Walmart memo: Don't hire the "unhealthy".

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Corn

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 1999
6,389
29
91
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: moshquerade
yes...yes...Walmart is the devil

/thread

They're pretty damned bad, when it comes to treating their own works. Not to mention their company forced "morality"...

If the people working for them think it is such a problem they should go find work elsewhere. Nobody is forcing people to work at Walmart.

In some places, they are forced, i.e. no other place to work.

One of the most ridiculous things I've read here in a long time! No one is forced to work anywhere! One chooses to work where there is employment offered. One other thing to consider is the fanciful "local" business that Walmart supposedly displaces. Walmart's competition isn't mom and pop owned hardware, grocery, or drug stores. Thier main competition is Target, Sears, Kmart, and to a lesser extent (because most walmart stores don't carry a full line of groceries) mainline grocery stores such as Kroger.

One thing that makes me go "hmmmmmm" is I wonder how many "local" retailers pay above average wages and health insurance to their employees........

 

Helenihi

Senior member
Dec 25, 2001
379
0
0
Originally posted by: EatSpam
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: moshquerade
yes...yes...Walmart is the devil

/thread

They're pretty damned bad, when it comes to treating their own works. Not to mention their company forced "morality"...

If the people working for them think it is such a problem they should go find work elsewhere. Nobody is forcing people to work at Walmart.

Where else are they going to work? A competing grocery store? A factory? The corner drug store? Hah! Wal-mart ran them all out of business.
On what planet is this true? Maybe in some tiny town in the middle of nowhere, but Wal-Mart has had no such effect in anything resembling an urban area. And even in rural areas I doubt its true, its just something that gets repeated over and over without any proof whatsoever.
 

Legend

Platinum Member
Apr 21, 2005
2,254
1
0
Walmart is terrible to their employees, but to say that people are forced to work their is stretching it way too far.

Everywhere I've been to where there's a superwalmart, there's also at least a few of these: Target, Kmart, Kroger, Publix, Food specialty stores (organic foods, fresh market, whole oats, bakeries, etc), Costco, Meier's, mall shop centers. In the Huntsville/Madison, AL, area, we have nearly all of those.

But let's suppose it's the only job. Why not move? I'm a computer engineer student. I move between co-op work, school, and home all the time. You have the freedom to move around.

I can see Walmart's argument about increasing wages and productivity not matching. At work as an engineer, people that have 10 years experience work much faster than I do, because evertime I do something new, I've got to spend hours learning.

Again, you don't have to work there. There's better low end jobs. There's training to become something more.
 

Viper GTS

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
38,107
433
136
First you have to make note that they aren't saying "don't hire," they are proposing incorporating more physical activity into all positions to either 1) discourage the unhealthy (read: obese) from applying or 2) encouraging those already employed to improve their health (to make their jobs easier).

Anyone make it to page two of that article? Some interesting stuff there.

One proposal would reduce the amount of time, from two years to one, that part-time employees would have to wait before qualifying for health insurance. Another would put health clinics in stores, in part to reduce expensive employee visits to emergency rooms. Wal-Mart's benefit costs jumped to $4.2 billion last year, from $2.8 billion three years earlier, causing concern within the company because benefits represented an increasing share of sales. Last year, Wal-Mart earned $10.5 billion on sales of $285 billion.

She wrote that "the cost of an associate with seven years of tenure is almost 55 percent more than the cost of an associate with one year of tenure, yet there is no difference in his or her productivity. Moreover, because we pay an associate more in salary and benefits as his or her tenure increases, we are pricing that associate out of the labor market, increasing the likelihood that he or she will stay with Wal-Mart."

The memo noted that Wal-Mart workers "are getting sicker than the national population, particularly in obesity-related diseases," including diabetes and coronary artery disease. The memo said Wal-Mart workers tended to overuse emergency rooms and underuse prescriptions and doctor visits, perhaps from previous experience with Medicaid.

The memo noted, "The least healthy, least productive associates are more satisfied with their benefits than other segments and are interested in longer careers with Wal-Mart."

In short Wal-Mart's employees (typically low income, low education) are making poor use of the available benefits & making it financially unfeasible for wal-mart to continue without some changes.

Other info:

Walmart Financial Info

~10.5 billion a year in profit, 3.4% 5 year profit margin

For comparison:

Target: $2.4 billion in profit, 4.3% 5 year profit margin

Sears: 1.1 Billion in Profit, 3.5% profit margin

Wal-Mart's profit margin is very reasonable (slightly below their main competitors), their $10 bil a year in profit comes from their sheer size.

This memo (which is getting so much attention) seems like good business, nothing more.

Viper GTS
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Why would walmart hire workers that wil possibly lose them money?

These people are overusing healthcare.
 

maluckey

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2003
2,933
0
71
And even if you do opt for health care, it was HALF of my pay to insure just myself, at full time, at a sams club (which pays more than walmart). Most people who "opt" not to have it, like myself, simply couldnt afford it.

According to the website, health benefits for a family plan are 250 dollars per month. You must make what? 3.75 cents per hour or less to be half of your salary???? I don't think so.

You can enroll according to the website at your six month window. If you miss it than you have to wait for open enrollment. Part time are eligible as well.
 

maluckey

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2003
2,933
0
71
it's 125.00 per pay period with the low deductible plan. Pay periods are bi-weekly......do the math. Maybe that's why you couldn't afford it. You couldn't do the math.
 

Acanthus

Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
19,915
2
76
ostif.org
Originally posted by: maluckey
it's 125.00 per pay period with the low deductible plan. Pay periods are bi-weekly......do the math. Maybe that's why you couldn't afford it. You couldn't do the math.

im sorry im sorry, it was only 25% of my total pay. so i was raking in a whopping $900 a month, -250 for insurance, $650 a month for a living wage? oh wait, taxes, $550 a month.

If you dont live in mississippi, you cant live on that.
 

3chordcharlie

Diamond Member
Mar 30, 2004
9,859
1
81
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: moshquerade
yes...yes...Walmart is the devil

/thread

They're pretty damned bad, when it comes to treating their own works. Not to mention their company forced "morality"...

If the people working for them think it is such a problem they should go find work elsewhere. Nobody is forcing people to work at Walmart.

In some places, they are forced, i.e. no other place to work.

That is very interesting, how did that come about?

Because walmart will move into a small town and steamroll every business there in under 18 months?

Oh and after that, they raise the prices.


Exactly, people in these small towns go for the best bang for the buck and drive out their own business's to save 10%. At the end of the day they helped create their own problem.
It's funny how many people think competition is good for a market, when what they are actually seeing isn't 'competition' but rather predatory pricing to create a monopoly.