Dan Minette wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 7:59 PM
> Subject: Re: Brin: some thoughts and quotes.
>
> >
> > In a message dated 9/16/2004 6:09:53 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >
> > Do you have a coherent objection to WalMart?
> > I have no idea, although I rather doubt it. But your
> > problem with WalMart, it's pretty obvious, is the
> > people who shop at it.
> >
> >
> > How about their treatment of their employees?
>
> Is there any indication that their treatment of workers is unusual for
> retail? We do know that without Wal-marts, K-marts, Targets, etc., lower
> income people would have a much lower effective standard of living. I'm
> willing to change my mind if places like Abercrombie and Fitch having high
> prices only because their employees get such good benefits.
I've heard a lot more stories about less than stellar treatment of
employees by Wal-Mart than by Target.
Then again, Target isn't as large, so I don't know if it's a difference
in corporate attitude towards employees, or just that the total number
of employees reflects the number of stories I've heard about each. But
the attitudes of the store employees I meet at each place makes me think
that maybe Target is just a better place to work.
I've also heard about some very specific mistreatment of employees by a
large grocery store chain covering a number of states, that I haven't
heard about the much more local chain I tend to frequent (but which
probably employs more people in the metropolitan area I'm near the edge
of), so I know which one I'd apply to for a job if I needed one at a
grocery store. The differences between the two chains, though, include
that there are a bunch of stockholders in the big one, and the smaller,
more local one is owned by the immediate descendents of the guy who
started it up roughly 100 years ago, with no outside shareholders.
Hm. I've heard that the company that owns Target isn't a great stock to
own, but Wal-Mart is a fairly good stock. Maybe the priorities of who
they serve first is different in each? (The groups that a company
should serve are its employees, its stockholders, its customers and the
community or communities in which it operates.)
Or maybe I should just head for bed. :)
Julia
if any of that made much sense, let me know; if not, let me know where
it needs clarification
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
