Safeway Executive Blasts Wal-Mart Tax

What - you need to get the facts - The issue here is that taxpayers, that is you and I, are paying for the healthcare that Walmart refused to provide to their employees.  Instead they line the pockets of their executives and drive jobs out of the US and overseas.

Chopp needs to get off his backside and protect the taxpayers of this state from paying for what Walmart should be paying for and put this to the floor for a vote.

Walmart underpays thier employees and provides them with all of the information and assistance they need to apply for state provided healthcare - Walmart is using the system that was intended to asisst low income familes with healthcare costs to get out of paying for healthcare and pocketing the money they are saving.

Taxpayer, I do not know that I have ever responded to any of your posts..??  I need to respond to a few things.....

“The issue here is that taxpayers, that is you and I, are paying for the healthcare that Walmart refused to provide to their employees.”

Sure.  Wal-Mart refuses to provide healthcare to its employees.  As you said, “you need to get the facts.” Wal-Mart offers a wide range of healthcare options to its employees with one plan starting as low as $23.

“Instead they line the pockets of their executives and drive jobs out of the US and overseas.”

Yup.  I believe that if you take Wal-Mart’s executive compensation and compare it as a percent of revenue, I am sure that you will see that the amount is nowhere near the top for the largest retailer in the world.  Do you honestly believe that Wal-Mart holds back on certain healthcare BENEFITS so that it can pay its executives more??  If WM wanted to pay its executives more, it would....

“Chopp needs to get off his backside and protect the taxpayers of this state from paying for what Walmart should be paying for and put this to the floor for a vote.”

Um-hmm.  Why SHOULD Wal-Mart pay more for its healthcare?  Is it mandated that they should???  I know that in Maryland it is, but where else???

“Walmart underpays thier employees “

Nope.  They don’t underpay me, and on the average, Wal-Mart’s wage is higher than most competitor’s wages.  As a matter of fact, in the retail world, Wal-Mart does not have ANY minimum wage jobs....

“and provides them with all of the information and assistance they need to apply for state provided healthcare “

Wrong again.  Wal-Mart does not provide me, A Store Manager, with ANY information that any associate would need to apply for state assistance. 

It appears as though your mind and thoughts have been influenced by the liberal left.  I welcome you to talk with a real Wal-Mart associate that can tell you the reality of it all instead of the propaganda that you hear in an attempt to further a political agenda.

The taxpayer from Seattle couldn’t have said it better…

This bill will provide tax relief by making Wal-Mart pay its fair share in healthcare costs.

As a small business owner who tries to do the right thing in providing benefits for my employees, I’m 100% behind this bill. Wal-Mart should pull its fair share, just like the rest of us. Anything else amounts to an unfair advantage. We need Fair Share Health Care right now.

I do believe you have said it all:

“me, A Store Manager”

As for the health care available at $23.00/month - yeah we have all heard about that - boy - I sure wouldn’t want to brag about offering that - what they get 3 visits a year to the Doctor.  - Does that cover just the visit (walking in the door) or does it cover what ever the doctor does, tests, lab work etc.?????

Tough choice for a low wage earner - $23.00/month for useless insurance that doesn’t cover anything but 3 visits a year to the doctor or free healthcare provided by the taxpayers.

An executives compensation that is based off the backs of the taxpayers paying for healthcare for their employees is compensation that is over inflated.

Uh-hmm.  Why SHOULD Wal-mart pay more for its healthcare?

Because it is their responsibility, not the responsibility of the taxpayer to provide healthcare for their employees.

I am sure you are not underpaid - you are management.

As far “as on average Wal-Mart’s wage is higher than the competitor’s wages” - Are there any competitors left in the area to compare to.  Wal-Mart comes in devestates the economy and lowers the wage standards in the area forcing the competitor to either lower wages or close shop in order to compete.

As far as providing information with getting state healthcare - I have seen the hiring packets given to new employees and yes it is included.

It appears that you have attended way to many captive audience and one on one Anti-Union meetings and apparently they have worked well on you.

I am sure your definition of a “real” Wal-Mart employee would require the employee to be as fooled as you appear to be.

Yes,

We should all be greatful that Wal-Mart, the countries largest company feels that it is ok to underpay their employees, not provide them with healthcare destroy the ecomomy and living wages in our communities.

Comparing Wal-Mart to Paul’s discount store is not even a comparison.  Because if Wal-Mart would get out of town - Paul’s business would increase and he would offer his employees livable wages and healthcare and get to hire more people to serve is many customers.  And maybe even get to open more stores.

Wal-Mart has a responsibility to the people that it employ’s and the the communities that it resides in.

HEALTH CARE IS A RIGHT - NOT A PRIVELAGE FOR JUST THE WEALTHY.

Completely agree with Taxpayer in Seattle Wa. and Jessica in Takome, Wa.

Michael D. in Connecticut:  is your compensation based in part in how low your labor cost is?  I’ve heard that is the case for WalMart store managers, and explains why long-term employment for employees is discouraged (especially if they access the skimpy WalMart health insurance.)

Taxpayer,

Could you please cite in our constitution where it talks about health care being a right???

And by “right” I believe you mean that if you are not successful and cant afford it then it is the responsibility of the person next to you to pay for your health care.

Also, what do you mean by “NOT A PRIVELAGE FOR JUST THE WEALTHY”?  Who is providing health care for the wealthy?  I beleive they are providing their own.

DeeDee,

I heard that Target and K-Mart flog employees on a regular basis.

Can you tell us other bad things you have heard about Wal-Mart, we are very interested…

Geeze Big T.---no wonder nothing is ever resolved here.  Wasn’t there some kind of discussion two weeks ago about the constitution and the DOI and whether or not there was a specific mention of healthcare being a right?  Apparently you weren’t reading the blog posts.

Of course Taxpayer isn’t going to be able to cite anything from the U.S. Constitution that states healthcare is a “right,” because it’s not there.  So what’s your point?

Why don’t you try re-reading the Declaration of Independence:  “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Notice it said, “unalienable Rights” NOT “unalienable benefits.” Besides Big T...what do you think the writers of the DOI meant when they said these truths are “self-evident?” My quess is that these writers never dreamed there would be wackos like you and Sickofspin who believe it’s “every person for themself.” For the last time Big T...if everyone is entitled to Life...what does that mean?  Doesn’t that include the quality of life...ie. good health?

One more thing Big T.  You are so full of crap if you want us to believe the wealthy all buy their own insurance.  Just look no farther than the Congress or Senate.  I wonder how many of our lawmakers have exempted themselves from the best taxpayer provided healthcare in the land?  Aren’t manyh of them millionaires?  What the heck...John Kerry ought to at least be able to get Theresa to pop for some health insurance on himself.  Health care for the wealthy?  You better re-think that one Big T.

Big T in Texas: “And by “right” I believe you mean that if you are not successful and cant afford it then it is the responsibility of the person next to you to pay for your health care. “

Yep.

Germany in the 1930’s made the decision that such people were to be considered “useless eaters” and discarded.  America, a civilized country, has decided that individuals will be given the health care they need regardless of ability to pay.

I prefer America to 1930s Germany.

Michael D. in Connecticut
Big T in Texas
Sickofspin

Good posts!!
I do not think these anti WalMart people understand when they try to understand what you wrote all they see is:
;laihtjbkl’HGOPHDSG;LJ"BAD WALMART”;LAHOPH’NATBIOHKA
;LAUT"BAD WALMART"A;LIROANB’OIQHNBA’>.

It is obvious to me that these folks are too simple minded to think for themselves.  They have been programed to just know that they are to say “Bad WalMart”.  They talk as if they want or expect change, however they yap as if WalMart is the only violator.  None of them are intelligent enough to address the whole issue, and if for some lucky chance they mention a real issue they are incapable of giving any kind of a logical solution.  They have been programed to spew the same tired union rhetoric.  Notice how they say the same exact thing over and over.  All of their posts combined can be summed up in two words “Bad WalMart”.

The real issue is that healthcare needs reform, who has ideas to fix it.  Just a hint the answer does not start with WalMart.

Robert Simms/ Bill Sampson where are you?  I am sorry if I was harsh, I really do enjoy your posts.

I cannot believe they drug Safeway into this! Safeway is just jealous that the unions have all but sank their ship and that they have yet to touch WalMarts.  I think it might help Safeway if we get Greg Sparks a pacifier!!

sorry i agree with strident i work for wal-mart now and wish i had went to work for them 20 years ago. but instead i stayed out of the wal-marts in favor of the little guy. and for 20 years was royally screwed. not only did i not have any insurance but my wages where low. most of the people i worked for where well off. usually had summer homes in forida and other places. but always made up lots of exuses of why i had to stay at the wage i was at. i worked one place 5 years and left making the same as i started. ontop of that no health care or even the option to have health care was provided. if there going to make changes it needs to go alot deeper than wal-mart. there are alot of people out there that have no ins and depend on state health care. at least at wal-mart i get some kind of coverage and im not left with nothing if i get sick.
as far as wages go i make more there than anywhere else in the area i could work.
wal-mart has its pitfalls like any other company but in order to change that they need to start at the top and work there way down. the entire bonus system that executives work on needs to be changed with all companys not just wal-mart. the way our companys operate large and small need an over hal so to pick on one company is very wrong. even with safeway fire one executive you could give a dollar an hour more to your workers. and you probably wouldnt miss that exeutive either.

wage is a relitive thing. make 20 dollars an hr but it takes 50 to live you have a bad job. make 5 dollars an hr and it takes 2 to live you have a good job.

Strident:

Your’re right Strident...everytime you or people like Sickofspin post something, all I hear coming through is blah, blah, blah!

Let me sum up the Pro Wal-Mart side of the “argument"--"Bad unions...unions are bad!”

While you at least agree that healthcare needs reforming in this country, and while it may not begin with Wal-Mart, it MOST CERTAINLY will include Wal-Mart in a major way!

I do believe that you all need read the legislation:

“The bill would require companies with more than 5,000 employees to spend at least 9 percent of their payroll costs on health-care benefits.”

This would not just affect Wal-Mart - Wal-Mart is just the largest offender in the State of Washington and the largest opposer of this legislation.

Safeway is the second largest offender and I believe that Greg Sparks and Safeway are just accepting their responsibility to the communities that they do business in along with the other companies.

“The needs of the many, outway the needs of the one”.

SickofSpin,

I believe that I answered your question - just because you do not like the answer does not mean that it was not addressed.

Comparing Wal-Mart to Paul’s discount store is not even a comparison.  Because if Wal-Mart would get out of town - Paul’s business would increase and he would offer his employees livable wages and healthcare and get to hire more people to serve is many customers.  And maybe even get to open more stores.

It looks like Someone needs to step in and help clear up this situation. I know how everyone has missed my posts. Forgive me if I reiterate points made by my fellow Wal-Mart apologists.

Taxpayer-

“Walmart refused to provide [healthcare] to their employees.”

That’s a good one. Let me guess...next time you will tell me 2+2=5.

“Walmart underpays thier employees and provides them with all of the information and assistance they need to apply for state provided healthcare”

Wal-Mart pays their employees market value. As Michael D. pointed out, the latter part of this claim is also false. Bentonville does not direct store managers to do this; it is not corporate policy. If it happens, it shouldn’t, but it is also an exception to the rule.

“Uh-hmm.  Why SHOULD Wal-mart pay more for its healthcare? Because it is their responsibility, not the responsibility of the taxpayer to provide healthcare for their employees.”

I assure you, it is no employer’s responsibility. Needless to say, it is not the taxpayers’ either. I’ll let you figure out who that leaves.

“Wal-Mart comes in devestates the economy and lowers the wage standards in the area forcing the competitor to either lower wages or close shop in order to compete.”

No, Wal-Mart does not lower wage standards, the market does. If Wal-Mart comes into a community and “drives down wages,” then there was unemployment in that community. If there had been full employment at a higher wage, Wal-Mart could not open up shop.

“Comparing Wal-Mart to Paul’s discount store is not even a comparison.  Because if Wal-Mart would get out of town - Paul’s business would increase and he would offer his employees livable wages and healthcare and get to hire more people to serve is many customers.  And maybe even get to open more stores.”

Sickofspin never said Wal-Mart was in town. Regardless, how do you know Paul would raise wages? He would not have to; in fact, he could probably pay less. If he chooses to increase wages and benefits, he is likely doing so to attract the more productive members of the labor pool. With a large labor pool, employers are not willing to pay as much.

“HEALTH CARE IS A RIGHT”

I, too, require proof of this claim.

Alex-

“This bill will provide tax relief by making Wal-Mart pay its fair share in healthcare costs.”

There is no such thing as an employer’s “fair share in healthcare costs.” Also, mark my words, the consequences of such a law will end up costing taxpayers more in the end.

Jessica-

“Wal-Mart should pull its fair share, just like the rest of us. Anything else amounts to an unfair advantage.”

No one is forcing you to provide benefits. I applaud you for doing so, but there is a difference between being a good person and being a good businessperson. If you are so worried about your competitive edge, you are free to do away with health benefits at any time.

Screwed-

“...if everyone is entitled to Life...what does that mean?  Doesn’t that include the quality of life...ie. good health?”

You’re right. It says “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Life is just that, being allowed to live...not helped to live by others...ALLOWED TO LIVE, as in not killed for no reason. Liberty is the freedom to do as you wish, including the freedom to make poor choices that put you on Medicaid, get (or fail to get) an education, pay your employees what you feel they are worth, and work (or refuse to work) for a company you feel ought to pay you more. I think “quality of life” is part of happiness. Notice it says “pursuit of happiness” - happiness is not guaranteed.

DeeDee-

It seems to me you’ve mentioned Germany numerous times. If you’d like, I can paste my reply into this thread.

On a side note: Since you are clearly a socialist, I think you should move to Canada.

someone

You have said everything that needs to be said..
“pursuit of happiness” means just that, you have to go out and find that happiness where ever you can.  It doesn’t mean a company or anyone else has to just hand it over to you.  That’s the problem with the system now to many people think they should always get a handout.  wal-mart has a good fair healthcare benefit.  I know this because I have used my insurance many times over and have never had a claim denied.  My premiums are low compared to other companies I have worked for.

Ok, so then, so to sum up what you Wal-Mart apologists are saying then is.

To hell with everyone else as long as I believe I am getting mine.

Great philosphy to live by - and you think we are simple minded.  Hmmmmmmmmm.

My sincere hope that you never become ill, disabled or have an emergency where you need medical attention.  I hope that you never require the assistance of a friend or a neighbor or get stranded on the side of the road - becasue the day will come when you are there and someone like you will drive by and wave - yelling out the window - “Sucker - not my responsibility to help you”

But let it be known that if I am driving by the local Wal-Mart and there was a fire or something else tragic happening (god forbid) I would gladly give my life to save those employees - I really doubt you could say the same.

“just because your mamma called you son, does not mean the world revolves around you”

taxpayer

Being responsibile for your own personal business is not saying you wouldn’t help someone that couldn’t help themselves at the moment.  It is saying everyone should take care of themselves in life in general.  If someone had an accident or something beyond their control, that is a different kind of help.

Someone in USA:  First you need to accept the reality in America:  a person who needs health care will receive health care.  All “first world” countries (Canada, England, even France) follows that standard.  The only “first world” country in recent memory that did not follow that standard is 1930s Germany.  If you follow your statements to their logical conclusion, then people without money or without health insurance or without adequate health insurance would be denied life-saving care.  Then they will die.  This will not happen in America.  Yelling “personal responsibility” until you are blue in your face will not change the reality of the situation.  America is not going to allow its citizens to be deprived of life-saving technology and medicines.  Period.

Since health care will be provided on an as-needed basis, the only question open for debate is:  who pays?  For better or for worse, in America, the decision is:  The employer pays for health insurance, with the government paying for the unemployed.  The private insurance market is unavailable to individuals with pre-existing medical conditions (like diabetes) or people over age 50.  So, it’s government or employer.  When the employers bail on their American responsibility, the health costs shift from the employer to the government.  WalMart is leading the way in the dumping of these costs onto government.  Fortunately, government is pushing these costs back onto WalMart.

Someone in USA: “There is no such thing as an employer’s “fair share in healthcare costs” In Canada, that is true.  In France, that is true.  In America, that statement is false, as WalMart is finding out, starting in Maryland.  Unless America goes to “national health insurance”, employer’s do have a “fair share in healthcare costs”.  It is how America has chosen to pay for health care for its citizens.

YUP!  I figured we’d hear more B.S. sooner or later from Someone in USA.  You’re a better contortionist than Houdini, Someone.  I don’t think there’s anything you won’t try to bend, twist, distort and spin so that it conforms to your Anarcho-Capitalist way of thinking!

I mean seriously--- is this your best definition of what “Life” is:  “Life is just that, being allowed to live...not helped to live by others...ALLOWED TO LIVE, as in not killed for no reason.” Surely someone so wise and articulate and logical as yourself can come up with something better than this!  It sounds like you just made a good case for euthanasia.  So we shouldn’t help others to live...and we shouldn’t kill them for “no reason,” but we could kill them if we had a reason--such as being in a permanent and persistent vegetative state?

And let’s see...you have a point… “happiness” is NOT guaranteed, but the “pursuit of happiness” is a RIGHT--right?
Well I don’t know about you...but how do most people “pursue happiness?” That is---take vacations, buy nice clothes, buy big screen TV’s, buy, buy, buy...!  Wouldn’t you agree that this requires a job that pays a “living wage?” Oh, that’s right...I forgot people like you and Sicko don’t believe there is such a thing as a “living wage.”

NO, Someone YOU and I will NEVER AGREE on too many things because I think your view of the world is vastly different from what the “founders of this country” envisionsed.

Screwed,

“NO, Someone YOU and I will NEVER AGREE on too many things because I think your view of the world is vastly different from what the “founders of this country” envisionsed.”

You have that statement backwards.  Our founding fathers would puke if they had to listen to your ideas on how this country should be run.

DeeDee,
How and when did this country decide it is the responsibility of employeers to pay for health care?  If we do illegaly force companies to pay for their employees insurance then they will just take the cost out of the employees pay.  You people seem to think that companies are made of money.

Those WA Safeway employees can buy a house, they can
pursue the American dream.  WMT “associates” are stuck
in the permanent lower economic class.  To really compare the wages per hour and bennies of a Safeway employee and a WMT supercenter employee would show the facts. Please do not BS me either. I have on three seperate occasions been salaried management for Sams Club and WMT supercenters.  I know about the incredible turnover at all levels of those companies and how the hourlie employees really speak of the company in the break room. A profitable Sams Club is one that is more than 50 miles from a
Costco.  This forum is great because it lets the applogists blow off steam but the public is getting informed. Everywhere good news is happening. People are being informed that WMT is not good for America or their town.

That is tooo easy.  It is not Paul’s problem if Paul is just a local busniess that does not seek tax breaks, donate heavily to anti union lobbiests, does not break labor laws, does not buy 80% of his inventory from China, does not brag about being the largest in the world, does not pay “Paul” millions while having his employees on Welfare. Paul is probably a member of the community and the profit stays there. Paul
carrys Plan B and promotes women and minorites. 
Paul would be forgiven because he is an assett to the
community. Paul does not hire illegals to mop his floors.
I could go on for pages.  Why the passion to defend WMT?
Nobody is going to Unionize WMT.  We just want America
workers to be taken care of better.  Is that not what Christians want?

You “conservatives” are very full of hate. You have ran the
country for five yrs and things keep getting worse.
I know, It is Hillary’s fault. ha When all your news is from
Rush and Bill O’reilly, you really are ill informed on the
ways or the world.  You have my sympathy.
Are you sexually surpressed like the Muslims?
ha You notice I did not use the word Republican.  Like the word “christian”, it has been distorted 180 degrees from the definition in place for centurys.
Some of us think America would be a better place if we took care of our fellow man, not celebrate our puny place a little higher on the social-economic ladder than others.  Conservatives don’t like Darwin but swear by suvival of the fittest in the marketplace, (usually with a Federal handout).
But they hate Welfare mothers.
Hate, hate, is not that kind of depressing?  Your role model, Ron Reagan was a Union Pres in his movie days.

How is it that any company, not just Wal-Mart, could be expected to pay wages that are higher than what the job is worth just so it is a “living wage.” Should a 17 year old, single cashier be able to afford a house??  I think not. 

For crying out loud, people, they are introductory level jobs.  Anyone that expects that this type of labor and skill level would require more pay discounts the education and degrees of others out there that have worked their asses off......

Houston, TX.....how is it that there are several Wal-Marts in this city and yet all of the other competitors are there as well?  That shoots the hell out of your “Wal-Mart closes everything down” philosophy....

By the way, Wal-Mart doesn’t close anyone down, the customers do.....if you don’t take care of the customers, they go elsewhere....

Have you noticed that Wal-Mart Watch pulled all of my posts?

Hey Michael D:

I couldn’t allow your reference to a “living wage” go unchallenged.  I don’t think anyone here has defined a “living wage” as one that allows a 17 year old to afford a home.  Right away you WM defenders go for the ridiculous!

How about simply being able to afford rent in a modest apartment without having to give up meals to do it?

In the great benefits vs. rights debate, owning a home is NOT a right!

Taxpayer in Seattle-

“As far as providing information with getting state healthcare - I have seen the hiring packets given to new employees and yes it is included.”

I went through an entire “hiring packet” on Friday, and there is NOTHING contained in there that has anything to do with state healthcare or state assistance of any sort. 

As far as I can see, just another post of uninformed B----HIT!!  Taxpayer, if you are able to provide us here with the name of the document, I will stand corrected.  If you can not, you will be considered a blowhard, as many of the rest on this site are.

DeeDee n Atlanta-

You state “Michael D. in Connecticut:  is your compensation based in part in how low your labor cost is?  I’ve heard that is the case for WalMart store managers, and explains why long-term employment for employees is discouraged (especially if they access the skimpy WalMart health insurance.)”

No.  I do not get compensated by directly getting my labor costs to go lower.  Profit is certainly a piece of my compensation package, and of course, wages directly impacts profit as the largest line expense of any retail business.  But, my compensation does not go up directly because I lower labor costs.  Another large piece of my compensation has to do with sales performance, and without the appropriate number of labor hours being spent, my sales will be lower and, therefore, my compensation can be negatively impacted by having lower labor costs.

And, 100% honestly, I have no idea why you state that Wal-Mart does not encourage long-term employment.  (And please don’t cite the leaked memo about healthcare.) I have never been encouraged to lessen the number of long-term associates, as they have the most experience and make my job easier.

Screwedby, again I state what I think is obvious.  I don’t feel that an entry-level wage earner would normally be able to afford an apartment and afford food and healthcare.  Things are just too damn expensive these days.  If there are entry-level jobs out there that can provide this,let me know where they are....I would like to check it out.