BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses

Subject: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 04:49 PM

Where's the outrage?



During this time that everyone is up in arms about bonuses being awarded, we get this little tidbit from Big Mick's favorite retailer.

I want to know where the outrage is now.


Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: bobad
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 04:55 PM

Should provide a boost to China's sweatshop manufacturing sector.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: DougR
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 04:59 PM

Wal-Mart is a private company that has fared very well during this economic crisis. No begging for handouts from the federal government from them. Of course they are not burdened down by union contracts it cannot afford as GM is. As a private business Wal-Mart can pay bonuses to anyone they want. None of the government's business.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Rapparee
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 05:03 PM

So? Walmart hasn't taken "bailout" funds.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: robomatic
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 05:08 PM

They've also been a corporate promoter of low energy lighting and renewable energy experimental units in some of their stores.

They also stock SOME American made stuff, if you're paying attention, which I am.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 05:38 PM

"Giant Norwegian Government Pension Fund drops Wal-Mart, cites US and Canadian
anti-union activity among other human rights and labour violatio[ns]

The $230 billion Norwegian Government Pension Fund-one of the largest pension funds in the world-has divested of Wal-Mart, citing human rights and labour rights violations. In making this decision, the Norwegian government cited anti-unionization efforts around the world, including Canada.

In a statement June 6, the Norwegian government said it had also decided to divest from mining company Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold for environmental reasons.

The government based the exclusions on the recommendations of the fund's ethical council. Under Norwegian government rules, the government will order a divestment of companies if it concurs with recommendations from the fund's Council on Ethics that such companies represent serious, systematic or gross violations of ethical norms.

While the Norwegian Government Pension Fund is unusual among pension funds in having a set of clear ethical guidelines, the decision shows that pension funds are beginning to exercise their responsible investment authority in a more rigorous manner.

"The recommendation to exclude Wal-Mart cites serious/systematic violations of human rights and labor rights," the Finance Ministry said in a statement. "The recommendation to exclude Freeport is based on serious environmental damage."

It said the council found "an extensive body of material" that indicated Wal-Mart had broken norms, including employing minors against international rules, dangerous working conditions at many of its suppliers and blocking workers' efforts to form unions.

In February 2005, Wal-Mart announced that it was closing its store in the small Quebec town of Jonquiere, just six months after the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union of Canada had won the legal right to represent its 190 employees.

In making the announcement, Wal-Mart said the store was closing because it was unprofitable.   More recently, the company has opposed unionization efforts in British Columbia and at another store in St. Hyacinthe, Quebec.

In support of its contention that Wal-Mart actively obstructs employees in their right to unionize, the Norwegian Government Pension Fund ethics council said that several of Wal-Mart's internal company documents, including a book entitled "Wal-Mart: A Manager's Tool Box to Remaining Union Free," have been the issue of a ruling by Canada's Supreme Court, in which the court ordered the company to surrender the book to labour authorities in Saskatchewan.

In divesting from Wal-Mart, the Fund said that prior to the divestment, it had held about NOK 2.5 billion ($450 million CAD) in Wal-Mart stock."

http://www.socialinvestment.ca/News&Archives/news-0606-NorwegianPension.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 05:41 PM

"From Matthew Perrone, March 11, 2009 - 12:57 AM
As government pours billions into health technology, Wal-Mart moves to leverage size
By Matthew Perrone
   
WASHINGTON (AP) - As the Obama administration begins investing billions in health information technology, Wal-Mart plans to use its unrivaled size to bring high-tech medical records to U.S. physicians.

In recent years Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, has used its buying power to move into health care markets, negotiating steep discounts for prescription drugs and eye care products.

With the government providing $17 billion of stimulus funding to encourage use of electronic medical records, the company sees an opportunity to serve as a low-cost, one-stop option for single doctors and small practices.

A Wal-Mart spokesperson said Wednesday the company is partnering with computer giant Dell Inc. and software maker eClinicalWorks to launch a bundled electronic health records package for doctors, including installation and maintenance.

The program will be offered through the company's Sam's Club discount-warehouse division, which caters to small businesses. A formal launch is expected this spring.

"Because of our volume, our size and our relationships we can leverage what we do for our members every day into this service," said spokesperson Susan Koehler, in a telephone interview from the company's Bentonville, Ark., headquarters.

Improving the nation's health information technology has been a rallying cry in Washington for years. Advocates say replacing paper files could reduce costly medical errors and duplicative testing. But after nearly a decade of promotion, there have been few gains to show for the technology.

Less than 20 percent of the U.S. physicians use electronic medical records, and many complain about the upfront costs of going digital and the daunting technological hurdles for small businesses.

Consulting group Avalere Health said this week it would cost about $124,000 for a single doctor to upgrade to electronic health records over five years.

Wal-Mart believes it could shave somewhere between 30 and 50 percent off that figure, putting the price closer to $44,000, the maximum in incentive payments available to single-practice physicians.

"We will streamline the process and be a single point of contact for them," Koehler said

Under the plan, Dell will provide computers and other hardware while eClinicalWorks will provide and install the software. Wal-Mart's role will be to coordinate the process."

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/markets/headline_news/article.jsp?content=D96RUQV00

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 05:41 PM

Lotsa differing views of Wal-Mart.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 05:48 PM

"During this time that everyone is up in arms about bonuses being awarded [AIG], . . ."

And it doesn't piss YOU OFF!

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: robomatic
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 06:32 PM

The article linked in the opening post of this thread doesn't get too specific, it mentions a huge sum of money to be distributed to hourly workers. This would appear to be a wide distribution, as opposed to a simple award to (or 'amongst') executives for squeezing more blood from more stones.

I see no outrage to be had against Walmart without more information.

Walmart shareholders might have problems with it but then Walmart has been gaining, not losing, market share among retailers.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 06:48 PM

The whole flap over the AIG bonuses is just a diversion to keep people from noticing what's actually in the latest "Bailout" bill.

REFERENCE: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (.pdf)

All the news media have been enthusing over the "$400 stimulus rebate ($800 for married couples, and more for those with rug rats)" that "everybody will get."

The fact is that only people who are employed and receive a "paycheck" will get any part of this. The "rebate" (page 195) is limited to those who have "earned income" and is limited to 6.2% of the persons "earned income." To receive a $400 rebate, you must have a "paycheck" showing someone paid you at least $6,451.61 as an employee.

Among others, Social Security income, Payements from a retirement plan, Disability Payments, withdrawals from an IRA or 401k, Railroad Retirement Act payments, Unemployment payments, and earnings from investments are NOT EARNED INCOME , so if you got laid off, fired, or retired, you get NOTHING.

There is a separate "benefit" of "up to $250" for persons on Social Security (but not, apparently on Disability? or unemployed, etc.) and for a few other "retirement" plans; but no credit for marriage or children, and the "exculsions and conditions" take up about 16 pages in the Act.

There is, as mentioned above, a "whole bunch of wordage" about "Technology in Health Care" that's intended to encourage automated record keeping and that could be helpful; but I'll have to talk to a few doctors about the real costs of such automation to tell whether the individual limits are significant relative to what it costs the doc. (A $40,000 "grant" isn't likely to be a deciding factor in whether to spend $120,000 to impress the clients, and my docs won't get anything because they all "updated" several years ago.)

There is a section on "Limits on Executive Compensation" (page 402) that was meant to address the "bonus" issue; but it's not exactly "strong" due to the simple fact that the bonuses given by AIG and others are embedded in prior existing laws.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: robomatic
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 06:55 PM

I think the AIG bonus fiasco is not of itself a diversion, but if you suggest it is being used as a diversion to foment political pot-stirring in place of constructive dialogue I will not disagree.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 09:23 PM

Well, as I said in another thread, the $250 for those receiving social security will buy me a few bottles of single malt. My wife also will get $250, but she will waste it on something frivolous.
-------------------------------

WalMart is increasing its common stock dividend to $1.09 for the year 2009.

I don't believe that WalMart is required to name executive bonus recipients or amounts awarded to them.
The payments indicated in the link in the first post seem to be just for their hourly employees. It is one of the benefits offered in place of union representation.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: frogprince
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 10:51 PM

Susu's Hubby, you're losing your touch. I presume you were trying to pull the liberal mudcatter's chains again, as that's about all you come around for. But why'n hell do you think people would get bent because Walmart shared some of their profit with their honest working people?

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 11:11 PM

Susu's Hubby is just looking for an opportunity to argue. That's why the thread is worded the way it is.

[Ho Hum]

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Sawzaw
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 11:12 PM

I recently talked to a young lady who worked for Walmart for nearly a year. She had to quit because she moved and went back to school.

I asked how she liked it. She said she liked it and didn't to leave. She said they did a lot of things for employees. For example they give you a life insurance policy the first day you start to work that equals one years pay.

She said people would come around and try to get someone to say something negative about Walmart and the workers would laugh at them.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: DougR
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 01:57 PM

Peace: And the Norwegian Government Pension Fund is not affected by pressure from labor unions, right? Aw well, Wal-Mart will just have to piddle through without them then I guess. They seem to be surviving okay.

As I have said on numerous occasions here on the Mudcat, my son has been an hourly employee at Wal-Mart for seventeen years. He has excellent health insurance, including dental, has a month vacation annually, and earns in excess of $25 an hour. Wal-Mart contributes generously to his 401k fund (which has been hard hit by the market downturn but that's not Wal-Mart's fault). Not too shabby I think. Does he ever bitch about Wal-Mart? Sure, sometimes. None of you critics of Wal-Mart have ever bitched about your employer's though, right?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 02:35 PM

Pull up thre ladder, mate, I'm aboard.

As usual, dwell on anecdotal minutae, rather than the complete picture.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: DougR
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 03:02 PM

And what is the "complete picture" Greggie? (as opposed to union propaganda).

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: PoppaGator
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 03:06 PM

Where's the outrage? Nowhere! No reason to be outraged...

Multimillion dollar bonuses to overpaid individuals who created the economic crisis in the first place (or at least were major contributors to the financial insantiy) ARE a reason to be outraged ~ especially when said bonuses are paid out by companies recently "bailed out" with taxpayer dollars. And (incidentally, in the case of AIG) when many of the payees are (a) foreign nationals and/or (b) former employees who do not "need to be retained," and therefore who do not qualify for one of the major rationalizations for the payouts.

You may dislike WalMart for union-busting and for squeezing out smaller local merchants, but they provide consumers with lots of goods at low prices, and provide workers with many jobs which, while mostly quite low-paying, do provide better benefit packages than most other positions in that pay-range.

Those billions in bonuses are being split up among hundreds of thousands of workers of modest means, and are an eminently fair method for adjusting the compensation of a huge number of low-profile workers whose labors have contributed to the company's success.

Good for WalMart!

PS ~ I have a chronic medical condition that requires daily medication. WalMart gives me the best currently-available deal: $4 for a month's worth of my (generic) prescription. Can't get this treatment from the government (at least not yet), and CERTAINLY not from any HMO, insurance company, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 03:11 PM

You wouldn't recognize the big picture, Douggie, if presented to you by God himself and if by some chance you did recognize it, you'd convince yourself not to believe it. So just enjoy your delusional world.

(Of course the information on the big picture is readily available in any number of published sources and on the Web as well. If you can't be bothered to educate yourself out of your ignorance, don't expect me top spoon-feed you.)

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 03:19 PM

Wal-Mart took over all of Woolworth/Woolco operations in Canada. They shut down any Woolco stores that were unionized at the time. They have used closure or threat of closure as a weapon against employees ever since. They try to use the Michelin template to discourage any union activity. For the most part they treat employees well as long as they are a "team player" but there is little room for independant thinking. Do what you are told and keep your nose clean!
What I find more objectionable is them flooding their shelves with Chinese sweat shop products while manufacturing towns in North America are being abandoned. Wal-Mart is not totally to blame, of course, but if the shoe fits..............

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 03:22 PM

...............check to see where it was made!

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: DougR
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 10:36 PM

Free trade, Sandy, is essential to a good economy these days.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Greg F.
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 03:25 PM

'Cept it ain't free......it costs dearly.

It was protective tarrifs that allowed the U.S. to become the industrial powerhouse it became in the early 20th Century & enabled U.S. workers to enjoy the highest standard of living in the world.

But no longer.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 03:45 PM

"And what is the "complete picture" ..."

well, the picture is that Walmart is clever enough to do 'good' things for those in their employ and to give to local charities...etc... That is, those who might have any serious influence on them, while doing BAD things to workers in foreign countries whom you don't hear much from.

There IS also the list of smaller retailers in some smaller towns who were forced out of business by being underpriced by Walmart.

There is no denying that Walmart has good 'business model', if all you care about is piles of cheap merchandise and decent jobs for a few who will keep their mouths shut and pretend the bad aspects don't exist.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 04:11 PM

Well Doug, we may have free trade galore but I am having trouble spotting the good economy. It works to increase short term profit but at a greater long term cost.It has been used to justify a lot of those CEO bonuses, but that is akin to saying that rape has a benefit if it increases the populace.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: DougR
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 05:20 PM

Ah, Sandy, how quickly we forget. You don't remember the good old days when the Dow was pushing 15,000. It was ONLY last November or so. One didn't hear any complaints about the economy then did one? The good times will come again, if not too impeded by Obama, Pelosi and Reads policies.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 05:33 PM

Small retailers with relatively high costs due to low volume and generalized merchandise had been going to the wall long before Walmart became a player.
J. C. Penny, Sears, Hudson's Bay, Montgomery Ward, Eatons (the last two now deceased), etc., started the trend in the 19th c.
The like of Target, Home Depot, Staples and internet-order companies like Amazon, Adorama, LLBean, Cabelas and many others, have continued the trend. I think many now confine most shoppng trips to the supermart and drugmart; most everything else may be ordered to the door by means of the net and computer.

Globalization and free trade are inevitable; some businesses, large or small, evolve and prosper, some cannot.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 07:33 PM

Ahh..well, Q, that (inevitable changes) may be so...but there are other things that 'may' be judged inevitable that we do not appreciate.

Such as rampant illegal immigration, overfishing, nuclear proliferation, etc.... (make YOUR own list)

There are a whole host of business practices that may be legal & profitable, but not terribly moral & fair. Walmart takes some of these further than Sears or Penny's ever did. Does that make them just 'smart' because they skirt illegality closer than most?

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 10:38 PM

Walmart has more than 2 million employees, who receive a generous bonus package, and have help with their medical needs. As the world's largest public corporation, they pay the many shareholders a decent dividend. They are helping to increase the living standards of workers around the world.

I fail to see anything immoral or illegal about their operations. Along with many other progressive concerns, they are successful while while those that fail to evolve all by the wayside.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: DougR
Date: 25 Mar 09 - 01:34 AM

Q: Si.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Mar 09 - 01:18 PM

Even IF everything you say is technically accurate, so might what I say be accurate also.


It's all in your 'take' on what they do...and how you spin it. I am far from the only one who has noted some distaste with Walmart's practices.

I contend they could still be a profitable company if they mitigated some of the predatory and monopolistic practices.

They are well-known for demanding better prices from their suppliers, which forces companies to compromise on fair working conditions in order to meet demands.

I'm sure their lawyers are well aware of the 'line' of legality, but that does not address what many consider to be immoral & unfair practices.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: DougR
Date: 25 Mar 09 - 02:34 PM

I assume, Bill D, that you wouldn't be caught dead in a Wal-Mart store. You probably prefer to shop at more expensive stores that more closely follow your political views, right? Good for you!

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Mar 09 - 03:56 PM

Mine is a minor voice, Doug....
Dead? I was in Walmart once...about 12 years ago in N. Carolina, when I needed a small cooler. This was before I knew much about them, but already didn't like the way local businesses disappeared when they arrived. That Walmart was the ONLY choice in that town.

I don't 'study' every business to see if they comply with my political views, but I do note when one gets to be rather famous...or rather, infamous....for exceeding the bounds of my ethical views.

I'm not likely to affect their fortunes by either my posts OR my shopping habits. But I will say that I am quite willing to pay a bit more to do my small part to support a business that is NOT engaged in predatory marketing.
And, yes...I make a serious distinction between my political & ethical views, though they often lead to similar opinions.

Subject: RE: BS: Wal-Mart to award bonuses
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Mar 09 - 04:40 PM

I am curious, Doug, to know if YOU would boycott a business whose views were seen as very Liberal and contradicted YOUR ethics or politics?