I thought you might pedantically say that. But I also knew that I could, equally pedantically, point out that I didn’t say I was disagreeing with you.
Don’t apologize – I thought it was a work of art.
Why is North Korea expected to pay for Wal-Mart employees’ uniforms? 
Holds lighter up and whistles loudly at the wonderful WalMart pitting.
Yeah, that one got me too…its not like those folks can afford to shop at WalMart, much less buy clothes.
I will attribute my inability to recognize sarcasm to the fact that it was 5:30 in the morning, and I hadn’t yet finished my first cup of coffee. Good one septimus!
Not lost, but in the WalMart storage area. Not brought out for the customers since the stockers are too hungry to move very fast, are ashamed to be mistaken for WalMart customers, and don’t want to be seen in their outdated uniforms.
I bet they have a backup plan to move manufacturing to North Korea as Bangladesh gets too expensive and the workers start wanting frills like fire exits.
If the employees were really that upset, they’d get second jobs and go to school full-time with a major in Being A Productive Member of Society and become billionaires themselves, the way all the greatest Americans have. They’re called bootstraps, people! Learn to use them.
What did the Pink Panther say to Skald the Rhymer? “Pedant. Pedant. Pedant, pedant, pedant!”
You mean find somebody stupid enough to buy them?
There is no excuse, however, for their egregious cake decorating/writing skills:
Like Jesus said, “Fuck the poor. If they weren’t so lazy, they’d be rich like me.”
Great!! Can I put it on my SNAP card?
Poorly.
After reading the Op-* yes*, apparently it is.
I think we should pit the Walcreatures who inhabit the Walmarts.
I will be the judge of that, thank you.
And should you Pit them out of existence, where should I then go for my quick Superiority fix?
Church.
An “associate” here, gonna bitch about my current predicament, rather than join the discussion of the modest proposal.
So, the dress code the last few years has been okay. Blue shirt, brown pants (for most day associates), jeans or shorts for associates in more strenuous positions (stocker, unloader, cart gatherer, etc.). It sucked that I could do an entire load of laundry that was just blue shirts, but hey. It was affordable, and got built up/replaced as needed. The new dress code gets more strict with personal clothing (shirts must have collars, no shorts or jeans in any position, then toss on a branded vest). Seemingly not a big deal.
But from my perspective (and that of fellow employees), some of the reasoning being used by the company is suspect. The big premise is that associate identification will be increased by wearing collared white or blue shirts, rather than a blue shirt and a badge; Oh, guy in blue/white collared shirt must work here! But then there’s a vest on top. The vest is garish, corporately-logoed and corporately-colored, and worn atop the required clothing. When WM previously used vests, the dress beneath the vests was unrestricted (outside of propriety); the vest was the ID that we were an associate. Why the need for a specific type of shirt now that (1) it will be covered and (2) the identification so desired will be fulfilled by the vest? Most of the associates have invested over their careers in shirts fitting the corporate color code and will suddenly need to purchase more shirts (5 at $12 apiece in-store, if they’re available, is $60 out-of-pocket from a usually underpaid worker), simply so feeble-minded folks won’t get confused that the dude wearing a Walmart vest and name badge might not be a real employee because there’s no collar peeking above. I got to go shopping last weekend with a coworker, since the dress code guaranteed that collared shirts were sold out at our own workplace. We’re full-time and need at least 5 shirts and such to last a week, can’t hit the laundromat every single week, so we spent a few hundred bucks apiece on pants and shirts. We’re lucky, making a pretty premium wage for the store, but it still sucked. I have no idea how the guys making $7.50 an hour can afford a new wardrobe, or to do laundry every few days to keep their precious few work-appropriate garments wearable.
Oh, but WM was helpful a bit; they shipped extra outfit-friendly pieces to each store, marked with a “Walmart spark” in the collar tag so we knew were legal, then told those of us who got paltry quarterly profit/earnings bonuses that we had no excuse in being non-compliant, as we had bonuses that were obviously unneeded elsewhere (those of us who hoped to pay debts off or car insurance or something were just silly). $12 shirts, $20 pants (plus more expensive options). The most basic, ugly option to work a single week was $160… oh, sorry, $144 after discount, but before tax. Oh, but they sold out anyway, associates are having to go to other chains and spend more for some compliant polos. And then during daily meetings, managers expressed surprise that sales had jumped in clothing departments, as if forcing 400+ in-house customers to suddenly buy a bunch of shit wouldn’t temporarily increase sales.
As well, the restriction on strenuous-activity workers seems wrong. These are guys unloading uncooled trailers overheated by the sun (>100 degrees), hauling bags of mulch, pushing carts in while the sun beats down, or stocking in stores that go over 90 at night when air conditioning gets shut off for economy. They get to wear dress pants now, or if their managers are lenient, chinos or khakis. And a collared shirt, with an additional cloth layer o’ vest over it. And if they’re running powered equipment or in the parking lot, a fluorescent safety vest over the work vest over the shirt. At my store, we already have to give safety breaks to a number of areas because of the heat and distribute bottled water; guys in t-shirts and shorts have to be nursed along in some of these conditions. Now these associates get to spend more money, wear more layers, and be less productive. Progress!
And, at the end… what to do with a closet full of blue t-shirts? Ugh.