Walmart employee Thanksgiving donations at Canton store cause controversy

  • Thread starter Thread starter seekerz
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
As I have said before, though, you can’t legally do that in this country. You can’t pay a person more just because he/she has a family. So, do you pay a full family wage to an 18 year old kid who has no dependents, so he can live large?

“Social justice” in wages is not possible in this country in the way the Church sees that.
Then your country needs to change. Social justice is not subjective and Pope Pius XI says that it demands a just and fair wage. Your economy is broken. So is mine and most of the world’s.

So fix it. Change the laws, Change everything that is unjust and perpetuates that which contributes to the break-down of society.
 
As I have said before, though, you can’t legally do that in this country. You can’t pay a person more just because he/she has a family. So, do you pay a full family wage to an 18 year old kid who has no dependents, so he can live large?

“Social justice” in wages is not possible in this country in the way the Church sees that.
Can you cite some court cases that have established that? I don’t see family size as a prohibited discrimination factor in EEOC laws. Also, there is no requirement that an employer pay two people doing the same job the same money. In academia, once you are tenured the only way to get a big raise is to get an outside offer, so those that find outside offers tend to make more than those who don’t.
 
Here is a little more from Pius XI, one could argue that the government is a cause of the lack of a living wage because its regulations could be thought to crush businesses with unjust burdens.
In determining the amount of the wage, the condition of a business and of the one carrying it on must also be taken into account; for it would be unjust to demand excessive wages which a business cannot stand without its ruin and consequent calamity to the workers. If, however, a business makes too little money, because of lack of energy or lack of initiative or because of indifference to technical and economic progress, that must not be regarded a just reason for reducing the compensation of the workers. But if the business in question is not making enough money to pay the workers an equitable wage because it is being crushed by unjust burdens or forced to sell its product at less than a just price, those who are thus the cause of the injury are guilty of grave wrong, for they deprive workers of their just wage and force them under the pinch of necessity to accept a wage less than fair.
 
Where does the Church call for a $15 an hour minimum wage?
It SHOULDN’T have to. The Church doesn’t call tell me how much to put into the offering basket or how much of my salary to spend on luxury versus necessities. After providing me an academic and a spiritual education, I would expect that the Church has confidence that I know how to assess those responsibilities and act accordingly.
 
Here is a little more from Pius XI, one could argue that the government is a cause of the lack of a living wage because its regulations could be thought to crush businesses with unjust burdens.
Walmart is being crushed? :confused: It is Walmart we are discussing, no?
 
As I have said before, though, you can’t legally do that in this country. You can’t pay a person more just because he/she has a family. So, do you pay a full family wage to an 18 year old kid who has no dependents, so he can live large?

“Social justice” in wages is not possible in this country in the way the Church sees that.
So is the Church is asking us to do the impossible? Am I reading you correctly? I know several secular issues on which the proponents would be happy to use that argument - in addition to their arguments urging the Church to change its teachings to get in line with modern realities…
 
In 2013 alone the Wal mart foundation have over a BILLION dollars to charity
What’s a spare billion or so for the people on whose sweat you thrive…? If there is to be no limit to profit-making, why should there be a limit to charity?
 
Walmart is being crushed? :confused: It is Walmart we are discussing, no?
Not since the topic went to the minimum wage - way back on page one. Unless you are proposing that the concept of raising the minimum wage to assure that employees are earning a just/living/fair wage would only apply to Walmart and other large corporations that people like to bash?

Do you really think that a minimum wage of $15 or $18 an hour would* not *crush small businesses?
 
Why is it that everyone is okay with the government setting wage controls but not price controls? Why doesn’t the government just legislate that gas costs $1.00 a gallon, meat costs $1.00 a pound, milk costs $1.00 a gallon, etc.? That would solve everyone’s problem wouldn’t it?

There is no difference between wage controls and price controls economically. They are both bad for the economy.
They already do that, to a certain extent. Government subsidies for agriculture do tend to control prices for many food products - it’s why corn is cheap and hence, why high fructose corn syrup replaced sugar in many products. You can go round and round debating the economics and ethics of that as well, but it would drag us far afield of the whole living wage conundrum.

We seem to be going in the same circle here, with some wanting to raise wages, and others pointing out it will raise prices. And it will. I try to shop at stores which treat its employees better and buy products from companies that do the same - and yes, it costs more money. It’s a personal calculus. If you truly wish to implement change, put your money where your mouth is and don’t shop at Walmart. Advocating for change while still purchasing from the company you’re trying to change solves nothing. Money talks. Companies will adapt if consumers make it clear with their purchases that certain behavior will not induce them to spend.

I do the same thing with meat. I have a big problem with the factory farming system in America. So I buy local, from a farmer where I know that the animals were treated well and fed properly, without tons of antibiotics dumped into their feed. Yes, meat is far more expensive, so I buy less of it, or cheaper cuts, and return to peasant style cooking. I eat a lot more lentils and beans to take the place of meat. It’s the only way things will change. It’s the same concept - factory farms will not change if you keep buying their product. Take away the money stream and they become far more receptive to courting consumers again.
 
So is the Church is asking us to do the impossible? Am I reading you correctly? I know several secular issues on which the proponents would be happy to use that argument - in addition to their arguments urging the Church to change its teachings to get in line with modern realities…
No one is suggesting changing Church teaching. Pius XI wrote during the start of the industrial revolution when child labor and sweat shops were the reality of the day. Having a minimum wage at all fulfills much of what he called for. Having government safety nets funded primarily by employers fulfills more. The question is whether you can take teaching given as a response to exploited workers and interpret it to mean that employers owe their employees a comfortable lifestyle.

Pius XI would have supported paying heads of household more than single workers but he probably would not have had any problem paying men more than women either. There are other principles, Catholic principles, that must be considered as well. Not only must an employer pay a fair wage, **he must pay it fairly **- not pay men more or married people more or single parents more than married parents. Not only must a government enforce a minimum wage, it must do so in a manner that allows businesses to continue to grow.
 
Can you cite some court cases that have established that? I don’t see family size as a prohibited discrimination factor in EEOC laws. Also, there is no requirement that an employer pay two people doing the same job the same money. In academia, once you are tenured the only way to get a big raise is to get an outside offer, so those that find outside offers tend to make more than those who don’t.
Don’t have time right now to look up cases, but here are some very quick findings.

eeoc.gov/federal/otherprotections.cfm

eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html

I did not say there was a requirement that “an employer pay two people doing the same job the same money”. What there is, however, is a prohibition against paying one person less than another BECAUSE of one of the prohibited bases. Marital and family status are among those bases. You’re not punished for paying one person MORE, you’re punished for paying the other person LESS.
 
So is the Church is asking us to do the impossible? Am I reading you correctly? I know several secular issues on which the proponents would be happy to use that argument - in addition to their arguments urging the Church to change its teachings to get in line with modern realities…
The Church speaks to the whole world, not just to the U.S. Not every country in the world is as fixated on “civil rights” as is this country, creating them incessantly it seems.
 
Don’t have time right now to look up cases, but here are some very quick findings.

eeoc.gov/federal/otherprotections.cfm

eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html

I did not say there was a requirement that “an employer pay two people doing the same job the same money”. What there is, however, is a prohibition against paying one person less than another BECAUSE of one of the prohibited bases. Marital and family status are among those bases. You’re not punished for paying one person MORE, you’re punished for paying the other person LESS.
I forgot about the marital status issue, although one can wonder whether one could base a salary on the number of kids independent of marital status. That would be a legal research quagmire though, so we can leave it at a wonder.
 
Not since the topic went to the minimum wage - way back on page one. Unless you are proposing that the concept of raising the minimum wage to assure that employees are earning a just/living/fair wage would only apply to Walmart and other large corporations that people like to bash?

Do you really think that a minimum wage of $15 or $18 an hour would* not *crush small businesses?
This is not about bashing anybody, this is about what we believe as Catholics. There is such a thing as a just wage and no, I don’t think it would crush small businesses. In fact, I know small businesses which pay that or more and they have good employee retention, loyalty, productivity…you get the picture.

In discussion of the ‘living wage’ the word I never see discussed is PROFIT. It’s like business owners only operate to pay wages and taxes…:rolleyes:
 
Do you really not understand this or are you just tweaking?

If an entry level employee makes minimum wage - $7.25 and a first level supervisor makes around $10/hour, what happens if minimum wage goes to $15? Would the supervisors be happy with making the same as the employees they supervise? No. The entire scale would shift up. Those formerly making $10 would be making $18, those formerly making $20 would be making $28, etc. Not only would employees demand it but management would need it. You don’t get employees to take on more work and more responsibility without paying more.
As I mentioned earlier, I am a corporate rep for a large gas station/convenience store chain, the low level cashiers are hired in at $7.25 and I dont know how often they get raises, or if they even get raises. I was hired as a rep so I did not start out at the lowest level, I make a little bit more than $15. hr(but not much more), overall, I am content and happy with my job/income, sure I would like more money, but I get by OK with the money I earn now.

The cashiers have alot of responsibilities, they are required to work very hard, constantly be doing something, if they cant find anything to do, they are expected to pick up a broom and sweep, but my job is different, and really as long as I meet the deadlines imposed on me and get all my duties done correctly, my boss does not care what I do.

Furthermore, if the low level cashiers were suddenly given raises to $10. hour or other living wage type increase, I would not feel I have the right to suddenly ask for more money, nor would I ask. I know plenty of them that deserve it, many are young single mothers, and many are working 2 jobs just to make enough to live on. I dont think this is right, they contribute to the company each day (probably more so than I do) and deserve to be paid more than what the state says the lowest possible wage the company can pay them.

I personally think its wrong for these large companies to hire everyone in at the same pay rate, no matter what their skills, that company is basically saying every single person we hire is the same. Every person is different, some are harder workers than others, some like to stand around, some do more than required, I dont see how a company can justify paying every single person the same exact amount, I would think their pay would be determined on the interview and what kind of the person is, what their references have said about them, past employer references speak volumes about what a person is like, yet most large companies dont even contact references for low level new hires…???

These large companies have huge profit margins, so an increase in minimum wages should not effect retail prices, it may cut into the profits, but these are the people helping to bring in those consistent profit margins, so they really should be anxious to pay these people more, without them, they would not have those huge profits.

I may not have the right answer, but something definitely needs to change, no one can live ANYWHERE making $7.25 hour and no one should expect them to. If they hire someone at this rate, they should expect to receive that level of work ultimately.
 
Walmart is being crushed? :confused: It is Walmart we are discussing, no?
Walmart is not being crushed, but it is a reasonable speculation that its best days are behind them. Over the past ten years, an investment in the market as a whole did better than an investment in Walmart. It is pretty easy to see why that is the case. Walmart is run by people who are working for a paycheck, not by people who have an emotional stake in it beyond their salary and benefits. They have also picked most of the low hanging fruit.
 
How long does it take to learn to be a fry cook?
About a week. I did it for ten years in my late teens early twenties at Red Lobster. It’s not rocket science. Its hot and greasy but you can teach anybody to do it within a week.
 
The Church speaks to the whole world, not just to the U.S. Not every country in the world is as fixated on “civil rights” as is this country, creating them incessantly it seems.
Who is “creating civil rights”? The “just wage” concept is Catholic teaching. And yes, it was created for the whole world. I don’t know a single place where people don’t demand a fair wage except in places where they are precluded from doing so. And besides, ignorance of one’s right does not nullify said right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top