I work for Walmart. Many of you may have already heard the news, but for those of you who haven’t…
Walmart made an announcement the other day that because of changes to tax laws and reduction of regulations, they have decided to pass along some of the windfall to the employees. So they have raised their minimum wage from $9/hour (intro rate jumps to $10/hr when you pass the trial period) to $11/hour. They also have a one-time bonus for employees based on length of service, from $200 up to $1000 for employees of 20 years or more.
Yep, I just got trickled on. Crap, now I have to thank Trump.
I think it’s more likely that an increasingly tight labor market is causing wages to finally grow in accordance with economic activity. We saw this sort of thing last in the 1990s when unemployment ducked below 4.3 and wages sure spiked there.
The fact is, to compete, WMT must raise wages or lose workers - talented, regular or low-skilled - to better paying jobs with either competitors or out of the retail sector completely.
To take a contrary view, I wonder if the labor market tightening would not have produced close to the same result this year. Many companies have been raising starting salaries.
It’s definitely working. Polls show that the BHQ (Billionaires’ Happiness Quotient) is up 10 points!
I’m glad the OP is seeing his prospects improved, but tying any one act by a company to a given government policy is problematic (unless we are talking about a specific regulation that can be traced to actions taken in response).
Of course the GOP could’ve just passed a tax law offering incentives for companies that agreed to raise their wages instead. That would have been far more efficient.
Or mandated a new minimum wage. That would’ve been 100x more effective too.
$1000 for working 20 years? At Wal Mart? Pull the other one…
This reminds me of the time I got a check for around $350 as a result of GWB’s tax policy. I interpreted it as a thinly veiled attempt to get me to ignore the ongoing systemic problems his administration had no intention at all of addressing.
I’d rather have had my taxes spent on fixing the healthcare system, schools and infrastructure. And I say that as a person with decent health insurance and no children.
Perhaps most pertinently, the labor market is, in truth, the ONLY obvious explanation for this.
It would be insane for Walmart to give employees a pay raise for no market-related reason. It isn’t their job to share a tax windfall with the employees, and makes no obvious sense as a business move.
On the other hand, it makes perfect sense if you’re struggling with maintaining staffing levels. The work has to get done.
It does make sense to raise pay for market related reasons and time it to boost the perception that this is trickle down working. The Waltons made out like bandits on the new tax law, they’d really like it if we didn’t vote the people into office who will take it away in favor of actual long term benefit to the middle class - so this is a savvy PR move.
The raises and the bonuses are not going to do much for all the workers laid off.
Businesses give raises when they have to give out raises to maintain their staff. They do not give out raises because they have extra money laying around.
The low unemployment in the labor market is really to thank for the raise and bonus, and for that, you can thank the longest growth cycle in history, which was initiated and presided over by the Obama administration.
That this tax cut will inject money into the economy is not in question. The question on the tax cut is whether it is an effective use of resources. The tax savings largely go to those who do not spend their extra marginal money in the economy, they are costing our country quite a bit of debt, and it is questionable if we need to “stimulate” the economy, when it is already at historic highs.
Back during the financial crises of 2008, republicans were aghast at the idea of adding onto the debt in order to promote a stimulus package that was desperately needed. The economy was in the worst position it had been since the great recession.
Now that they are in charge though, they think that deficit spending for stimulating and already healthy economy is a great idea.
The idea is to go into debt during down times, to prop up the economy, then raise taxes when the economy is doing well, not just to pay back what was borrowed, but also for the specific purpose of slowing the economy from growing too fast.
Yeah, there’s no reason for Wal-Mart to actually do this in response to the new tax law. But there’s plenty of reason for them to say they’re doing it in response to the new tax law.
There’s always disagreement over when a new administration can take responsibility for what happens in the country; was 9/11 due to a lapse by Clinton or Bush, that sort of thing.
So, for those who are claiming that the current economy is due to Trump I want to ask:
Are you ready to accept responsibility for the economy; will you give credit or blame for the economy to Trump and the Republicans from this point forward?
In 2008, the economy was down, and going further down. The Obama administration changed fiscal policies to try to help, and it seemed to have worked. The economy managed to rebound and start to pick up again.
In 2016, the economy had been chuggin along relatively happily for quite a bit. Trump and the republicans win, and they really haven’t touched any fiscal policy since. The tax bill was the first thing that they changed about the way the economy was running.
I feel fairly confident in saying that the things that happened due to the fiscal policies of the previous administration are the responsibility of the previous administration, but once they have taken the reigns and started making big changes, then they own the economy.
Not to sidetrack, but Osama did grow up under Clinton’s watch, but they were keeping an eye on him. Bush may not have been responsible for Osama, but he is responsible for not taking the threat seriously.
Not one of those, but I will put the responsibility of the economy from more or less this time forward on Trump and the republicans. They did inherit a pretty healthy economy, so they have no excuses if their ideas don’t work out.
The bubble didn’t burst yet because Trump installed another inflator at the Fed. So hail Trump,I guess, for now.
I also suppose now that the Republicans have passed the most meager of tax cuts, this will be used to explain the inevitable downturn that will take place in the next year or two.
It’s all about timing. If left to their own schedule, owners would drag out raising wages until the bitter end. I don’t fault them. They have stockholders to answer to. Their job retention comes before employee consideration.
That Target had already raised wages to $11 might have something to do with it. And the increased minimum wage. And that the announcement might have been trying to deflect attention away from their massive Sam’s Club layoff.
I thin Wally’s World might have finally woken up to the indisputable fact that if you pay people crap wages in a good economy, they will do crap work for you.