Wal-Mart Good - So say 25,000

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-walmart26.html
from JoeUser Forums

In what can only be a hilarious rebuke to the city of Chicago, Wal Mart is opening a store one block outside of the city limits after being denied the right to open one in the city.  Now all of us have been regaled with stories of how horrid and horrible Wal-Mart is, and how oppressive to their employees they are.  So in a city (just outside) with a reputation of Unionization like Chicago, one would think they would be stupid to build and operate a store.  The Pickets alone would be bad publicity.

But something strange happened on the way to the picket line.  25,000 (yes, 3 zeros) applied for the 325 jobs!  This far surpasses their old record when they built in Oakland of 11,000, or what a Wal-Mart spokesman called a successful opening of 3,000 applicants.  25,000!  And all but 500 listed Chicago as their home!

The Alderman (why does Chicago call their Council members aldermen?) that tried to get Wal-Mart in Chicago itself laments the fact that most of the shoppers are going to be coming from Chicago, but Chicago is not going to get any of the benefits.  Indeed, the little township that won the prize is expected to reap a bonus of $1 million in sales taxes a year from the store alone.  And they currently only get $3 million a year from all other sources!  A very hefty winfall!

Why Chicago rejected Wal Mart was not made clear in the article, but in reading some of the comments, it appears to be political infighting among the aldermen.  Only a couple are actually quoted.  But it does seem to be penny wise and pound foolish for all the alderman to have just chucked that much additional revenue out the door due to some petty internal squabbling.

And the 25,000 people eagerly looking for jobs?  I doubt they care what side of the street the store is located on.  They voted for Wal-Mart with their actions, and seem to be saying "Pays good, Benefits better".  And not "Bad Big Wally World".

So who gets hurt when you deny the market place?  The lesson here, is your Constituents.

8,655 views 79 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
Good article, hehe,
see Wal-Mart grow
see city councilmen blush
see people not learn from past
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top

see Wal-Mart grow
see city councilmen blush

Like bailing Lake Michigan with a seive!

DeskScapes - Bring your desktop background to life.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
"Pays good, Benefits better".

Slightly better then minimum wage earnings plus a benefits package so modest, the expense is hardly worth it seems to contrast heavily with your statement, Doc.

Of course, I guess I could see the perspective of Wal-Mart pay being 'good' and the benefits 'better' opposed to any job that only offers minimum wage and no benefits.

You should grab the Wal-Mart documentary 'Wal-Mart: The High Price of Low Costs", I think you will find it to be eye-opening.

I would skip through the first half-hour sob-story, but I would really concentrate on the chapter dealing with benefits and the one dealing with chinese worker exploitation.

Enjoy.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top

Slightly better then minimum wage earnings plus a benefits package so modest, the expense is hardly worth it seems to contrast heavily with your statement, Doc.

Actually, 8 bucks an hour is not bad.  and Significantly higher than minimum Wage.  As for the Benefits, I have heard they are not up to industry standards.  But what INdustry?  Having worked in Retail for 12 years, I can tell you that on average, their pay and Benefits do suck.  So Wal-Mart is no different, just bigger.

I dont have to watch a fluff piece to know that Wal-Mart is doing just fine.  WHen you get 25,000 applications (and the unemployment rate in Chicago is not THAT high), that indicates that people are shopping and liking what they see.

BTW:  I doubt China is getting exploited.  They dont need to make $5.25 per hour to have a very good standard of living.

Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
25,000 (yes, 2 zeros) applied for the 325 jobs!

Yes another sign of how robust our current economy is.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
25,000 (yes, 2 zeros) applied for the 325 jobs!

Yes another sign of how robust our current economy is.


I seem to notice a lack of the word "unemployed" in there, specially after the 25,000. I must be mistaken.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
I seem to notice a lack of the word "unemployed" in there, specially after the 25,000. I must be mistaken.


Yes, I'm sure that majority of the 25,000 were people who were on their lunch breaks from their jobs with Fortune 500 companies.

I'm not a big Walmart basher, but it's fact that they don't pay much and the benefits are paltry. So why would employed people be standing in line to get a job there?
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top

Slightly better then minimum wage earnings plus a benefits package so modest, the expense is hardly worth it seems to contrast heavily with your statement, Doc.

"slightly better than minimum"? You've GOT to be joking, def. Even in our nearest community, where wages are LOW, WalMart pays over $7.00 an hour...which is about 50% MORE than minimum, if you're keeping score at home.

Only in the world of the left could 50% over minimum be considered "slightly better".

Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top

I'm not a big Walmart basher, but it's fact that they don't pay much and the benefits are paltry.

It's a FACT? SURE...if you believe the hype from people who are PAID to attack WalMart (yes, ladies and gents...the WalMart watch folks get a paycheck for their smear!) Let's see...salary that exceeds the industry average (ask me about the guy who worked with me at WalMart that jumped ship from A&F for a $2 an hour increase), health care benefits for PART TIME employees after a year, generous stock match, profit sharing...yup, they're definitely out to screw the working class!

Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top

Yes another sign of how robust our current economy is.

Thanks for catching the typo!  It has been corrected.

Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top

I seem to notice a lack of the word "unemployed" in there, specially after the 25,000. I must be mistaken.

The article did not comment on (nor do I think Wal-Mart knows) if any are unemployed.

Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top

but it's fact that they don't pay much and the benefits are paltry

There has been a lot of debate on their benefits, but the truth is, go to work for a Mom and Pop shop, and your Benefits are nil.  So they are better than nothing.  And their pay is pretty good for retail.  After all, you are basically talking about low skilled jobs. 

Apparently the combination of the 2 is enough to make 25,000 people think it is a good job.

Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top

"slightly better than minimum"? You've GOT to be joking, def. Even in our nearest community, where wages are LOW, WalMart pays over $7.00 an hour...which is about 50% MORE than minimum, if you're keeping score at home.
Only in the world of the left could 50% over minimum be considered "slightly better".

I think I read in another article that they are paying about $8/hr up there, but it (the article) did not reference this store, so that may just be an average (starting) for the Mid-West.

Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top

health care benefits for PART TIME employees after a year, generous stock match, profit sharing...yup, they're definitely out to screw the working class!

What it really comes down to is what you wrote about recently.  It is not called slavery for a reason.  And these 25,000 are not wanting to become indentured.  So Wal-Mart is doing something right.

Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
There has been a lot of debate on their benefits, but the truth is, go to work for a Mom and Pop shop, and your Benefits are nil. So they are better than nothing. And their pay is pretty good for retail. After all, you are basically talking about low skilled jobs.


I work "in retail", so I know what's good and not good "in retail".
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
I think I read in another article that they are paying about $8/hr up there, but it (the article) did not reference this store, so that may just be an average (starting) for the Mid-West.


Even if we assume that they're paying them $8, do you know what the cost of living is like in Chicago? Do you know how much a one bedroom apt goes for in Chicago?
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
Yes, I'm sure that majority of the 25,000 were people who were on their lunch breaks from their jobs with Fortune 500 companies.


Ever heard of a second job? Not everyone who has one job looks for a second job out of necesity, more like ambition. They can't get the high paying jobs so they get 2 lower paying jobs, more hours but also more money. I should know, cause I have a job, $9.50 and hour, and I wouldn't mind a 2nd job for those extra electronic expenses I dream a lot about.

I'm not a big Walmart basher, but it's fact that they don't pay much and the benefits are paltry. So why would employed people be standing in line to get a job there?


Maybe not to you, but to those who can use the extra money, sure. I believe I answered you question with my previous paragraph. Look just because you don't need the extra money doesn't mean they don't.

The article did not comment on (nor do I think Wal-Mart knows) if any are unemployed.


They might know since these people usually have to put previous job info, including any current ones. But that would be only after they reviewed the applications.
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
Even if we assume that they're paying them $8, do you know what the cost of living is like in Chicago? Do you know how much a one bedroom apt goes for in Chicago?


I actually do. Link


Not bad, almost the same as Florida. But you do also have efficiency options and if a couple then both should work. I really wish you stop making excuses. There's a reason 25,000 people applied and I bet they probably pay more rent than most of those places I posted.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top

I work "in retail", so I know what's good and not good "in retail".

I worked there 12 years.  SO I know as well.  I have never worked for Wal-Mart, nor do I intend to.  But a lot of people want to.

Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
Not bad, almost the same as Florida. But you do also have efficiency options and if a couple then both should work. I really wish you stop making excuses. There's a reason 25,000 people applied and I bet they probably pay more rent than most of those places I posted.


Yes, I'm sure they do pay more than the places you listed, considering most of the reasonable ones are in "da hood".
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
DJ,

And as I mentioned before in a thread about DC (which, from the ensuing researchh I found to be significantly more expensive than Chicago), there are plenty of rental opportunities that are "off the map" that you have to know the community to get. For instance, in the summer of 1993, we rented a clean, 5 bedroom place for $600 a month. It was the upper two floors of an elderly lady's three story home, and was close to two different "el" lines, and had several of the type of restaurants in Chicago that make it cheaper for a single person to eat out than to eat in (for instance, a HUGE burrito...big enough for two meals for $3). We had five of us in that place, and we lived the high life for awhile...at a rate FAR below the average rental prices in Chicago.

I don't know where the WalMart's located, but I would guess that many of the 25,000 are applying because it will save them a 45 minute commute into the city for other jobs.
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
Why Chicago rejected Wal Mart was not made clear in the article, but in reading some of the comments, it appears to be political infighting among the aldermen.


If I had to guess, their decision reflected the supposed long arm of union labor, soon to be cut off. I don't care what anyone says about Wal Mart... They bring customer value, "stable" jobs for hard work, and a contributing cash-cow to the coffers of the communities they build in while reflecting the core of our economic structure in action....supply and demand.

but it's fact that they don't pay much and the benefits are paltry. So why would employed people be standing in line to get a job there?


Are you assuming their employed? I read nothing in Guy's article. In answer though, many city folks desire moving to the burbs... For most, that can only be done if they have a job in the burbs to go to. Then consider those folks that like to work hard, earn fair wages in good working conditions. Others prefer a job verses unemployed and or wondering "if" they will find a higher paying job if they wait. Most hourly folks are not cut out to wait.

Also apply some fiscal thinking. Staying unemployed for months with outgoing expenses and no incoming, even if one gets a higher paying hourly job, it's not going to be that much greater when all costs are considered. Say it takes 3-5 months just to find a decent job, add another 3-6 months for a better paying job, they have outgoing for 4-9 months. Factor in the average hourly lives paycheck to paycheck. Where do you think folks in this income will get the cash flow to cover that length period of unemployment? The person that waits for that has -0- reasoning and likely more mental problems then just that. The increase won't remotely offset accumulated monthly expenses or repayment of borrowed monies and or replace their small depleted savings accounts, if they had one.

I applaud those that won the jobs.... And, would tell those that didn't, think about what you didn't do or say so the next time, you're a winner instead of looser.
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top

Even if we assume that they're paying them $8, do you know what the cost of living is like in Chicago? Do you know how much a one bedroom apt goes for in Chicago?

Does it matter?  Apparently the pay scale for Wal-Mart in Chicago is better than most other entry level jobs, and the people know it.  I wouldthink you would slam the other employers for not paying as well as Wal-Mart.  Not for Wal -mart paying too much.

Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top

They might know since these people usually have to put previous job info, including any current ones. But that would be only after they reviewed the applications.

Truie.  It will be interesting if they ever publish any stats on the applications.

Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top

Not bad, almost the same as Florida. But you do also have efficiency options and if a couple then both should work. I really wish you stop making excuses. There's a reason 25,000 people applied and I bet they probably pay more rent than most of those places I posted.

Looks better than Richmond!