Doesn't the Catholic Church know that Walmart has the sacred American right to exploit workers with poverty level wages while the company founders are the richest people in America? It almost seems from the following statement that the Catholic Church actually is completely opposed to our Administration on a basic issue... Perhaps good Catholics shouldn't have voted for Bush and shouldn't vote for Republicans in general due to their anti-union practices? They may or may not have reasons to vote for Democrats, but there are definite reasons that people of deep spiritual values should not vote for Republicans either.
From the Second Vatican Council's Pastoral Constitution of the Church in the Modern World, issued by the Vatican in 1965 : "Among the basic rights of the human person must be counted the right of freely founding labor unions," the document declares. "These unions should be truly able to represent the workers and to contribute to the proper arrangement of economic life. Another such right is that of taking part freely in the activity of these unions without fear of reprisal." - Source: Vatican Policy Cited in Verizon Wireless Protest
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Dave Nalle
So now the Catholic Church is going to be used as the basis of setting national policy? I take it you're also in favor of posting the 10 Commandments in our courthouses?
And the Vatican statement on unions isn't out of keeping with Wal-Mart's actions. Nothing is stopping Wal-Mart workers from starting unions if they want to. Wal-Mart may fire them for it, but that's the risk union organizers have always taken throughout history. If they really got the movement going, how many scabs do you think Wal-Mart can find to fill those jobs - there are so many of the jobs there aren't enough scabs to fill them.
But the truth is that Wal-Mart pays a market wage for what they expect of their workers - better than some of their main competition, and most of those workers are happy with the jobs and what they get paid for them. This is why they can't organize on a large enough scale to make a real impact on the company.
Dave
2 - Brandon Weber
Dave, pull your head out of your...shoes.
They can't organize Wal-Mart because it wages a campaign of fear and intimidation every time an effort begins.
If there were a fair election with no interference from management, you can bet the workers at those stores would vote for a union; that is the only way they can improve their working conditions and economic situation.
>"Most of those workers are happy with >the jobs and what they get paid for >them."
Which is why more of them and their children depend on state doles for welfare and health insurance than any other company.
http://www.exportingourjobs.com
3 - Big Time Patriot
"Another such right is that of taking part freely in the activity of these unions without fear of reprisal"
When Walmart closes a store in Canada due to union acitivity, that strikes me as reprisal.
The Catholic Church is AGAINST fear or reprisal for union organizing. Walmart is FOR fear of reprisal for union organizing. Seems to me that the Vatican statement on unions IS out of keeping with Wal-Mart's actions.
Union organizing isn't politically correct with the "free enterprise" party line, but facts are facts, no matter if they go against some peoples ideas that moral values stop at some other womans womb or some other persons marriage.
People are important. People are MORE important than businesses. Really, that's why people should have MORE rights than businesses. At least in my opinion.
4 - RJ
If Wal-Mart unionizes, it's over. Their labor costs will increase dramatically, without any increase in productivity. Therefore, they will have to raise their prices in order to continue to be profitable. Therefore, the main reason people shop at Wal-Mart (cheap products) will be gone. Therefore, they won't do as much business. Therefore, they will lose money. And then they'll be forced to close stores, which will ELIMINATE massive numbers of jobs.
Which is why unionizing Wal-Mart is such a terrible idea, for the sake of the corporate execs, for the sake of the consumer, and yes, even for the sake of the employees...
5 - Big Time Patriot
It would be all over for Walmart, apparently because they think their employees are expenses and not assets worth investing in.
It's funny how there is a big mind set that people provide no value to business but are only expenses. Yet surprisingly, eliminating entirely the "expense" of workers is hardly ever done? Is it true that CEO's and stock holders are the only productive people in America?
Also, with the net expenses of a county to provide support to underpaid Walmart workers, would it be such a bad thing for a county if Walmart left? Hundreds would lose their jobs? Yet the people who buy at Walmart aren't going to stop buying if Walmart closes are they? Perhaps those hundreds can get a job at a place that values them.
6 - Brandon Weber
[quote] Which is why unionizing Wal-Mart is such a terrible idea, for the sake of the corporate execs[/quote]
Bingo. That would mean the owners and execs could make less money and the workers more money. Wow...what a concept!
If the wealth were distributed JUST A BIT from those people to the real workers, the prices could stay the same.
7 - Dave Nalle
So, the conclusion from all this - it's better that Walmart go out of business and leave all their workers unemployed than that they make any corporate profits or continue to be successful.
Good plan.
Dave
8 - gonzo marx
no Dave, i don't think that is an accurate Conclusion ...personally i'm a bit closer to Big Time Patriot on this one..
collective bargaining by workers is a very big part of Capitolism..a function of the Free Market in action..toss in a bit of Ethical Business behaviour in the Model and any actuarian can figure out that by evening out salries a bit, shifting from keeping such a huge involutary part time workforce (done for cost saving purposes, so benefits won't be available to said employees),toss in ..what ..maybe 1 or 2 pennies per item on price...pennies mind you, with their volume...and a Corporation with a larger Gross Product than most countries can easily afford to take care of their workers a bit better and still fufill their Mission Statement..
but it is THEIR business, and it is those workers jobs...so it shoudl be left to them, and the Free Market to work it out..if folks don't like it...then don't shop there...i don't...but that has more to do with the fact that so many of their products are of inferior quality and come from Suppliers that utilize child labor and sweatshops than anything else...
my problem with Wal-Mart currently is the whole bit with their using illegal aliens...they are in the process of settling for what...11 million dollars if memory serves...so the whole bit about Federal charges will just go away
call me silly...but i want our Government to enforce the Laws they pass..ESPECIALLY when it comes to illegal aliens working in our country..take it as just a Homeland Security issue if ya like...
here's the Nightmare Scenario for ya...if i were the Evil Overlord i might just slip my minions in as undocumented aliens..have them get jobs on night cleaning crews in every store of the largest retail chain in the country i hate...and plant some nasty chemical weapon that can be made FROM THE PRODUCTS IN THAT VERY STORE...swing by the electronics section for some alarm claocks for triggering devices...and have the whole thing set to go off at..oh 6 pm, when the stores will be the most crowded...
now , wouldn't that make 9/11 look like a sunday school picnic...not to mention ruin the Company and lose a heck of a lot more jobs along with the lives lost and devasted...that's some Terror, i tell ya..
so let's just Prosecute those responsible, under already existing laws, for hiring those illegals...in EVERY business...
as for the rest...the Market and Labor forces will sort it all out eventually...i hope
geeez...did i really just spew all that out onto the screen? hope i didn't get any on yas...
Excelsior!
9 - Dave Nalle
The illegal alien issue is really completely separate from the unionization issue.
The basic problem with unionizing Walmart isn't the closing of the store in Canada, it's the inability of union organizers to get enough employees to sign on to impact the company in anything more than a small area. Part of the problem is the huge numbers of stores and the distances involved, but it's also that most WalMart workers are fairly satisfied with the way they're treated by the company.
Think about it. They get paid more than minimum wage for not terribly challenging work. Many of them want to work part time or for limited durations because they're housewives and students and came to WalMart because they don't want to make a larger commitment to a career. It's a great provider for that sort of job.
Unionizing part time and short term workers is incredibly difficult - virtually impossible on the scale of a company like WalMart with thousands of worldwide locations.
I'm also not convinced that WalMart doesn't do a good job for their workers. They pay well over minimum wage. They promote almost exclusively from within. They offer health insurance at a surprisingly low rate - i was literally shocked at how good their insurance plan is - for even part time employees, they give merchandise discounts, have a stock purchase plan for all employees and offer a 401K plan for full and part time employees, plus a productivity bonus program. I'm more than willing to believe that unions aren't making traction at WalMart because the workers are happy there.
Dave
10 - gonzo marx
like i said..the Issue of Unions and Management are something they can work out for themselves..
but i believe their "no union" Policy, as stated by them publicly...violates the Free Market concept that enables collective bargaining to work..for BOTH sides of the Issue
when you tell your workers "you can't even talk about unionizing or you will be fired"...then you are NOT bargaining in good faith
open up the Option..if the workers are happy and don't want to Unionize, then there is no arguement, eh?
that was my main point...i raised the "illegal" bit to show the proclivity of Management..in these instances...to be willing to break the Law...
after WorldCom, Enron, the Savings and Loan bit a few years ago...i am SO against criminal activity by Corporations...as i keep stating..it's all about Ethical practices
ya will find a recurring Theme in my rantings...i believe the Ends NEVER justify the Means, but that the Means are the End in and of themselves..
so many Corporations are highly Ethical in their practices, and make damned good money doing so...those i Reward with my dollars and my Advocacy...
the others i wanna send to the vivisectionist...
nuff said?
Excelsior!
11 - Dave Nalle
>>when you tell your workers "you can't even talk about unionizing or you will be fired"...then you are NOT bargaining in good faith<<
If they actually said that or acted on that intent, then they'd be in clear and blatant violation of the FLSA and would be prosecuted for it - not true?
Dave
12 - gonzo marx
good question, they were NOT prosecuted for hiring hundreds of illegal aliens were they?
"not true?"
Excelsior!
13 - Dave Nalle
In the case of the illegal aliens WalMart had playsible deniability because they didn't actually hire the illegals, they hired cleaning companies and the cleaning companies hired the illegals. Thus it wasn't really WalMart who was liable, but the companies actually employing the illegals.
Dave
14 - gonzo marx
yep..off on another technicality..
but if there were NO culpabilty...why settle for $11 million for the Prosecutors to drop the whole thing?
i don't neccesarily blame the Corporation, i highly doubt it was part of their oficial Policy...instead, overzealous Managers trying to feed the bottom line overstepped Ethical Boundaries...enough Question as to how much they knew spurred the Criminal Investigation..
which is how the System is supposed to Work...but rather than continuing until the Facts of any Criminality are discovered, the Corp shells out $11 mill to hush it all up
and THAT is the disturbing part, don'tcha think?
Excelsior!
15 - Brandon Weber
__>>when you tell your workers "you can't even talk about unionizing or you will be fired"...then you are NOT bargaining in good faith<<
If they actually said that or acted on that intent, then they'd be in clear and blatant violation of the FLSA and would be prosecuted for it - not true?__
Sure. Got years, many dollars, and no mouths to feed? They can and do fire people all the time for talking union, and it takes so long, and so much money, that nobody can see it through. Wal-Mart has full time lawyers just to MAKE this stuff take years and cost tens of thousands of dollars to get a day in court. Who's going to take it that far?
Leaving aside for a minute that all of the U.S. labor laws have been gutted beyond any value for unions or working people, and have been skewed heavily toward the wealthy corporations...
16 - Dave Nalle
>>but if there were NO culpabilty...why settle for $11 million for the Prosecutors to drop the whole thing?<<
Because there was evidence that individual WalMart managers were aware that the cleaning contractors were hiring illegals and didn't report them. I think that's on the individual managers, not the corporation, but understandably WalMart didn't want it to go any farther so they plea bargained. Happens all the time. It's easier to pay a penalty than go through a protracted legal procedure. In this case they were really protecting their managers who they presumably felt deserved not to be dragged into court for a decision which was certainly arguably not unreasonable.
>>i don't neccesarily blame the Corporation, i highly doubt it was part of their oficial Policy...instead, overzealous Managers trying to feed the bottom line overstepped Ethical Boundaries...enough Question as to how much they knew spurred the Criminal Investigation..<<
I don't think it was even that much of an issue. Most likely the managers just put the cleaning contracts out for lowest bid and never even considered the possibility that the workers who the contractors brought in were illegals. It wasn't their problem so long as the work got done and they probably saw it as none of their business. The prosecuters - possibly overzealously - disagreed.
>>which is how the System is supposed to Work...but rather than continuing until the Facts of any Criminality are discovered, the Corp shells out $11 mill to hush it all up<<
Or to protect their managers.
>>and THAT is the disturbing part, don'tcha think?<<
Not really. Has it actually been hushed up? Doesn't look that way to me.
Dave
17 - Dave Nalle
>>Sure. Got years, many dollars, and no mouths to feed? They can and do fire people all the time for talking union, and it takes so long, and so much money, that nobody can see it through. Wal-Mart has full time lawyers just to MAKE this stuff take years and cost tens of thousands of dollars to get a day in court. Who's going to take it that far?<<
Let's see, the ACLU, the unions, the justice department, since it's a criminal issue. Are you telling me that WalMart has more lawyers and more money than the Justice Department?
Dave
18 - gonzo marx
Dave sez...
*Because there was evidence that individual WalMart managers were aware that the cleaning contractors were hiring illegals and didn't report them. I think that's on the individual managers, not the corporation, but understandably WalMart didn't want it to go any farther so they plea bargained. Happens all the time. It's easier to pay a penalty than go through a protracted legal procedure. In this case they were really protecting their managers who they presumably felt deserved not to be dragged into court for a decision which was certainly arguably not unreasonable.*
time ta shave with Occamm's Razor , Dave..
up till halfway thru yer quoted statement, we are in Agreement..i also thought, in my previous Posting, that it is most likely the deed of overzealous Managers...my Point is that they should be Prosecuted for violating the Law like any other Criminal
as for "happens all the time" that is NO excuse for breaking the Law...nuff said there?
now we get to spurious speculation...i find it difficult to believe that a mega-Corp like Wal-Mart suddenly gets altruistic about the welfare of Managers that have violated the Law..instead let's take a look at the possibility that those in charge authorized a risk/cost analysis regarding the negative impact such a legal battle could have...add in that if they fired said Managers there is the distinct Possibility that at least one would roll over to save his own ass and implicate higher ups, factor in what such publicity would do to sales and ya come up with the $11 million dollar number
far easier for me to believe THAT than that they suddenly "cared" about anything but the Numbers
Dave sez *I don't think* which shows that it is your Opinion..and i Respect yoru Right to lay that out there...but it has nothing to do with the Facts of the matter when it comes to Prosecution of the Law
Dave sez..
*Not really. Has it actually been hushed up? Doesn't look that way to me.*
it seems it dropped right out of the News cycle after it's initial mention 2 days ago..instead we are treated to Jacko and Steroids...and how it looks to you again shows we are dealing with an Opinion...
that leads me ta Wondering...own any stock in Wal-Mart , Dave?
Enquiring minds wanna Know...
Excelsior!
19 - Z.Z.Bachman
WalMart is the type of organization that issues employee policies aligned with my post in the Culture column here at Blogcritics .... see Corporate Travel Under $50 a Day --- They are allegedly a poster child for the creating of dysfunctional employee work enviorments by management all in the name of cutting costs for shareholders!! :)
At least that's the buzz in corporate circles.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ZZ Bachman / ZardozZ News & Satire Portal
20 - Marty Thau
Everybody has a Wal-Mart opinion. Meanwhile their prices cannot be equaled and their goods are more than satisfactory. The folks that work there aren't exactly rocket scientists and generally get paid what they are worth. They should be thankful there is a Wal-Mart to hire them.
21 - Victor Plenty
Wal-Mart should be thankful so many people are willing to work for so much less than they are truly worth.
Sadly, Wal-Mart shows little evidence of being thankful for anything.
22 - gonzo marx
oh my stars and garters...
folks..it seems we have a winner for the Insidious Troglodyte Award..
Marty Thau sez..
*The folks that work there aren't exactly rocket scientists and generally get paid what they are worth. They should be thankful there is a Wal-Mart to hire them.*
just the kind of unsubstantiated, elitist bullshit that keeps me going..
let us take a Moment to deconstruct this hateful piece of tripe, shall we?
"The folks that work there aren't exactly rocket scientists and generally get paid what they are worth"
for the love of Bog, could you please tell me how many of those folks you know, produce their IQ exams and show the cost analysis of their wages versus the earning power of their Labor?
not everyone is cut out to be a rocket scientist, just as nto everyone has the physical capacity to be a ditch digger...both are important to the Economy...try not to forget that...add in how many of those folks are single mothers working part time whiel their kids are at school...senior citizens trying to supplement their pensions and so on...then perhaps you will get knocked off yer high horse and down to the bottom of the Marianas Trench with the rest of the whale snot..
"They should be thankful there is a Wal-Mart to hire them"
i put to you, gentle Readers, that is is the Corporate Entity that should be thankful for a workforce that enables them to pursue their Mission Statement
i am all for Free Market Capitalism..but i require they live up to certain Ethical standards in their pursuit of Profit...those that do..i support with my dollars...those that don't, i boycott and will Editorialize against
if Marty here wants to side with a souless legal Entity against living, breathing human beings that provide the Labor that fuels the Economy...so be it..
i reserve the Right to point out said Idiocy...cuz i happen to like human beings...since i am one myself..
Excelsior!
23 - Dave Nalle
>>up till halfway thru yer quoted statement, we are in Agreement..i also thought, in my previous Posting, that it is most likely the deed of overzealous Managers...my Point is that they should be Prosecuted for violating the Law like any other Criminal<<
Except that they clearly did NOT violate the law. They're insulated from that by the fact that they hired contractors and the contractors are the ones who broke the law. Are you going to have me dragged into court because the guys who built my swimming pool hired subcontractors who hired sub-subcontractors who were probably illegals? At what point was I going to be able to stop that?
>>as for "happens all the time" that is NO excuse for breaking the Law...nuff said there?<<
'happens all the time' referred to the settlement for $11 million, not the hiring of illegals, though that happens all the time too.
>>now we get to spurious speculation...i find it difficult to believe that a mega-Corp like Wal-Mart suddenly gets altruistic about the welfare of Managers that have violated the Law..instead let's take a look at the possibility that those in charge authorized a risk/cost analysis regarding the negative impact such a legal battle could have...add in that if they fired said Managers there is the distinct Possibility that at least one would roll over to save his own ass and implicate higher ups, factor in what such publicity would do to sales and ya come up with the $11 million dollar number<<
Is there a difference? Protecting those managers is protecting the company, and $11 million is a reasonable price to pay for what they did. If you think of it as a fine, it's more than adequate for hiring a few illegals through a third party.
>>it seems it dropped right out of the News cycle after it's initial mention 2 days ago..instead we are treated to Jacko and Steroids...and how it looks to you again shows we are dealing with an Opinion...<<
Nothing stays in the news when faced with Jacko and steroids. Plus my point was that it hasn't been forgotten because we're discussing it here.
Truthfully this isn't that big or that exciting a news story. It does happen all the time, and WalMart getting caught and paying for it really isn't even a first page news story. I doubt it got carried on any network broadcasts in the first place. It's not major news.
>>that leads me ta Wondering...own any stock in Wal-Mart , Dave?<<
Not yet, though I'm sure some of my mutual funds have it. If the price goes to the right level and I have an opportunity I'd certainly buy it. I think it's foolish to let your stock choices be influenced by the politics surrounding a company.
Dave
24 - Dave Nalle
>>Wal-Mart should be thankful so many people are willing to work for so much less than they are truly worth.<<
In our system, Victor, you're worth exactly what you are paid and not a penny more or a penny less. If you think you should be worth more, work for a promotion or go out and get a better job. Until you do that, you're worth the $10.30 an hour the average WalMart employee earns.
Dave
25 - gonzo marx
Dave sez...
*Except that they clearly did NOT violate the law*
since they paid off(read:bribed)the Prosecutors in a criminal case, and as such it will never be brought to Court..i guess we won't know the Answer to that one..will we...which is my Point...
Dave sez..
*'happens all the time' referred to the settlement for $11 million*
i know that..and it is my point that a Criminal Investigation should NEVER be "settled"...what becomes of our Rule of Law when accused criminals can buy their way out of Prosecution...where does that stop?
Dave sez...
*Is there a difference?*
yes...yes there is
Dave sez...
*Truthfully this isn't that big or that exciting a news story. It does happen all the time, and WalMart getting caught and paying for it really isn't even a first page news story. I doubt it got carried on any network broadcasts in the first place. It's not major news.*
my point being that this SHOULD be "major news" and Jacko & steroids should be a minor Story...just goes to show where the Priorities are with the Corporate Infotainment organizations, don't it?
and finally ...Dave sez..
*I think it's foolish to let your stock choices be influenced by the politics surrounding a company.*
spoken like a true Robber Baron...and here we get to the nut of the matter, gentle Readers...
i belive it is Paramount for we, the Consumers, to regulate Corporations and ensure their Ethical practices by voting with our Dollars in the full Spirit of the Free Market...both in where we buy and where we Invest..
those that don't care about the Ethical behaviour of those they support prove the age old adage "money is the root of all Evil"
i choose Ethical standards over a quick buck any day...and whether folks Acknowledge it or not, realize it or not..
everyone faces the same Choice every day
Excelsior!