[OnTheIce]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Whether you're against it or not doesn't matter. You can't fire people for taking job actions in defence of their working conditions. You're living in the 19th century.

Not even close, my friend.

Taking job action when in a strike position is one thing...walking out because you're not happy isn't acceptable.

There are proper channels you can take in regards to labour laws and labour complaints but you cannot just simply walk away and expect nothing to come of it.

[OnTheIce]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Given the wages, working conditions and lack of benefits Wal-mart gives its employees, they should be thankful everyone doesn't walk out en masse.

Same could be said about almost all retail environments.

Having seen many of them from behind the scenes, Wal-Mart is no different than other major retailers in Canada. Soon enough, I'll get my behind the scenes view of Target as it starts to open here in Canada and I'll bet it'll be much the same.

[Nuggie77]

jeff744 jeff744:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Workers don't take too kindly to being moved to 'part time' so they don't get benefits, but still having to work 'full time' hours.

Or not being able to make a union because the company will just close down the store on you. Walmart brought this on itself.

I'm not on either side of this, but don't you think that Wal-Mart can shut a store down whenever it wants? Not very ethical, but nothing stopping them.

[Lemmy]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Not even close, my friend.

Taking job action when in a strike position is one thing...walking out because you're not happy isn't acceptable.

There are proper channels you can take in regards to labour laws and labour complaints but you cannot just simply walk away and expect nothing to come of it.

You don't know what you're talking about. Non-unionized workers are always in a legal strike position because they aren't under any collective agreement. Do you really want to argue with a labour economist about this? Just because their choice of job action is unacceptable to you doesn't mean it isn't lawful, which it is. You can't fire people for attempting to organize. You should read the Labour Relations Act, specifically section 72.

[jeff744]

Nuggie77 Nuggie77:

jeff744 jeff744:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Workers don't take too kindly to being moved to 'part time' so they don't get benefits, but still having to work 'full time' hours.

Or not being able to make a union because the company will just close down the store on you. Walmart brought this on itself.

I'm not on either side of this, but don't you think that Wal-Mart can shut a store down whenever it wants? Not very ethical, but nothing stopping them.

Sure they can, and they just conveniently decided to only pick the ones that unionized.

[OnTheIce]

Lemmy Lemmy:

You don't know what you're talking about. Non-unionized workers are always in a legal strike position because they aren't under any collective agreement.

From your link:

$1:

Where no collective agreement is in operation, no employee shall strike and no employer shall lock out an employee until the Minister has appointed a conciliation officer or a mediator under this Act....


and


No employee shall threaten an unlawful strike and no employer shall threaten an unlawful lock-out of an employee.

Lemmy Lemmy:

You can't fire people for attempting to organize.

This walk-out isn't union related or an attempt to organize. It's a protest of hourly, non-unionized employees with no union present.

[commanderkai]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Given the wages, working conditions and lack of benefits Wal-mart gives its employees, they should be thankful everyone doesn't walk out en masse.

According to Making Change at Walmart, a supporter of this whole faux union organizing/striking program that will get a lot of people fired, the average wage of a Walmart employee is $8.81 an hour. It's higher than the minimum wage of the United States minimum wage of $7.25.

Is it shit money? Sure, but this is unskilled, easily replaceable work. The article even states that Walmart has a lower turnover rate compared to national average, with a significant portion of applicants being former Walmart employees. Are there cases of abuse? Of course, no company will have a flawless record, but I don't get why people are expecting decent benefits or a good wage at a retail outlet, Walmart or otherwise.

$1:

I've no doubt that if the US economy was stronger and there were lots of other employment options, Wal-Mart would be pretty far down the list for most people.

I certainly hope so, but that's the reality we're in at the moment.

[Lemmy]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

This walk-out isn't union related or an attempt to organize. It's a protest of hourly, non-unionized employees with no union present.

That's your opnion. I doubt that the WalMart employees, nor ultimately the courts, will share your interpretation.

[RUEZ]

Lemmy Lemmy:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Not even close, my friend.

Taking job action when in a strike position is one thing...walking out because you're not happy isn't acceptable.

There are proper channels you can take in regards to labour laws and labour complaints but you cannot just simply walk away and expect nothing to come of it.

You don't know what you're talking about. Non-unionized workers are always in a legal strike position because they aren't under any collective agreement.

How's that?

[bootlegga]

commanderkai commanderkai:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Given the wages, working conditions and lack of benefits Wal-mart gives its employees, they should be thankful everyone doesn't walk out en masse.

According to Making Change at Walmart, a supporter of this whole faux union organizing/striking program that will get a lot of people fired, the average wage of a Walmart employee is $8.81 an hour. It's higher than the minimum wage of the United States minimum wage of $7.25.

Is it shit money? Sure, but this is unskilled, easily replaceable work. The article even states that Walmart has a lower turnover rate compared to national average, with a significant portion of applicants being former Walmart employees. Are there cases of abuse? Of course, no company will have a flawless record, but I don't get why people are expecting decent benefits or a good wage at a retail outlet, Walmart or otherwise.

$1:

I've no doubt that if the US economy was stronger and there were lots of other employment options, Wal-Mart would be pretty far down the list for most people.

I certainly hope so, but that's the reality we're in at the moment.

Personally, I don't expect great wages at any unskilled job. I've said many times here that more education/training is the best path to a better life, not higher minimum wage.

That being said, I think companies should be ethical and strive for a mix of profitability while at the same time making their business a place people want to work. Whether that means holding company picnics, giving benefits or paying slightly better wages than their competitors, then that is up to them.

The last thing we need is a return to the way labour relations were handled prior to WW2, which typically was force. IMHO, Wal-Mart's tactics here are akin to using union busters to crush unions - oops, I meant dissent. After all, isn't America the land of the free and the home of the brave?

Perhaps they should just change it to "Land of the Corporation and Home of the Robber Baron" so people stop thinking they are anything other than corporate drones ready to be used and spit out by multi-national corporations instead of real human beings.

[Lemmy]

RUEZ RUEZ:

How's that?

Because you don't have to wait for a contract to expire when there is no contract.

[xerxes]

Nuggie77 Nuggie77:

jeff744 jeff744:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Workers don't take too kindly to being moved to 'part time' so they don't get benefits, but still having to work 'full time' hours.

Or not being able to make a union because the company will just close down the store on you. Walmart brought this on itself.

I'm not on either side of this, but don't you think that Wal-Mart can shut a store down whenever it wants? Not very ethical, but nothing stopping them.

They did in Jonquiere (sp?) Quebec a few years ago when the workers there organised themselves into a union.

[martin14]

xerxes xerxes:

Nuggie77 Nuggie77:

I'm not on either side of this, but don't you think that Wal-Mart can shut a store down whenever it wants? Not very ethical, but nothing stopping them.

They did in Jonquiere (sp?) Quebec a few years ago when the workers there organised themselves into a union.

Yep, another job well done by the unions.

[Zipperfish]

It;'s rare you see any labour issues in the news these days. At the very least, it's good to see these issues discussed in the front pages occasionally. Unions reached their zenith in the 1950s when, I think, about half of industrial workers were unionized. Unions, strangely enough, even made ground in the 1930s--somewhat counterintuitive, you would think, given the circumstances.

A lot of things have changed since then. Communism has become pretty much universally discredited as a viable system of government. A fear of communist revolution was one of the reasons workers were given rights to start with. Also, unions used to produce benefits for non-union workers--for instance the eight-hour day, minimum wage. But with union membership dwindling and concentrating in the public sector, it no longer has that "trickle down" effect (and wouldn't Reagan turn in his grave to hear his metaphor used in that context!)

Unions were also big on solidarity, another more-or-less discredited ideology replaced by much more faith in the market, enlightened self-interest and all that lovely Adam Smith stuff. Instead of solidarity now, you're more likely to see envy by non-unionized workers, and bitterness between union and non-union workers.

On the plus side, relatively sepaking, the US has a very productive, innovative and flexible workforce.

I think that one of the downsides of the decreasing influence of unions is the decline of the middle class in the US. I understand that high wages and workers rights were instrumental in creating the fabled American middle class, which was an engine of prosperity. The disappearance of the middle class (due in part to "McJobs") has contributed to the economic malaise.

As for Walmart, it's hard to find much sympathy for them. The low-wage thing is an essential aspect of thier business model. Certainly their beliggerant attitude towards organized labour has resulted in a belligerant display by the unions. They asked for the fight and they will have it. I don't imagine other low-cost retailers are dissimilar to Walmart, but Walmart, through their actions--and their success--have become symbolic.

The bigger questions though--how to stop the cancerous trade deficit with China from rising and how to protect the middle class of America. Actually, I suppose the debate, given current Republican pronouncements, is even whether the middle class should be saved.

[RUEZ]

Lemmy Lemmy:

RUEZ RUEZ:

How's that?

Because you don't have to wait for a contract to expire when there is no contract.

If you don't come to work you get fired. I suppose you can call that a strike.