The Wal-Mart Embargo

[shikimo]

Yes, thanks. Practically everything I see has both logos on it. I suppose many people still don't notice it, though.



I've spent some time in towns where they don't have chain grocery stores and the stores were charging people much more than Wal-Mart ever did. I thought that prices in cities were high but they're obviously not that bad in comparison.

True enough...Wal-Mart almost always has the lowest prices. But the whole discussion here is whether or not low prices justify malicious and often blatantly illegal corporate behavior (witness the millions in fines and legal costs incurred by Wal-Mart, not to mention a few criminal cases involving migrant workers). Clearly I don't think so and I've got lots of facts to back it up, but there's two or more sides to every story...for example, I've had my mind mostly changed about Starbucks, cuz there's a lot of surprising data regarding what has happened with the coffee industry in markets they have opened up, and they've cleaned up their corporate act in many ways. Do the same thing for Wal-Mart and I'll admit I was wrong again...

but don't even let me get started on Blockbuster .

 

[pseudobrit]

interesting point of view. care to cite some sources how target has a "better track record" than walmart? what's "better"??

"diff corp blueprint," or wolf under sheep's skin?

I promise not to buy my next Mac from Target either. Is everyone happy yet?

 

[bousozoku]

True enough...Wal-Mart almost always has the lowest prices. But the whole discussion here is whether or not low prices justify malicious and often blatantly illegal corporate behavior (witness the millions in fines and legal costs incurred by Wal-Mart, not to mention a few criminal cases involving migrant workers). Clearly I don't think so and I've got lots of facts to back it up, but there's two or more sides to every story...for example, I've had my mind mostly changed about Starbucks, cuz there's a lot of surprising data regarding what has happened with the coffee industry in markets they have opened up, and they've cleaned up their corporate act in many ways. Do the same thing for Wal-Mart and I'll admit I was wrong again...

but don't even let me get started on Blockbuster .

Wal-Mart stores seem bad in almost every way. I don't think that they're great or wonderful and it's rare that I would go there. My adoptive parents, however, live in a town where Target left and they have few choices.

I wish that Wal-Mart didn't take advantage of people but it's up to the individuals to stop shopping or working there, where possible.

I don't have a membership at Blockbuster and it would be very unusual for me to be at a Starbucks that's in a book store, let alone a standalone Starbucks store.

Of course, considering the various Wal-Mart issues, would we stop buying gasoline because of the various issues with the petroleum industry? I don't think so.

 

[FrankBlack]

Well, looking through this, I'd say that so far, it is one of the most civilized discussions about Walmart I have seen on any on-line forum. So, what do I think?

Most folks that know me know that I am anti-Walmart. Yes, I have set foot in one, sadly enough. Never again. However, what I think doesn't really matter. People look at the low prices, and the fact that Walmart is open 24/7 in many locations, and they shop there for those benefits. Being open 24/7 is a great benefit to people who work shifts, and that's a lot of folks today.

My concerns are about the way this company treats their workers, and the pressure they put on suppliers to get prices down. So many companies have either folded altogether, or have had to lay off their American workers, so they could outsource their manufacturing operations to China. (yes, Apple does this as well. We know that.) And the now un-employed, or in many cases, under-employed workers have no choice but to shop at Walmart.. I could go on, but I think everyone has heard the same things.

The funniest thing I heard about Walmart concerned a college kid who actually managed to live in a walmart store for three days. Here is a link to that rather funny story.

 

[Sun Baked]

I'm still looking for the canned dolphin at Walmart ...

Problem is they give people what they want at a decent price, but they are also the most skilled at sneaking in high profit items into your cart.

They know what you shop for deals on and what you don't.

 

[yojitani]

Well, looking through this, I'd say that so far, it is one of the most civilized discussions about Walmart I have seen on any on-line forum. So, what do I think?

Most folks that know me know that I am anti-Walmart. Yes, I have set foot in one, sadly enough. Never again. However, what I think doesn't really matter. People look at the low prices, and the fact that Walmart is open 24/7 in many locations, and they shop there for those benefits. Being open 24/7 is a great benefit to people who work shifts, and that's a lot of folks today.

My concerns are about the way this company treats their workers, and the pressure they put on suppliers to get prices down. So many companies have either folded altogether, or have had to lay off their American workers, so they could outsource their manufacturing operations to China. (yes, Apple does this as well. We know that.) And the now un-employed, or in many cases, under-employed workers have no choice but to shop at Walmart.. I could go on, but I think everyone has heard the same things.

The funniest thing I heard about Walmart concerned a college kid who actually managed to live in a walmart store for three days. Here is a link to that rather funny story.

Just to add, as was mentioned earlier, that not only do they treat their own workers poorly, but because of their business practices, they tend to encourage other local companies to do the same. e.g. My aunt is a factory worker in Ill. the town she lives and works in relies now on WalMart and the factory for employment. Of course this was not always the case. There were other, smaller 'mom and pop' stores (true, they did not employ as many people as walmart does). The WalMart has done two very horrendous things to the town. First, a few years ago, the local walmart was about to face an increase in property tax (because they had been in the same location for x number of years). The tax, had they paid it, could have gone back into the community to repair roads etc. But instead, the walmart closed, fired all the workers and reopened about 500 meters down the road as a 'superwalmart'. Thus, they avoided paying the tax. Moreover, employees could be rehired, but any pay raises any of them had seen were gone. They start back on starters salary. The other thing is that the local factory workers were looking into unionizing (they really need the union, but anyway..). Well, of course the factory was not happy about it and made all sorts of threats - ultimately threatening to close the factory if the workers voted to unionize. And to seal things off, WalMart threatened to leave if the factory closed! Nice... of course, the workers did not unionize...

Looking at statistics of currently operating WalMarts will not give you an idea of the effect walmart has on communities. Have a look at the walmarts that have closed, moved, rebuilt, etc...

YT

... and lets not forget what happens when walmart employees consider unionizing!

 

[SkyBell]

Don't usually shop at Wal-Mart (There isn't one within 20 miles) For groceries. but for electronics, yeah, thats where I go. (Sure, I'm going ANOTHER 30 miles from that Wal-Mart to the nearest Target. )

Maybe we can sue them like we did M$...

 

[shikimo]

interesting point of view. care to cite some sources how target has a "better track record" than walmart? what's "better"??

"diff corp blueprint," or wolf under sheep's skin?

Maybe you read this Corpwatch.com article: http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=13508

...unless it's just a coincidence you chose the same metaphor . In any case it's a good article with good points, and I'm not going to defend the rotten things that Target has done. But, for example, did you read the section about percentage of money spent in local communities? Wal-Mart gives approximately 7/100 of 1% of its pre-tax revenue to charity, while Target hangs consistently at 5%:

http://sites.target.com/site/en/corporate/page.jsp?contentId=PRD03-001086

Wal-Mart only offers raw numbers, which are impressive until you compare them against their staggering revenue figures:

http://walmartstores.com/GlobalWMStoresWeb/navigate.do?catg=216

In fact, as many observers have noted, Wal-Mart spends more money advertising their generosity than it does being generous. Sure, Target still sucks in many ways, but in a world where big-box stores are here to stay, are they not still a better choice?

What I mean by "different corporate blueprint" is the demographics that the respective stores use to decide where and when to open, close or move stores. I have found nothing in Target's behavior to suggest the cold-blooded and often willfull defrauding of customers and communities a la Wal-Mart. The latter targets (no pun intended) vulnerable communities because they know they will succeed; it's predatory economics and there are laws against it for good reason.

A good website to peruse for sources: http://walmartwatch.com/

A good website for learning of some of the legal trouble Wal-mart has had with its female employees:

http://www.now.org/issues/wfw/wal-mart.html

For anyone who reads French, a good article about the Wal-Mart business model from foreign eyes:

www.infoguerre.com/fichiers/Opposition_Wal_Mart.pdf

A fair article about just one example of their illegal-labor troubles and the ways Wal-Mart tries to keep out of trouble without obeying the law:

http://money.cnn.com/2005/11/18/news/fortune500/walmart_raid/

And their are many more...but perhaps there is hope! The Motley Fool recently did a 180 and published this analysis of Wal-Mart's investment potential vs Target:

http://www.fool.com/investing/value/2006/11/30/fool-fight-target-vs-walmart.aspx

which supercedes their conclusion in this 2003 article:

http://www.fool.com/news/commentary/2003/commentary030509ram.htm

...and at least part of Wal-Mart's bearish investment outlook (although it is still a very safe buy) is due to discussions just like this one all over the world, so it's worth the time and space. Even if you decide you don't agree with the anti-Wal-Mart movement, it's good to have as many facts as possible.

Sorry for the huge post, but you asked for sources...and to bring it all back to the OP: none of us love all of Apple's corporate practices either, but we love them and their products a whole lot more than those of Micrsoft, right? Echoing mine and few other posts: we make choices with our money, and it matters.

 

[Ish]

Every little helps!

EDIT: Or is that Tesco's line?

That's Tesco's. In the UK Asda has the customer patting their pocket, presumably to show off how much money they have left.

 

[3nm]

haven't read that article. however, it is my belief that there's always conflict of interest between consumers and corps (i'm no commie ). and i mentioned target b/c i find it interesting that most people tend to think that walmart is evil while target receives public subsidies to open new stores.

Maybe you read this Corpwatch.com article: http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=13508

...unless it's just a coincidence you chose the same metaphor . In any case it's a good article with good points, and I'm not going to defend the rotten things that Target has done.

i've seen soccer moms flashing their target credit cards and saying how target donated money to their kids' schools. my impression was that it was another sugar coated corp strategy. it is my opinion that it'd be more appropriate to spend that money on target's own workers - FT positions w/ decent salaries, health insurance, etc.

But, for example, did you read the section about percentage of money spent in local communities? Wal-Mart gives approximately 7/100 of 1% of its pre-tax revenue to charity, while Target hangs consistently at 5%:

http://sites.target.com/site/en/corporate/page.jsp?contentId=PRD03-001086

Wal-Mart only offers raw numbers, which are impressive until you compare them against their staggering revenue figures:

http://walmartstores.com/GlobalWMStoresWeb/navigate.do?catg=216

i'm sure you are also aware that how much money target spends in advertising campaign to make sure that it doesn't look anything like walmart.

In fact, as many observers have noted, Wal-Mart spends more money advertising their generosity than it does being generous. Sure, Target still sucks in many ways, but in a world where big-box stores are here to stay, are they not still a better choice?

since walmart and target aim at diff corp images, it'd make sense for the two corps to use diff demographics. walmart's domination is perhaps a good reflection on how effective the laws are.

What I mean by "different corporate blueprint" is the demographics that the respective stores use to decide where and when to open, close or move stores. I have found nothing in Target's behavior to suggest the cold-blooded and often willfull defrauding of customers and communities a la Wal-Mart. The latter targets (no pun intended) vulnerable communities because they know they will succeed; it's predatory economics and there are laws against it for good reason.

perhaps i should make it clear that i can understand and agree with most anti-walmart sentiments. the only thing i don't agree is why similar corps are "better."

Even if you decide you don't agree with the anti-Wal-Mart movement, it's good to have as many facts as possible.

thx for the sources. wish someone did the same when i was taking sociology.

Sorry for the huge post, but you asked for sources...and to bring it all back to the OP: none of us love all of Apple's corporate practices either, but we love them and their products a whole lot more than those of Micrsoft, right? Echoing mine and few other posts: we make choices with our money, and it matters.

 

[compuwar]

Take that to your president. Your whole economy is built around large corporations. If it's wasn't wal-mart it would be somebody else. It's the harsh truth.

That's not an executive branch issue, it's a legislative branch issue and there's way more than one person with their hand in the corporate till.

 

[SharksFan22]

Walmart's purchasing power is frightening. I'm a free-market capitalist at heart, but admit that I'd like to see something done to reign them in -- some would vote for government intervention, I'd vote for people to stop shopping there. An earlier poster mentioned that he recently was in the market for a new car battery -- so was I. Instead of spending hours driving all over in search of the lowest price, I went to the reliable independent that's served me well for years and made my purchase with them. Sure, it probably cost a few bucks more, but I dealt with a person that I trusted and kept my dollars (well, a few of them anyway!) with the local economy.

Americans on the whole tend to focus solely on price, instead of quality and overall value for their dollar. Until this changes, WalMart will only grow.....

 

[Grakkle]

lol, its easy to say, but hard to do for somebody. especially u are posting here at MR. which is like.... <.1% of wal-mart's customers? doesn't really have much impact.

Every bit helps. As for myself, I already avoid Wal-Mart like the plague. I do occasionally buy necessities from them, but only after exhausting any other option for getting whatever it may be and then only with great reluctance.

Wal-Mart isn't good for the people who produce their products in the sweatshops of Asia, for the people who work there without benefits and for a pittance, or for the local businesses that close because of Wal-Mart. Not to mention their mass-produced junk is worthless and destructive of the environment.

 

[FrankBlack]

Just to add, as was mentioned earlier, that not only do they treat their own workers poorly, but because of their business practices, they tend to encourage other local companies to do the same. e.g. My aunt is a factory worker in Ill. the town she lives and works in relies now on WalMart and the factory for employment. Of course this was not always the case. There were other, smaller 'mom and pop' stores (true, they did not employ as many people as walmart does). The WalMart has done two very horrendous things to the town. First, a few years ago, the local walmart was about to face an increase in property tax (because they had been in the same location for x number of years). The tax, had they paid it, could have gone back into the community to repair roads etc. But instead, the walmart closed, fired all the workers and reopened about 500 meters down the road as a 'superwalmart'. Thus, they avoided paying the tax. Moreover, employees could be rehired, but any pay raises any of them had seen were gone. They start back on starters salary. The other thing is that the local factory workers were looking into unionizing (they really need the union, but anyway..). Well, of course the factory was not happy about it and made all sorts of threats - ultimately threatening to close the factory if the workers voted to unionize. And to seal things off, WalMart threatened to leave if the factory closed! Nice... of course, the workers did not unionize...

Looking at statistics of currently operating WalMarts will not give you an idea of the effect walmart has on communities. Have a look at the walmarts that have closed, moved, rebuilt, etc...

YT

... and lets not forget what happens when walmart employees consider unionizing!

There's an expression the wall street types use for that. I believe it's "downward pressure".

Walmart's hard line anti union stance was cultivated by Sam Walton himself. Why he was so vehemently anti-union is something of a mystery. Whatever the reason, his hatred of organized labor seemed to go way beyond the normal reasons that management has for not liking unions. Organized Labor was apparently Sam Walton's "White Whale". He hired a union-busting attorney named John Tate in 1978, when employees at a walmart (still a small regional company at the time) distribution center talked openly about joining the teamsters. link to the story

Not really new though. In the 30's Ford hired Pinkertons security to harass, intimidate, and beat up union organizers. Walmart simply shuts down departments (meat cutters in Texas) or entire stores in canada.

 

[ReanimationLP]

I shop a lot at Walmart for groceries, household stuff, and car stuff. Why? Because its cheap, and convenient. Not everyone is rich enough to go to Target. Besides, I personally hate Target.

Though for anything with a plug, I shop at Best Buy. It may be because umm, I have this really, really nice discount, being an employee and all. Plus then the CompUSA and the Circuit City near me both suck.

 

[shikimo]

Walmart's hard line anti union stance was cultivated by Sam Walton himself. Why he was so vehemently anti-union is something of a mystery. Whatever the reason, his hatred of organized labor seemed to go way beyond the normal reasons that management has for not liking unions. Organized Labor was apparently Sam Walton's "White Whale". He hired a union-busting attorney named John Tate in 1978, when employees at a walmart (still a small regional company at the time) distribution center talked openly about joining the teamsters. link to the story

Yeah, you're right: although all big businesses with a low-skill labor force have a healthy fear of unionized employees, it was a real crusade for M Walton, very personal, and it lives in the company to this day. As an earlier poster pointed out, Target's record with union-hopeful employees isn't so good either, but with Walton it seemed like he really looked up to the Pinkerton years as the good old days. I wonder if he read old news reports of the Homestead Massacre while he...nevermind .

 

[MACDRIVE]

Boycotting Wal-Mart is a good start, but what would be even better is to boycott all products made in China since they're like Wal-Mart on a global scale.

Yes I'm aware of Macs being made in China, so then boycott all the other imported stuff first and then maybe steve will switch operations to Germany.

By the way, it looks like Safari spell check has already boycotted Wal-Mart since it keeps underlining them in red.

 

[FrankBlack]

Walmart is not the only company that is known to be nasty to its employees. Cumberland Farms (eastern convenience store and gas station chain) also has a horrid reputation for being nasty to their help. Cumberland Farms is privately owned, so you won't find it in the stock market listings. They've been around for much longer than Walmart.

This outfit has had a few scandals. One, in 1990, hit the news when it became known that their internal security agents would intimidate and harass employees into confessing to thefts that never happened. Here is a clip and a link:

"A full-fledged scandal struck Cumberland Farms in 1990, when two former company officials said the company had a longstanding policy of coercing confessions of theft from employees, often without corroborating evidence. Some 275 former company cashiers, several of whom filed lawsuits, said they had been falsely accused of stealing, intimidated by company officials into signing false confessions, and forced to pay the company money as restitution. The story made headlines in many newspapers and Newsweek and was also featured on the television program "60 Minutes."

Link to above story

I haven't been in a Cumberland Farms store for more than thirty years, not that it would matter to them. A high school buddy of mine worked at one as a cashier, for a total of five shifts before he told his ****** boss off and walked out. I would guess that nothing has changed. I'm bringing this up simply to point out that Walmart did not invent the bully-the-low-end-worker-because-we-can philosophy. They are however, the biggest player in the game.

Remember learning about the coal companies of long ago? They owned entire towns, and everything in them. They owned the houses the miners lived in. The paid the miners in company scrip which could only be used at the company store. In other words, total and absolute control over the worker. Slavery, really.

Does anyone feel that this might be Walmart's ultimate goal?