Wal-Mart to use Scheduling-Optimization

[Drolefille]

Walmart only "decimates" a town because people shop there. If a city really wanted to keep them away they'd simply boycott and not give in to the lure of lower prices.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Walmart only "decimates" a town because people shop there. If a city really wanted to keep them away they'd simply boycott and not give in to the lure of lower prices.

I said the same thing when Walmart came to my town, but then again I didn't have to feed a family on near poverty wages. For them, the price is everything. The sick thing is, Walmart reduces prices, drives everything out of business, and then puts their prices back up. People are finally getting wise to it, but it's taken a long time.

And Kevin - college degrees, plumbers' school, electricians' school (even if you do internships) COST MONEY. Which many of Walmart's employees simply DO NOT HAVE.

Don't misunderstand - from a MONETARY point of view, I completely understand why they're doing this. My best friend is a retail manager and this is the kind of stuff that keeps her up at nights - did we go over budget? did we make plan? Is my job on the line because we didn't have enough sales to match our hours? It is the right MONETARY decision. But for a company that's taken so many PR black eyes lately and keeps saying that they care about their employees, it's a really stupid, not to mention uncaring thing to do.

[valkyrie]

Originally Posted by 33girl

And Kevin - college degrees, plumbers' school, electricians' school (even if you do internships) COST MONEY. Which many of Walmart's employees simply DO NOT HAVE.

Well, that's their fault! If they were born into poverty and never got an education and don't know how to succeed and make money, it's their fault!

(LOL that's not my argument, but I'm guessing it's what Kevin would say.)

[amanda6035]

Originally Posted by valkyrie

Well, that's their fault! If they were born into poverty and never got an education and don't know how to succeed and make money, it's their fault!

Wow, I'm assuming that's supposed to be sarcastic, but it's a statement I agree with dead on. But I wont get into all that because I'll derail the thread...

on a different note - I HATE shopping at walmart - simply because of the check out process. The lines are always too long, the cashiers are short tempered (cant blame them, I've worked retail before and I HATED it) and the deaf,dumb and stupid people with a cart full of items thinks it's *cute* to go through the self serve lines, while someone like me, who goes to walmart for the simple convenience of location, for 1 or 2 things, has to wait 15 or 20 minutes in line.

Believe me - if it's not a matter of distance and convenience, I'll bypass walmart and go to Target. I NEVER have to wait in a long line at Target.

[valkyrie]

Originally Posted by amanda6035

and the deaf,dumb and stupid people with a cart full of items thinks it's *cute* to go through the self serve lines

Wait, it's cool to make fun of deaf people now? I'm sure they're sorry that their disability makes you feel like you have to spend more time standing in line at the store, although I don't think it follows that a deaf person using the self-serve line would take any longer than a non-deaf person using the self-serve line.

[AlphaFrog]

I think you're right, valk. A blind person may take longer, but not a deaf person. I don't think I've seen braille on those machines. Although,they have braille on drive up ATMs - which is a major "go figure" for me.

[amanda6035]

Originally Posted by valkyrie

Wait, it's cool to make fun of deaf people now? I'm sure they're sorry that their disability makes you feel like you have to spend more time standing in line at the store, although I don't think it follows that a deaf person using the self-serve line would take any longer than a non-deaf person using the self-serve line.

Absolutely, when it causes people to take things out of context as you just did. Anybody with half a brain (oh wait, is that offfensive too? My bad...) would realize that I was not talking about "true" deaf people. It's called "a saying"...I was referring to the morons (oops, another something offensive) out there who waste other customers time going through the self checkout, when common sense should intervene and say 'ya know, I really should go to a cashier for this'.

I apologize for using the term "deaf" in conjuction with moron's. I didnt mean it that way. Unfortunately, you took it that way, even though if you had read the context of what my post was actually saying, you shouldn't have. But surely you've seen people at stores who play up the oblivious part and it makes you wonder if they are deaf, when 9 times out of 10, it's not actually a person who has the disability.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by valkyrie

Wait, it's cool to make fun of deaf people now? I'm sure they're sorry that their disability makes you feel like you have to spend more time standing in line at the store, although I don't think it follows that a deaf person using the self-serve line would take any longer than a non-deaf person using the self-serve line.

I'm pretty sure she was referring to people who can't figure out the self serve machines and stand there staring at it when it tells you to put the item in the bag. Not physically deaf and dumb, but people who can't follow directions.

Metaphor

[amanda6035]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

I'm pretty sure she was referring to people who can't figure out the self serve machines and stand there staring at it when it tells you to put the item in the bag. Not physically deaf and dumb, but people who can't follow directions.

Metaphor

Yes. That's exacttly what I meant. Jesus, I'm not so shallow to make fun of someone who suffers from a true disability. Stupidity, though, is NOT a disability. Haha.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by valkyrie

Well, that's their fault! If they were born into poverty and never got an education and don't know how to succeed and make money, it's their fault!

(LOL that's not my argument, but I'm guessing it's what Kevin would say.)

You aren't far off the mark. How hard is it really to learn how to be a welder? How difficult is it to be a plumber? Even trade schools have financial aid, so the money thing isn't the huge problem you make it out to be. It is still a choice to do poorly in school. There are opportunities for people who want to succeed. Can they piss those opportunities away by building up a criminal record or bad credit? Sure. Those are choices as well though.

If they're ineligible for financial aid because they have a history of not paying their bills.... again, whose fault is that? Wal-Mart's?

Being born into poverty does not preclude one from getting an education. Is that really what you think? It is merely an obstacle that must be overcome in order to succeed.

[amanda6035]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Being born into poverty does not preclude one from getting an education. Is that really what you think? It is merely an obstacle that must be overcome in order to succeed.

Thank you. Exactly my point.

[valkyrie]

I think the reality is probably somewhere between your idea and my idea -- I don't think being born into poverty precludes anyone from getting an education, but I know that being born into poverty creates hardship the likes of which I've never experienced in my relatively privileged life, and there is no way I can understand the struggles faced by people born into poverty/drug addiction/whatever other crappy circumstances people face.

I have a hard time with your statement that it's a "choice" to do poorly in school. I'm willing to agree with that to a certain extent, but not in terms of people who do poorly in school from early childhood -- a child under the age of say, 15 or 16, is not old enough to be independently responsible for his or her behavior to that extent.

Long story short, I don't think you or I are qualified to speak to how hard or easy it is for someone born into poverty to get an education and achieve some measure of financial success in life.

Originally Posted by Kevin

You aren't far off the mark. How hard is it really to learn how to be a welder? How difficult is it to be a plumber? Even trade schools have financial aid, so the money thing isn't the huge problem you make it out to be. It is still a choice to do poorly in school. There are opportunities for people who want to succeed. Can they piss those opportunities away by building up a criminal record or bad credit? Sure. Those are choices as well though.

If they're ineligible for financial aid because they have a history of not paying their bills.... again, whose fault is that? Wal-Mart's?

Being born into poverty does not preclude one from getting an education. Is that really what you think? It is merely an obstacle that must be overcome in order to succeed.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by valkyrie

a child under the age of say, 15 or 16, is not old enough to be independently responsible for his or her behavior to that extent.

As the father of two children under 10, one of whom has ADHD and Asperger's, I would disagree. Many children may have challenges that make it hard for them to "choose" to do well in school, but it has actually been pretty clear to us and to our son's teachers when he is struggling because of his own challenges and when he is choosing not to do well. He may not understand the long-term consequences of such choices, which is why we explain those long-term consequences while imposing short term consequences. It's still his choice to be independently responsible or not.

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

As the father of two children under 10, one of whom has ADHD and Asperger's, I would disagree. Many children may have challenges that make it hard for them to "choose" to do well in school, but it has actually been pretty clear to us and to our son's teachers when he is struggling because of his own challenges and when he is choosing not to do well. He may not understand the long-term consequences of such choices, which is why we explain those long-term consequences while imposing short term consequences. It's still his choice to be independently responsible or not.

I think that's valkyrie's point though. Many children (especially those born into poverty) have parents who either don't care enough or themselves don't understand the affect doing poorly in school has on their life to impose short-term consequences and explain the long-term. Darn you responsible parents for actually caring enough about your children to MAKE them make something of themselves. Unfortunately, not everyone has that luxury.

[valkyrie]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

As the father of two children under 10, one of whom has ADHD and Asperger's, I would disagree. Many children may have challenges that make it hard for them to "choose" to do well in school, but it has actually been pretty clear to us and to our son's teachers when he is struggling because of his own challenges and when he is choosing not to do well. He may not understand the long-term consequences of such choices, which is why we explain those long-term consequences while imposing short term consequences. It's still his choice to be independently responsible or not.

Even though your kid has obstacles (ADHD and Asperger's) he clearly has good teachers and parents. What about the kid who has ADHD and Asperger's and attends (rarely, nobody cares if he goes) an overcrowded class in a crappy school where teachers don't even notice he's struggling and his mom is a crackhead who has never explained anything to him and rarely provides enough food for him to eat? To argue that this kid is responsible for his decision to do poorly in school implies that he should have some type of built-in adult ability to figure out for himself the consequences of his behavior without an adult to help him learn these things. I think that is unreasonable.