So is claiming the WalMart hate is overblown the new "both parties are equally bad", Ralph Nader too cool for rational opinions meme?
Fuck WalMart. Its a scumbag company that treats its employees badly, utilizes its market share like a Supersledge, politically intimidates its employees in order to promote a socially conservative, anti-union, free trade and partisan (Republican) agenda, and essentially locks in rural poverty in those communities it essentially takes over. And I don't think anyone seriously disputes any of these points. So Fuck WalMart.
That's not really the reason I don't go there though. I don't go there because WalMart customers suck. It doesn't even honestly get to the point of the ethics of the company because every time I've gone into the store I've become just a little bit dumber and a little bit more of an asshole.
most people who say 'fuck walmart' still shop there for the convenience and/or the $$cheap. but then there are people who live in the US that still say 'fuck USA' so maybe its just pointless moaning.
also... why are you talking to walmart customers (who are no stupider than customers in any store/mall)? you go in, grab what you need, pay for it and leave. you may have to say 5 words to the cashier but if you go to walmart for interesting conversation.... you're doing it wrong.
Talk to them!? Are you mad!?!
I'm just talking about the osmosis of putrefying essence which mocks the very concept of a sacred soul in the other patrons. You don't have to eat plutonium to get radiation sickness and you don't have to converse with the dregs to feel their enveloping worthlessness or pricks of petty vileness.
A couple of weeks ago my mother was in line at Wal-Mart when some bitch lady knocked her light bulbs off the belt. Of course they broke when they hit the floor, but rather than at least apologize for her clumsiness bitch lady picked up the box, pushed in front of my mother, and moved to scan them through herself. The clerk grabbed the box away and no "harm" was done, but my mother was absolutely livid when she got home.
To say nothing of the number of times I've heard about customers urinating on the shelves.
Zimmydoom, Zimmydoom
Flew away in a balloon
Had sex with polar bears
While sitting in a reclining chair
Now there are Zim-Bear hybrids
Running around and clawing eyelids
Watch out, a Zim-Bear is about to have sex with yooooooou!
Someone posted earlier "Maybe we need another fuck Walmart thread."
I find that hilarious as this thread has been that for about four hundred and fifty six thousand pages now.
And for the people who have said "wtf omg I'm not saying walmart shoulders the blame alone but seriously, fuck those guys" its not only a stupid position, its just plain wrong.
The rhetoric in this thread has been overwhelmingly anti-company. I'm not saying that is good or bad, but pretending that it isn't the case is fundamentally dishonest; the disbelief over people (beyond myself) believing that others in this discussion were trying to say that "blaming anyone except Walmart is ridiculous" has been, itself, ridiculous. ITS WHAT YOU SAID.
So is claiming the WalMart hate is overblown the new "both parties are equally bad", Ralph Nader too cool for rational opinions meme?
Fuck WalMart. Its a scumbag company that treats its employees badly, utilizes its market share like a Supersledge, politically intimidates its employees in order to promote a socially conservative, anti-union, free trade and partisan (Republican) agenda, and essentially locks in rural poverty in those communities it essentially takes over. And I don't think anyone seriously disputes any of these points. So Fuck WalMart.
That's not really the reason I don't go there though. I don't go there because WalMart customers suck. It doesn't even honestly get to the point of the ethics of the company because every time I've gone into the store I've become just a little bit dumber and a little bit more of an asshole.
most people who say 'fuck walmart' still shop there for the convenience and/or the $$cheap. but then there are people who live in the US that still say 'fuck USA' so maybe its just pointless moaning.
also... why are you talking to walmart customers (who are no stupider than customers in any store/mall)? you go in, grab what you need, pay for it and leave. you may have to say 5 words to the cashier but if you go to walmart for interesting conversation.... you're doing it wrong.
Talk to them!? Are you mad!?!
I'm just talking about the osmosis of putrefying essence which mocks the very concept of a sacred soul in the other patrons. You don't have to eat plutonium to get radiation sickness and you don't have to converse with the dregs to feel their enveloping worthlessness or pricks of petty vileness.
A couple of weeks ago my mother was in line at Wal-Mart when some bitch lady knocked her light bulbs off the belt. Of course they broke when they hit the floor, but rather than at least apologize for her clumsiness bitch lady picked up the box, pushed in front of my mother, and moved to scan them through herself. The clerk grabbed the box away and no "harm" was done, but my mother was absolutely livid when she got home.
To say nothing of the number of times I've heard about customers urinating on the shelves.
Yeah I don't much care to shop at Wal-Mart.
Someone vomited in a box of dishes, then closed the box up and put it in the back of a shelf in the Domestics department at the Target store I worked at. It was finally found due to the smell, which lingered for a week. A bum at the train station where I get on to go into the city urinated behind one of the garbage bins/electrical boxes/big green plastic things they have at train stations less than 20' from a nicely maintained public restroom with clear signage. When I got off at the train station in the city a businessman in a suit blithely knocked over a (thankfully empty) stroller in order to get on a train that wasn't going to depart for probably another 20 minutes.
People are horrendous assholes. What store they shop at does not in any way influence this.
Someone posted earlier "Maybe we need another fuck Walmart thread."
I find that hilarious as this thread has been that for about four hundred and fifty six thousand pages now.
And for the people who have said "wtf omg I'm not saying walmart shoulders the blame alone but seriously, fuck those guys" its not only a stupid position, its just plain wrong.
The rhetoric in this thread has been overwhelmingly anti-company. I'm not saying that is good or bad, but pretending that it isn't the case is fundamentally dishonest; the disbelief over people (beyond myself) believing that others in this discussion were trying to say that "blaming anyone except Walmart is ridiculous" has been, itself, ridiculous. ITS WHAT YOU SAID.
Point it out. I dare you.
Been there, done that. Oh, but right, the poster didn't MEAN that. They just said it. Rhetoric only means something if it agrees with your POV, after all.
The 'fault lying firmly with the company and to argue otherwise makes you a idiot' certainly couldn't be taken as placing fault at the corporate door. Now yes, after the fact people can say "But that isn't what I meant, I just left out the part saying that consumers are also part of the problem" and that can even be true; but it doesn't make it impossible for people to read the words that were just typed and take them at face value. The inability to admit that is just silly. Maybe that's not what was meant, I'm not a mind reader so I can't know. But it could (and obviously was) be taken that way, and the entire position of the people like you who keep saying QUOTE IT (even though that's been done already) is that there is no way anyone could have taken the posts to mean that.
Funny how everyone disengaged and moved on to something else nearly immediately at the time, where as before I took the time to sit there like an idiot and cull through pages of posts to find what led some of us down that path people couldn't focus on anything except the crazy idea that people in this thread came off as blaming Walmart alone, and how stupid we must have been to think it.
The best one after I went back and spent the time was "Uh..., yeah it does say that but it COULD be interpreted this other way!" When the response was "OK, but it could also be taken the way it was if you just read the thing" the poster mysteriously vanished.
As for "the greater evils of Walmart," guess who has made it that way? They can't be successful unless the populace makes them that way. But again, all the big bad companies fault that people don't read up on WalMart's practices and say "You know what, I disagree with this and won't shop there anymore." The fact is, we've made them the way they are. Welcome to the free market. While you may not agree with Walmart's policies, its what has made them so big to begin with. The problem isn't a company that customers choose to go to: The problem is us.
And no, I don't shop there.
Cue a post saying that people are just too weak to resist ten dollar toaster ovens. And they're correct. That weakness isn't on the fault of the company selling the damn ovens. Its on the part of the people buying them.
Someone posted earlier "Maybe we need another fuck Walmart thread."
I find that hilarious as this thread has been that for about four hundred and fifty six thousand pages now.
And for the people who have said "wtf omg I'm not saying walmart shoulders the blame alone but seriously, fuck those guys" its not only a stupid position, its just plain wrong.
The rhetoric in this thread has been overwhelmingly anti-company. I'm not saying that is good or bad, but pretending that it isn't the case is fundamentally dishonest; the disbelief over people (beyond myself) believing that others in this discussion were trying to say that "blaming anyone except Walmart is ridiculous" has been, itself, ridiculous. ITS WHAT YOU SAID.
Point it out. I dare you.
He already 'did' even though the posts he quoted were discussing legal liability and the fact that we're arguing about him not substantiating his point is also anti-Wal~Mart or something and oh my god would you just take the anti-corporate blinders off, Medopine? The thread is so huge and just chock a block full of Wal~Mart = Evil, Trampling Horde = Saints; he can't be bothered to find some good examples of it.
Been there, done that. Oh, but right, the poster didn't MEAN that. They just said it. Rhetoric only means something if it agrees with your POV, after all.
The 'fault lying firmly with the company and to argue otherwise makes you a idiot' certainly couldn't be taken as placing fault at the corporate door. Now yes, after the fact people can say "But that isn't what I meant, I just left out the part saying that consumers are also part of the problem" and that can even be true; but it doesn't make it impossible for people to read the words that were just typed and take them at face value. The inability to admit that is just silly. Maybe that's not what was meant, I'm not a mind reader so I can't know. But it could (and obviously was) be taken that way, and the entire position of the people like you who keep saying QUOTE IT (even though that's been done already) is that there is no way anyone could have taken the posts to mean that.
Funny how everyone disengaged and moved on to something else nearly immediately at the time, where as before I took the time to sit there like an idiot and cull through pages of posts to find what led some of us down that path people couldn't focus on anything except the crazy idea that people in this thread came off as blaming Walmart alone, and how stupid we must have been to think it.
The best one after I went back and spent the time was "Uh..., yeah it does say that but it COULD be interpreted this other way!" When the response was "OK, but it could also be taken the way it was if you just read the thing" the poster mysteriously vanished.
As for "the greater evils of Walmart," guess who has made it that way? They can't be successful unless the populace makes them that way. But again, all the big bad companies fault that people don't read up on WalMart's practices and say "You know what, I disagree with this and won't shop there anymore." The fact is, we've made them the way they are. Welcome to the free market. While you may not agree with Walmart's policies, its what has made them so big to begin with. The problem isn't a company that customers choose to go to: The problem is us.
And no, I don't shop there.
Cue a post saying that people are just too weak to resist ten dollar toaster ovens. And they're correct. That weakness isn't on the fault of the company selling the damn ovens. Its on the part of the people buying them.
There's no reason to not shop at Wal-Mart, because the money you save really helps you, and Wal-Mart isn't going to notice whether or not you shop there at all. So, it's a collective action problem, which is the problem with the free market: the free market doesn't optimize collective action problems.
As for the rest of the post, what you're saying is that even the person who supposedly said that has said they don't agree with it. So, fine, you're right, and the best kind of right: technically right. Some person said something stupid, that they later took back. Good for you. You win the internet, or something, I guess.
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.
Zimmydoom, Zimmydoom
Flew away in a balloon
Had sex with polar bears
While sitting in a reclining chair
Now there are Zim-Bear hybrids
Running around and clawing eyelids
Watch out, a Zim-Bear is about to have sex with yooooooou!
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.
Realistically though on average you'll spend a small amount more shopping at target vs. walmart. Plus like the argument I got into with an assistant manager back in the day, if walmart had no customers it'd be cleaner and offer better customer service as well.
Unless you're an executive at Wal-mart, I seriously doubt you have any amazing shit about them that you know.
At least, no level of middle-management incompetency that's unique to them when compared to other huge companies.
You mean the receivers throw product around in the backroom, or maybe you knew someone who did something inappropriate with some piece of produce. OMG walmart sucks.
He was talking specifically about the incompetence of management. My counter-claim is that everyone thinks the management at their company is incompetent.
He was talking specifically about the incompetence of management. My counter-claim is that everyone thinks the management at their company is incompetent.
He really doesn't mention management (you're talking about chasm's post right?) I actually get the vibe he's complaining about specific issues in reference to his store.
DeShadowC on
0
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
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.
I think the first time I went to a Target was after working at Wal*Mart for a summer. I was amazed by how quiet, tidy, and relaxed it was. There were no suspended TV's blaring advertisements at me, and the people didn't look like they were trying to trade their food stamps for the fixin's to make crystal meth.
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 doesn't have as much market share and as such is not the hegemonic force that Wal~Mart is. Which is why regardless of how evil it is, it's not nearly as evil as Wal~Mart. All the other complaints against Wal~Mart are crap, but it's ability to dictate terms and effectively control the decisions of other companies is a horrible, horrible aspect of Wal~Mart.
Someone posted earlier "Maybe we need another fuck Walmart thread."
I find that hilarious as this thread has been that for about four hundred and fifty six thousand pages now.
And for the people who have said "wtf omg I'm not saying walmart shoulders the blame alone but seriously, fuck those guys" its not only a stupid position, its just plain wrong.
The rhetoric in this thread has been overwhelmingly anti-company. I'm not saying that is good or bad, but pretending that it isn't the case is fundamentally dishonest; the disbelief over people (beyond myself) believing that others in this discussion were trying to say that "blaming anyone except Walmart is ridiculous" has been, itself, ridiculous. ITS WHAT YOU SAID.
Point it out. I dare you.
Been there, done that. Oh, but right, the poster didn't MEAN that. They just said it. Rhetoric only means something if it agrees with your POV, after all.
The 'fault lying firmly with the company and to argue otherwise makes you a idiot' certainly couldn't be taken as placing fault at the corporate door. Now yes, after the fact people can say "But that isn't what I meant, I just left out the part saying that consumers are also part of the problem" and that can even be true; but it doesn't make it impossible for people to read the words that were just typed and take them at face value. The inability to admit that is just silly. Maybe that's not what was meant, I'm not a mind reader so I can't know. But it could (and obviously was) be taken that way, and the entire position of the people like you who keep saying QUOTE IT (even though that's been done already) is that there is no way anyone could have taken the posts to mean that.
Funny how everyone disengaged and moved on to something else nearly immediately at the time, where as before I took the time to sit there like an idiot and cull through pages of posts to find what led some of us down that path people couldn't focus on anything except the crazy idea that people in this thread came off as blaming Walmart alone, and how stupid we must have been to think it.
The best one after I went back and spent the time was "Uh..., yeah it does say that but it COULD be interpreted this other way!" When the response was "OK, but it could also be taken the way it was if you just read the thing" the poster mysteriously vanished.
As for "the greater evils of Walmart," guess who has made it that way? They can't be successful unless the populace makes them that way. But again, all the big bad companies fault that people don't read up on WalMart's practices and say "You know what, I disagree with this and won't shop there anymore." The fact is, we've made them the way they are. Welcome to the free market. While you may not agree with Walmart's policies, its what has made them so big to begin with. The problem isn't a company that customers choose to go to: The problem is us.
And no, I don't shop there.
Cue a post saying that people are just too weak to resist ten dollar toaster ovens. And they're correct. That weakness isn't on the fault of the company selling the damn ovens. Its on the part of the people buying them.
Oh I'm sorry. I didn't recognize you as the same idiot from earlier in the thread. Carry on then.
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.
I think the first time I went to a Target was after working at Wal*Mart for a summer. I was amazed by how quiet, tidy, and relaxed it was. There were no suspended TV's blaring advertisements at me, and the people didn't look like they were trying to trade their food stamps for the fixin's to make crystal meth.
Target is what Wal-Mart could be if Wal-Mart shoppers had more teeth.
Point is that Target and Wal-mart are practically identical, except Target has a trendy-sounding name whereas Wal-mart sounds like the name of a wholesale swap meet, and Target has fewer customers, less market share, and shallower pockets.
Seriously, I have a huge theory about how almost all of the hatred toward Wal-mart could be fixed with an image change. "Mart" has such low-class connotations. Call it "Walton's" instead, and don't make the name of the store this huge fucking white block-letter monster, just make it some not-in-your-face cursive script in the corner.
Nobody messes with Target, or even Sam's Club for that matter.
Point is that Target and Wal-mart are practically identical, except Target has a trendy-sounding name whereas Wal-mart sounds like the name of a wholesale swap meet, and Target has fewer customers, less market share, and shallower pockets.
Seriously, I have a huge theory about how almost all of the hatred toward Wal-mart could be fixed with an image change. "Mart" has such low-class connotations. Call it "Walton's" instead, and don't make the name of the store this huge fucking white block-letter monster, just make it some not-in-your-face cursive script in the corner.
Nobody messes with Target, or even Sam's Club for that matter.
Target's corporate behavior is a fair bit different from Wal-Mart's, too. They put a lot more money back into the local communities where they put their stores.
Point is that Target and Wal-mart are practically identical, except Target has a trendy-sounding name whereas Wal-mart sounds like the name of a wholesale swap meet, and Target has fewer customers, less market share, and shallower pockets.
Seriously, I have a huge theory about how almost all of the hatred toward Wal-mart could be fixed with an image change. "Mart" has such low-class connotations. Call it "Walton's" instead, and don't make the name of the store this huge fucking white block-letter monster, just make it some not-in-your-face cursive script in the corner.
Nobody messes with Target, or even Sam's Club for that matter.
Target's corporate behavior is a fair bit different from Wal-Mart's, too. They put a lot more money back into the local communities where they put their stores.
Both directly and in the form of not completely screwing their employees, not forcing out every other retail store in the county (partially by not focusing on rural areas to small to reasonably support such a store) and not being political dicks.
And Sam's Club is not the same kind of store as Walmart, Target (or Kmart for that matter). Its more analogous to CostCo or BJs (Membership warehouse/bulk stores). Different animals. And amongst those, CostCo is the clear winner in the not-a-dick company contest.
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.
Point is that Target and Wal-mart are practically identical, except Target has a trendy-sounding name whereas Wal-mart sounds like the name of a wholesale swap meet, and Target has fewer customers, less market share, and shallower pockets.
Seriously, I have a huge theory about how almost all of the hatred toward Wal-mart could be fixed with an image change. "Mart" has such low-class connotations. Call it "Walton's" instead, and don't make the name of the store this huge fucking white block-letter monster, just make it some not-in-your-face cursive script in the corner.
Nobody messes with Target, or even Sam's Club for that matter.
Walmart doesn't have an image problem because their name "sounds too white trash". Walmart has an image problem because for the past two decades at least, they've been leading a race to the bottom, crushing anyone who got in their way.
By the way, they have done the second part of your idea, and guess what? It doesn't work.
Point is that Target and Wal-mart are practically identical, except Target has a trendy-sounding name whereas Wal-mart sounds like the name of a wholesale swap meet, and Target has fewer customers, less market share, and shallower pockets.
Seriously, I have a huge theory about how almost all of the hatred toward Wal-mart could be fixed with an image change. "Mart" has such low-class connotations. Call it "Walton's" instead, and don't make the name of the store this huge fucking white block-letter monster, just make it some not-in-your-face cursive script in the corner.
Nobody messes with Target, or even Sam's Club for that matter.
What will it take to convince you that the people you're arguing with have reasons for disliking Walmart other than they have a shitty logo?
Point is that Target and Wal-mart are practically identical, except Target has a trendy-sounding name whereas Wal-mart sounds like the name of a wholesale swap meet, and Target has fewer customers, less market share, and shallower pockets.
By shallower pockets you mean less buying power, and thus less power to influence vendors and the market as a whole. I will agree, though, that saying Target is decent while Wal-Mart is evil is about like saying that SPAM is high-quality food while that discount store-brand luncheon meat is crap.
The overall difference is pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things.
Seriously, I have a huge theory about how almost all of the hatred toward Wal-mart could be fixed with an image change. "Mart" has such low-class connotations. Call it "Walton's" instead, and don't make the name of the store this huge fucking white block-letter monster, just make it some not-in-your-face cursive script in the corner.
Bullshit. Part of the problem that people who have not worked for a carnival have with Wal-Mart is the fact that the inside of the store seems literally designed to make your skin crawl. Tighter aisles, lower-quality displays, the entire store just generally feels "cheaper." And that's before you get into shit like the constant "rotate security cameras to sector three" calls or whatever, designed to remind you that you're being watched at all times. This is the kind of thing that a logo change won't fix, they'll have to actually spend more money. I guess they're still a notch above K-Mart on this front, which at least in my town smells like an airport bathroom from corner to corner.
But it has nothing to do with the word "mart," it has to do with Target working to make sure that from end to end their store generally "feels" classier.
Both directly and in the form of not completely screwing their employees, not forcing out every other retail store in the county (partially by not focusing on rural areas to small to reasonably support such a store) and not being political dicks.
While I'm sure you can quote some numbers regarding their overall treatment of employees (like % on benefits, average wage, whatever) I can say that as a former employee of both stores the difference seemed pretty negligible. Both treat their employees like absolute dogshit.
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.
Yeah, their staffing was absolutely fucked on the sales floor. They'd have three people on the floor (sometimes two, one for all of hardlines one for all of softlines), and then they'd call one of those to the front registers to check out lest some poor customer have to wait behind a single person in line...ignoring the fact that this may leave only one fucking person on the entire sales floor.
I can think of several times where, due to breaks and cashier call-ups, I was the only person covering the entire store, often for up to ten or fifteen minutes at a time.
I'll disagree that Wal-Mart is much better, they're more than happy to screw people in other ways instead. But I'll say the difference between the two is pretty negligible
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.
TL DR on
0
Options
Just_Bri_ThanksSeething with ragefrom a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPAregular
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. And if they feel they do not want to put up with the legal footwork to get away with it then they will just pressure you out.
Just_Bri_Thanks on
...and when you are done with that; take a folding
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
0
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
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.
mcdermott on
0
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
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.
TL DR on
0
Options
Just_Bri_ThanksSeething with ragefrom a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPAregular
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*
Just_Bri_Thanks on
...and when you are done with that; take a folding
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
Posts
Pot still illegal.
Wow we suck
That was a pretty constructive post.
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
Planes crash.
Pot still illegal.
SO RELEVANT!
A couple of weeks ago my mother was in line at Wal-Mart when some bitch lady knocked her light bulbs off the belt. Of course they broke when they hit the floor, but rather than at least apologize for her clumsiness bitch lady picked up the box, pushed in front of my mother, and moved to scan them through herself. The clerk grabbed the box away and no "harm" was done, but my mother was absolutely livid when she got home.
To say nothing of the number of times I've heard about customers urinating on the shelves.
Yeah I don't much care to shop at Wal-Mart.
Point it out. I dare you.
They may someday build the one in Landover, MD, just outside the Beltway. Then it would be closer.
I live near enough to the PA Dutch Market in Germantown so if I want good food I can splurge on it.
Someone vomited in a box of dishes, then closed the box up and put it in the back of a shelf in the Domestics department at the Target store I worked at. It was finally found due to the smell, which lingered for a week. A bum at the train station where I get on to go into the city urinated behind one of the garbage bins/electrical boxes/big green plastic things they have at train stations less than 20' from a nicely maintained public restroom with clear signage. When I got off at the train station in the city a businessman in a suit blithely knocked over a (thankfully empty) stroller in order to get on a train that wasn't going to depart for probably another 20 minutes.
People are horrendous assholes. What store they shop at does not in any way influence this.
Been there, done that. Oh, but right, the poster didn't MEAN that. They just said it. Rhetoric only means something if it agrees with your POV, after all.
The 'fault lying firmly with the company and to argue otherwise makes you a idiot' certainly couldn't be taken as placing fault at the corporate door. Now yes, after the fact people can say "But that isn't what I meant, I just left out the part saying that consumers are also part of the problem" and that can even be true; but it doesn't make it impossible for people to read the words that were just typed and take them at face value. The inability to admit that is just silly. Maybe that's not what was meant, I'm not a mind reader so I can't know. But it could (and obviously was) be taken that way, and the entire position of the people like you who keep saying QUOTE IT (even though that's been done already) is that there is no way anyone could have taken the posts to mean that.
Funny how everyone disengaged and moved on to something else nearly immediately at the time, where as before I took the time to sit there like an idiot and cull through pages of posts to find what led some of us down that path people couldn't focus on anything except the crazy idea that people in this thread came off as blaming Walmart alone, and how stupid we must have been to think it.
The best one after I went back and spent the time was "Uh..., yeah it does say that but it COULD be interpreted this other way!" When the response was "OK, but it could also be taken the way it was if you just read the thing" the poster mysteriously vanished.
As for "the greater evils of Walmart," guess who has made it that way? They can't be successful unless the populace makes them that way. But again, all the big bad companies fault that people don't read up on WalMart's practices and say "You know what, I disagree with this and won't shop there anymore." The fact is, we've made them the way they are. Welcome to the free market. While you may not agree with Walmart's policies, its what has made them so big to begin with. The problem isn't a company that customers choose to go to: The problem is us.
And no, I don't shop there.
Cue a post saying that people are just too weak to resist ten dollar toaster ovens. And they're correct. That weakness isn't on the fault of the company selling the damn ovens. Its on the part of the people buying them.
He already 'did' even though the posts he quoted were discussing legal liability and the fact that we're arguing about him not substantiating his point is also anti-Wal~Mart or something and oh my god would you just take the anti-corporate blinders off, Medopine? The thread is so huge and just chock a block full of Wal~Mart = Evil, Trampling Horde = Saints; he can't be bothered to find some good examples of it.
As for the rest of the post, what you're saying is that even the person who supposedly said that has said they don't agree with it. So, fine, you're right, and the best kind of right: technically right. Some person said something stupid, that they later took back. Good for you. You win the internet, or something, I guess.
If you guys knew the shit I know, you'd be amazed that a company so incompetent could ever make as much money as they do.
XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
It is, however, shocking in its audacity.
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.
Realistically though on average you'll spend a small amount more shopping at target vs. walmart. Plus like the argument I got into with an assistant manager back in the day, if walmart had no customers it'd be cleaner and offer better customer service as well.
At least, no level of middle-management incompetency that's unique to them when compared to other huge companies.
You mean the receivers throw product around in the backroom, or maybe you knew someone who did something inappropriate with some piece of produce. OMG walmart sucks.
He really doesn't mention management (you're talking about chasm's post right?) I actually get the vibe he's complaining about specific issues in reference to his store.
I think the first time I went to a Target was after working at Wal*Mart for a summer. I was amazed by how quiet, tidy, and relaxed it was. There were no suspended TV's blaring advertisements at me, and the people didn't look like they were trying to trade their food stamps for the fixin's to make crystal meth.
Target doesn't have as much market share and as such is not the hegemonic force that Wal~Mart is. Which is why regardless of how evil it is, it's not nearly as evil as Wal~Mart. All the other complaints against Wal~Mart are crap, but it's ability to dictate terms and effectively control the decisions of other companies is a horrible, horrible aspect of Wal~Mart.
Oh I'm sorry. I didn't recognize you as the same idiot from earlier in the thread. Carry on then.
Target is what Wal-Mart could be if Wal-Mart shoppers had more teeth.
Seriously, I have a huge theory about how almost all of the hatred toward Wal-mart could be fixed with an image change. "Mart" has such low-class connotations. Call it "Walton's" instead, and don't make the name of the store this huge fucking white block-letter monster, just make it some not-in-your-face cursive script in the corner.
Nobody messes with Target, or even Sam's Club for that matter.
Target's corporate behavior is a fair bit different from Wal-Mart's, too. They put a lot more money back into the local communities where they put their stores.
Both directly and in the form of not completely screwing their employees, not forcing out every other retail store in the county (partially by not focusing on rural areas to small to reasonably support such a store) and not being political dicks.
And Sam's Club is not the same kind of store as Walmart, Target (or Kmart for that matter). Its more analogous to CostCo or BJs (Membership warehouse/bulk stores). Different animals. And amongst those, CostCo is the clear winner in the not-a-dick company contest.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
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.
Walmart doesn't have an image problem because their name "sounds too white trash". Walmart has an image problem because for the past two decades at least, they've been leading a race to the bottom, crushing anyone who got in their way.
By the way, they have done the second part of your idea, and guess what? It doesn't work.
Good, then you can sue them on a rights group's dime and get mucho dinero. Sounds like a deal to me.
By shallower pockets you mean less buying power, and thus less power to influence vendors and the market as a whole. I will agree, though, that saying Target is decent while Wal-Mart is evil is about like saying that SPAM is high-quality food while that discount store-brand luncheon meat is crap.
The overall difference is pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things.
Bullshit. Part of the problem that people who have not worked for a carnival have with Wal-Mart is the fact that the inside of the store seems literally designed to make your skin crawl. Tighter aisles, lower-quality displays, the entire store just generally feels "cheaper." And that's before you get into shit like the constant "rotate security cameras to sector three" calls or whatever, designed to remind you that you're being watched at all times. This is the kind of thing that a logo change won't fix, they'll have to actually spend more money. I guess they're still a notch above K-Mart on this front, which at least in my town smells like an airport bathroom from corner to corner.
But it has nothing to do with the word "mart," it has to do with Target working to make sure that from end to end their store generally "feels" classier.
While I'm sure you can quote some numbers regarding their overall treatment of employees (like % on benefits, average wage, whatever) I can say that as a former employee of both stores the difference seemed pretty negligible. Both treat their employees like absolute dogshit.
Yeah, their staffing was absolutely fucked on the sales floor. They'd have three people on the floor (sometimes two, one for all of hardlines one for all of softlines), and then they'd call one of those to the front registers to check out lest some poor customer have to wait behind a single person in line...ignoring the fact that this may leave only one fucking person on the entire sales floor.
I can think of several times where, due to breaks and cashier call-ups, I was the only person covering the entire store, often for up to ten or fifteen minutes at a time.
I'll disagree that Wal-Mart is much better, they're more than happy to screw people in other ways instead. But I'll say the difference between the two is pretty negligible
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.
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. And if they feel they do not want to put up with the legal footwork to get away with it then they will just pressure you out.
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
Someone bought be a few pairs from Steve & Barry's. They've held up pretty well, and were supposedly like $10
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.
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*
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.