dispatches from the new world of work

Who Woulda Thunk?

"The Good Goliath," an Op-ed column loudly applauding Wal*Mart appeared in the ... New York Times! By John Tierney, 11.29. Consider: Wal*Mart is arguably the #1 lubricant for the welfare-to-work revolution, offering 1st jobs to many, many, many under-skilled workers. (W*M has 5 to 10 applicants per job.) Wal*Mart pays less than Costco, but the average W*M shopper has an income of $35,000 vs $74,000 (!) at Costco—thence, to sell higher-end stuff, Tierney argues, one needs higher skilled workers. Wal*Mart saves the average regular shopper $800 a year on groceries alone. Tierney says he obviously "gets it" that union critics and local merchants have big problems with the giant, but concludes, "Why would anyone who claims to be fighting for social justice be so determined to take money out of the pockets of the poor?"

(As a long time/continuing fan of Wal*Mart, though not a mindless defender, I was delighted to see this piece, especially in the gray lady.)

Tom Peters posted this on 12/01/05.

Comments

Indeed Tom - in the gray shady lady! And as a *Mart fan also - they kicked backside in extra speedy distribution and delivery and donation toward Katrina and Rita victims.

Posted by Sean at December 1, 2005 10:06 AM

Tom - Some people look at WM as a mixed blessing. They get pissed off when they come into town but they soon get over it and start shopping there. We must admit that WM has given jobs to people that might have been unemployable anywhere else. Plus, think about the companies that build up around the WM locations - Restaurants, Gas stations, Lowes, on and on. The jobs that WM produces spreads out to other companies. The General Motors plant is closing here in Oklahoma City and they are letting go of 2200 people which will equal 6600 people because of the food service companies, car dealerships, etc. around GM. What do you think?

Posted by Robert Floyd at December 1, 2005 10:08 AM

"...to sell higher-end stuff, Tierney argues, one needs higher skilled workers." I call bollocks on that. Whether you're at Wal*Mart or Costco, you'd be hard-pressed to find a clerk who really knows what they're selling. Furthermore Costco's "self-service" policy employs far less people who work the floors.

As for Wal*Mart, to me it's kinda like an arsonist who sells cheap housing.

Posted by Francis Wu at December 1, 2005 1:16 PM

The problem is that the wages are so low that the employers are being tax subsidized. Those workers don't get off of all social programs just welfare, and most of those workers were never on welfare. The cost of keeping those workers alive, so they can be exploited by employers of the working poor are paid by us, the taxpayer.

The problem with the payroll statistics is that they do not reflect the closing of the other businesses in town, or the wage givebacks or ever decreasing wages for those that work for competitors.

Here in Texas, our towns die.

Posted by David Locke at December 7, 2005 12:36 AM