    mcdermott wrote: »
    1. Wal*Mart also expects any employee to cover the entire store.
    2. You need to call the authorities on your job. They can't legally fire you, and it sounds like they'd be doing you a favor if they did.

    1. Unless both stores I worked at were just flukes, Wal-Mart is less likely to expect an employee to cover the entire store by themselves than Target. Yes, Wal-Mart expects employees in any department to help out elsewhere if needed...Target actually schedules such that employees wind up covering half the store or more on their own. As both an employee and as a customer I've always felt there were more employees on the floor at Wal-Mart than Target.

    Of course, there are usually more customers as well.

    2. Yep.

    I was referring to override's comment that you weren't just responsible for one department. I worked in Pets, and once my shit was straight I was expected to move on to neighboring departments, to say nothing of the times when a customer needed help with something.

    eokNV.jpg
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    I was referring to override's comment that you weren't just responsible for one department. I worked in Pets, and once my shit was straight I was expected to move on to neighboring departments, to say nothing of the times when a customer needed help with something.

    But the fact that you could even claim to "work in Pets" is a vast improvement over Target. I guess I just see a difference between being expected to help out elsewhere and actually being responsible for other departments. When I worked at Target, I was always working something like "Health and Beauty AND Electronics AND Home AND Toys." And that was if I was lucky, and not just working all of hardlines (so throw in sporting goods, automotive, seasonal, and the rest). So I was generally, on a given night, responsible for anywhere from 1/4 to 1/2 of the store.

    Whereas when I worked at Wal-Mart, I worked in Electronics. When we were open (it wasn't a 24-hour store, obviously) I was actually specifically told not to help in other departments. They wanted me there, period. Obviously after close I was expected to help where needed. Walking around on the floor at Wal-Mart, they often have more people in the area of Electronics than we had in the entirety of hardlines. We were lucky to have 3 or 4 people in all of hardlines during peak hours (so, for like 3 hours of the afternoon/evening).

    The point being that Target works their employees like damn slaves just like anywhere else, so anybody trying to claim that Target is more than marginally better than Wal-Mart (and I mean overall, even including the money they put back into communities and such) is deluding themselves.

  • DalbozDalboz Resident Puppy Eater Right behind you...Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    The main difference between Target and Wal-Mart that I've noticed is the smell. Every Target I've ever been in has that really weird smell that I can't figure out what it's supposed to be. Even new ones. A couple of years ago, I went into a new Target that had just opened within the last couple of weeks, and sure enough it had the same smell.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    mcdermott wrote: »
    I was referring to override's comment that you weren't just responsible for one department. I worked in Pets, and once my shit was straight I was expected to move on to neighboring departments, to say nothing of the times when a customer needed help with something.

    But the fact that you could even claim to "work in Pets" is a vast improvement over Target. I guess I just see a difference between being expected to help out elsewhere and actually being responsible for other departments. When I worked at Target, I was always working something like "Health and Beauty AND Electronics AND Home AND Toys." And that was if I was lucky, and not just working all of hardlines (so throw in sporting goods, automotive, seasonal, and the rest). So I was generally, on a given night, responsible for anywhere from 1/4 to 1/2 of the store.

    Whereas when I worked at Wal-Mart, I worked in Electronics. When we were open (it wasn't a 24-hour store, obviously) I was actually specifically told not to help in other departments. They wanted me there, period. Obviously after close I was expected to help where needed. Walking around on the floor at Wal-Mart, they often have more people in the area of Electronics than we had in the entirety of hardlines. We were lucky to have 3 or 4 people in all of hardlines during peak hours (so, for like 3 hours of the afternoon/evening).

    The point being that Target works their employees like damn slaves just like anywhere else, so anybody trying to claim that Target is more than marginally better than Wal-Mart (and I mean overall, even including the money they put back into communities and such) is deluding themselves.

    I worked there part time for roughly 6 years and never experienced anything to that extent. There were days that we were short staffed around close, but most sections had 1 person barring breaks. So yay for anecdotal evidence. All of which being meaningless as the only real negative that Wal~Mart brings to bear is its imposition of demands on suppliers which they cannot refuse due to market share. Shitty store design, crappy worker treatment, outsourcing some of their externalities to local, state, or federal programs; none of that is really unique to Wallyworld and all of it is besides the point. Whichever point we have tangented off into making.

    tea-1.jpg
  • override367override367 misogynist/MRA/socially irresponsible Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Zimmydoom wrote: »
    Excuse me if I'm making assumptions, but isn't Target really similar to Wal-Mart? I mean, around here I see them a lot more than Wal-Mart.

    Target is considered to be much more upscale. They treat their employees better and sell higher-quality products, their stores are cleaner and less "oppressive" in their design, and generally are an all-around more pleasant place to shop at. They aren't more expensive than Wal-Mart either; in fact I bought a bunch of tough-to-find NERF stuff from Target recently and saved anywhere from 10%-25% off Wal-Mart's prices.

    If by that you mean they work their employees harder than wal-mart for inferior pay, then you're absolutely right! You don't have a department, you have the entire store - oh shit some woman in jewelry needs help and you're in sporting goods, you better get there in 15 seconds if you don't wanna get in trouble!

    It was typical to have three employees for the entire sales floor during the week days when I worked there, at a store that averaged between 150-250 thousand a day in revenue. All the stress of a job that pays 7 times as much money without any of those pesky things like decent benefits.

    Not to say Wal-Mart treats its employees great or anything, but they treat them better than Target does. At the very least they don't work you like a mule and deny you breaks and lunches by all kinds of indirect pressure. Wal-Mart expects $7.50/hour of performance out of you, and as long as you don't set the store or a customer on fire and keep your area stocked as best as inventory allows, it's good enough for them.

    Right now I work that a place that's even worse than Target, minimum wage, breaks and lunches are simply not allowed under any circumstance no matter how long your shift is, you have to stand all day and there's no little OSHA mat to stand on. I could say something to whoever looks into these things but then they'd fire the entire staff and just hire new ones, that and my boss is cool and doesn't actually enforce the company policy of no breaks, lunches, or sitting. God what the fuck did I do to get in this place, I was making $25/hour when I was 17 fixing computers - go to college they said! What a load.

    1. Wal*Mart also expects any employee to cover the entire store.
    2. You need to call the authorities on your job. They can't legally fire you, and it sounds like they'd be doing you a favor if they did.

    Well being treated as less than human by an employer is marginally preferable to starvation and freezing to death.

    I'd take my job back at Target being bitched at for not covering Electronics while told to put away toys and getting no raise year after year because they score every employee in the store "below expectations" on their reviews than this, but hey what am I going to do? Tourist town, in a recession, mountains of cash owed to DeVry

    Not much I can do but tough it out and squirrel away pennies until I have enough to do something

    XBLIVE: Biggestoverride
    League of Legends: override367
  • gtrmpgtrmp Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    PantsB wrote: »
    And Sam's Club is not the same kind of store as Walmart

    ...no, but they are the same company. The "Sam" in "Sam's Club" is Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton.

  • bowenbowen Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    They can't legally fire you, and it sounds like they'd be doing you a favor if they did.

    It should be said here that any company that wants to fire you will find a reason to do it; especially in a "Right to work" state. If you are truly expendable they already have half a dozen reasons they haven't acted on yet.

    Sure, but to fire the entire staff after being hit with an OSHA violation or something? Just asking for a cushy lawsuit.

    Oh, that is easy. "Closing the store for OSHA compliance renovations" *Immediately starts bringing in a new crew*

    They are required to bring in the old crew once the store is reopened. The business cannot take any action other than to fix the problems.

    I know because I called OSHA on UPS for safety violations that the union wasn't taking care of.

    If they do, you sue, and you win. Also, they get fined much dinero.

  • Just_Bri_ThanksJust_Bri_Thanks Seething with rage from a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited December 2008
    Well, I stand corrected. What if they let you "keep your job" but transfer you (during the renovations of course, *wink* *nudge*) to a location that is somewhat economically stressful to commute to?

    Some days I just want to smack people with a rolled up newspaper. Or a phone book.
    A folding chair is looking like an attractive option right now too...
  • bowenbowen Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    I believe they are also required to keep you at your current location unless you agree to a transfer. All things aside, it is terribly shady to do that in lieu of a OSHA violation.

    No breaks or lunches? That's a DoL violation there too, depending on your state. Here in NY, if you work more than 6 hours straight you are required to take a lunch. Meaning you have to stop and take a lunch at some point, and if not, they get fined and you can sue for some more.

    Unions started for a reason, and most of the reasons now have laws to help you if there's no union to join. You might want to talk to a lawyer who specializes in labor laws because you could be sitting on like a fucking gold mine.

  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    bowen wrote: »
    I believe they are also required to keep you at your current location unless you agree to a transfer. All things aside, it is terribly shady to do that in lieu of a OSHA violation.

    No breaks or lunches? That's a DoL violation there too, depending on your state. Here in NY, if you work more than 6 hours straight you are required to take a lunch. Meaning you have to stop and take a lunch at some point, and if not, they get fined and you can sue for some more.

    Unions started for a reason, and most of the reasons now have laws to help you if there's no union to join. You might want to talk to a lawyer who specializes in labor laws because you could be sitting on like a fucking gold mine.

    Very true. I don't know how it is at other large scale companies, but at Costco the employee agreement with non-union employees (only a few warehouses in California & Arizona are unionized) is so iron clad you can literally have a no-call/no-show (not calling ahead, not showing up to shift) every other day for weeks and not get fired for it. The pros are obvious, because it takes practically an act of Congress or God to terminate an employee with seniority greater than a year for anything other than outright theft or assault. On the bad side, it means ridiculously inept employees (and in my experience, people who come to work stoned or on other drugs) are almost impossible to terminate. In a way, it highly negates the need for a union when Costco itself ties its hands in how it can deal with you.

    steam_sig.png
  • GungHoGungHo Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Dalboz wrote: »
    The main difference between Target and Wal-Mart that I've noticed is the smell. Every Target I've ever been in has that really weird smell that I can't figure out what it's supposed to be. Even new ones. A couple of years ago, I went into a new Target that had just opened within the last couple of weeks, and sure enough it had the same smell.
    I know what you're talking about. But, Wal-Mart here also has a smell... though that smell is more similar to a cattle auction.
    gtrmp wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    And Sam's Club is not the same kind of store as Walmart
    ...no, but they are the same company. The "Sam" in "Sam's Club" is Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton.
    You pay to shop at Sam's though... consequently, it's a bit nicer. I still prefer CostCo over Sam's. Especially the "big as a man's fist" chocolate muffins.

    "Adios, mofo" -- TX Gov Rick Perry (R)
  • CervetusCervetus Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    GungHo wrote: »
    I still prefer CostCo over Sam's. Especially the "big as a man's fist" chocolate muffins.

    Those are some giant goddamn hands.

    The libertarian response to anything is, "Sure, that works fine in practice, but it doesn't fly in theory."
  • Nimble CatNimble Cat Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    God, those and the Maple muffins. A box of those is ridiculously cheap.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    GungHo wrote: »
    Dalboz wrote: »
    The main difference between Target and Wal-Mart that I've noticed is the smell. Every Target I've ever been in has that really weird smell that I can't figure out what it's supposed to be. Even new ones. A couple of years ago, I went into a new Target that had just opened within the last couple of weeks, and sure enough it had the same smell.
    I know what you're talking about. But, Wal-Mart here also has a smell... though that smell is more similar to a cattle auction.

    That, my friend, is the smell of quiet desperation.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • Darkchampion3dDarkchampion3d Registered User
    edited December 2008
    Nimble Cat wrote: »
    God, those and the Maple muffins. A box of those is ridiculously cheap.

    Damn you now i have a craving for those maple muffins.

    Our country is now taking so steady a course as to show by what road it will pass to destruction, to wit: by consolidation of power first, and then corruption, its necessary consequence --Thomas Jefferson
  • GungHoGungHo Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Cervetus wrote: »
    GungHo wrote: »
    I still prefer CostCo over Sam's. Especially the "big as a man's fist" chocolate muffins.
    Those are some giant goddamn hands.
    You know what they say about a man with big hands... :winky:
    GungHo wrote: »
    Dalboz wrote: »
    The main difference between Target and Wal-Mart that I've noticed is the smell. Every Target I've ever been in has that really weird smell that I can't figure out what it's supposed to be. Even new ones. A couple of years ago, I went into a new Target that had just opened within the last couple of weeks, and sure enough it had the same smell.
    I know what you're talking about. But, Wal-Mart here also has a smell... though that smell is more similar to a cattle auction.
    That, my friend, is the smell of quiet desperation.
    Oh. I just figured the fat chick in the mumu whose offspring are orbiting her like moons just didn't wash her va-jay-jay.

    "Adios, mofo" -- TX Gov Rick Perry (R)
  • CervetusCervetus Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    GungHo wrote: »
    Cervetus wrote: »
    GungHo wrote: »
    I still prefer CostCo over Sam's. Especially the "big as a man's fist" chocolate muffins.
    Those are some giant goddamn hands.
    You know what they say about a man with big hands... :winky:

    And I thought I was big for preferring the original X Box controller. :(

    The libertarian response to anything is, "Sure, that works fine in practice, but it doesn't fly in theory."
Sign In or Register to comment.