Wal-Mart to use Scheduling-Optimization

[33girl]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

This is completely irrelevant to the argument.

Saying they'll schedule more people on Friday nights than Monday afternoons is not the same as saying "you're f-ed for childcare" and I'm not sure why we're taking it to that extent.

Because the use of this type of scheduling makes it hard if not impossible for people whose FULL TIME job is Walmart to 1) budget or 2) schedule ahead of time. I don't use childcare, but I'm guessing they wouldn't be too jazzed if I kept calling and saying "I'll know 2 hours ahead of time but no earlier if I'm bringing little Connor in, oh, and by the way, I might have to work late, so can I maybe leave him there till 8 PM?"

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by 33girl

I'm sorry, but "Walmart didn't hurt us, we have 2 of them and lots of Krogers!" is in the top 5 of really silly statements I've heard where Walmart is concerned.

I'd still put charges that Wal-Marts decimates towns and basically eliminates any other retail outlet as number one on that list.

Originally Posted by 33girl

Because the use of this type of scheduling makes it hard if not impossible for people whose FULL TIME job is Walmart to 1) budget or 2) schedule ahead of time. I don't use childcare, but I'm guessing they wouldn't be too jazzed if I kept calling and saying "I'll know 2 hours ahead of time but no earlier if I'm bringing little Connor in, oh, and by the way, I might have to work late, so can I maybe leave him there till 8 PM?"

You're assuming, without much evidence as far as I can see, that's how it would work. Heather17, who actually has worked under a system like Wal-Mart is implementing, described it quite differently.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Because the use of this type of scheduling makes it hard if not impossible for people whose FULL TIME job is Walmart to 1) budget or 2) schedule ahead of time. I don't use childcare, but I'm guessing they wouldn't be too jazzed if I kept calling and saying "I'll know 2 hours ahead of time but no earlier if I'm bringing little Connor in, oh, and by the way, I might have to work late, so can I maybe leave him there till 8 PM?"

They get 2 hours notice? Where did you read that?

I'm guessing they have at least a 1 week notice. I'm vaguely familiar with a similar piece of software called "PeopleSoft." I've heard few complaints from teh folks working under that schedule. I imagine that the software does allow for some employees to have priority as to their schedule remaining the same (e.g., students who have to go to classes).

That this affects all employees in the same way is arguing the facts without having access to the facts.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Because the use of this type of scheduling makes it hard if not impossible for people whose FULL TIME job is Walmart to 1) budget or 2) schedule ahead of time. I don't use childcare, but I'm guessing they wouldn't be too jazzed if I kept calling and saying "I'll know 2 hours ahead of time but no earlier if I'm bringing little Connor in, oh, and by the way, I might have to work late, so can I maybe leave him there till 8 PM?"

First off, the article notes that 'some' employees 'may' be subject to an on-call arrangement, so we're really, really stretching to assume this will be the case for even most employees, or even a significant number of shifts.

Second, almost every other store in the advanced world, including most grocery stores, already uses a similar process - having a 'guaranteed', strict 40 hours per week is TERRIBLE for business purposes. Unskilled labor often requires you to work hours suited to people shopping after work, over lunch or stocking before the business day - getting pissed about this seems odd.

Now, to argue with the above points, you're really digging for a reason to be pissed - this type of flexible child-care arrangement is not only eminently possible, but if it doesn't exist already it will probably spring up to meet the needs if there is demand . . . you know, market and all that. Wal-Mart is not holding anybody hostage, as far as I know, and if a profitable decision for the company is ruinous for employees, the employees have a right to strike, to seek other employment, etc etc etc.

These things do NOT require money, nor education, nor anything related.

It is QUITE a stretch to claim that being scheduled two days, two evenings and one 'flex' period on Friday makes it 'impossible' to find child care or to adequately budget.

Will it require the employees to change their current lives? Quite possibly - but again, there are other no-collar options, and demand will always create supply for the subsidiary elements you've focused on (even if I consider them somewhat superfluous) if these changes are dire or even drastic, and adapting to these will make the company more profitable, which benefits shareholders, creates jobs and all of that good stuff. Is it a 'poor tax'? Possibly, but again, we can all stop shopping there and stop the whole thing. See how circular this becomes?

Originally Posted by 33girl

When it's been proven over and over again that they don't give a shit about anything but profit, why on earth should I think otherwise?

Finally, and I hate to break it to this level, but what on Earth don't you understand about the fact that a.) a company is responsible (to shareholders and employees alike) for turning a profit and b.) its employees are out much more than a few hours a week if the company does not turn a profit?

Wal-Mart is profit-oriented? Do you own mutual funds or a 401(k)? I mean, come on . . .