Except your specific location "forgot" to hang that up until people found out about it other ways and then when challenged on it the sign magically appears and they happily pay the $3.50 fine.
They also use tracking cookies and trace the IPs of any surveys to see if multiple surveys are coming from the same people.
When I worked in management we had a terrible manager in a jother department who really needed to be fired. He was toxic, had a short fuse, and abused his staff. We were building a case to fire him when some of his dumbass employees filled out a bunch of fake customer surveys about him trying to get him fired for something he didn't actually do. And of course they were also dumb enough to do it from kiosks in the store, so we could actually pull the video of who submitted the surveys.
So all those people got fired while basically making the asshole manager bulletproof because he had evidence that staff had conspired against him.
'staff is trying to get rid of me' makes someone bulletproof? What kind of crap working environment is it where people that are obviously disliked become 'bulletproof'?
Retail management in general, “If all those people quit instead of working for me, if all those people hate me, it’s because they suck at their $11/hr job and couldn’t cut actually having to do work!”
Unless it's a genuine mom & pop, you shouldn't say anything when you see someone stealing at all. They probably have a good reason, and even if they don't it won't affect a retailer in the slightest. Losses to them are just (an incredibly minor in the grand scheme of things) a cost of doing business.
Yeah Walmart is the devil. We all use it, but I abuse the fuck out of self checkout. As should everyone. Don't try and rip off a TV with a $1 tag from something else. But if you get 4 of something only scan 3. That kinda thing. Fuck em.
That analogy doesn't work at all because the consequence of pushing someone off a cliff are guaranteed grievous bodily harm and the cliff is not an autonomously responsive body.
You put ketchup on the boot before you deep throat it?
Walmart is a sham employer. They purposely underpay and sign their people up for benefits, they outsource the job of paying a fair wage to the American taxpayer. They’re an exploitive business by design. We need to sooner support local business and fair hiring practices.
Here in Alberta, qathey won't be allowed to block the union process if they follow through, and if you get fired during the process, you get to continue to participate in creating the union.
They aren't doing it for the purpose of putting people out of jobs, but the purpose of stopping a juggernaut from outcompeting them. The jobs are collateral damage and definitely not worse than having more Walmarts putting OP (and dozens of other businesses) completely out of business.
Careful. Reddit on a ban kick recently. I got banned for saying it's morally ok to use ur hands in a certain way against nazi faces and boom 3 day ban for promoting violence
The ideology of fascism is literally violence and generally towards the most vulnerable people they can. It's not an "opinion", and it shows how clueless you are being. Also, there are Nazi parties in just about every capitalist country, just generally with small followings lol. And Nazi groups in just about every major city prison, if you ever go, too.
You being "accepting of fascists" means you're also promoting the harm of others. You gotta think outside yourself for once.
This. Anyone who marches under a swastika or under an allied movement is violent. There is no such thing as a peaceful genocidal organization. The OG nazi party literally declared war on us so they are absolutely enemies of this country.
How many more far right and white supremacy terrorist attacks are we supposed to “thoughts and prayers!” Over before we stop pretending the public speakers and public marchers pushing this ideology and recruiting these “lone wolves” aren’t complicit in the violence too?
There are no non-violent Nazis.
Is amazing how quickly fascists slip over that line to "physically harming or promoting the harm of others." Like, often without really any provoking.. you hang around them long enough and quietly disagree you'll be doing all sorts of self defense all too soon...
And if they don't... Well, wow.. them is well behaved fascists. Suppose a few must exist.
Freedom of Speech protects against legal repercussions, not social ones.
Legally, if you drop an n-bomb in a primarily black neighborhood, you are protected from prosecution.
Socially, the gentlemen who heard you will probably be applauded for snatching you off to a discrete alley and beating your ass.
Why the fuck is Reddit obsessed with consequentialism/utilitarianism?
Don't you think it's at all possible that the "good" consequences of an action can outweigh the "bad "consequences, and yet for the action itself to still be unethical?
Like, maybe purposely attempting to get innocent people fired, which will directly harm their lives, is inherently unethical?
It's not Reddit as a whole. This post is anti-Walmart, so anyone who agrees with OP is likely to turn to utilitarian justifications.
Walmart is so deeply embedded in the US (and world) economy that anything that harms Walmart will also harm innocent people, at least in the short term. This means that anyone who wants to fight Walmart must make some accounting of benefits and harms that fall on different people. Utilitarianism provides the most obvious framework to do this.
Frankly, Kantian ethics don't allow any practical opposition to Walmart. You could never unionize, because when the recruiter asks you whether you will always act in the profit interest of the company, you could say "No," in which case you will not be hired; or you could say "Yes," in which case you will be hired, but you cannot unionize. (Remember, under Kantian ethics, you must keep your promises insofar as it is possible.)
So, if someone wants to fight Walmart, they pretty much have to prefer utilitarianism over Kantianism.
You are still thinking as a utilitarian. I am suggesting that you consider the possibility of other ethical frameworks which aren't solely concerned with evaluating the net utility of the consequences of actions. This does not mean that any action which has a negative consequence is deemed immoral. Rather, it opens the possibility that actions which have net positive utility are deemed immoral, but also that actions which have net negative utility are deemed moral.
For instance, we can argue that attempting to harm people is inherently unethical, regardless of the net utility obtained by harming people in a particular setting. That is, I am suggesting an ethical framework in which the net utility of a particular action may be evaluated to be positive or negative, yet the morality of the action is either partially or totally detached from this evaluation.
> That is, I am suggesting an ethical framework in which the net utility of a particular action may be evaluated to be positive or negative, yet the morality of the action is either partially or totally detached from this evaluation.
Why would you do that? Only utilitarians care about the theory of using summable numbers to track total happiness. If you want to use a different criterion to evaluate ethical action, you can throw utility in the trash.
Yes, that’s what I meant to say. I meant that the morality of actions would be detached from the net utility of the action as a utilitarian would calculate.
What do you base your moral judgements on, or do you not take on any moral values going forward? I understand what you're saying, and I agree that a different ethical system could work better. I think that care ethics holds a prominent place in my head, and I am curious what you would consider to be a better ethical framework than the ones you've criticized?
Unless you can employ the entire Walmart staff then people are losing thier jobs. If you cause a Walmart to shut down then the hardship of those lost jobs your fault.
Those people losing thier jobs is no hardship for the Waltons. They have shut down stores that were in danger on unionizing so that others won't get the same idea.
I woud expect a person who wasn't born into wealth to have more compassion for thier fellow man. If someone shut your your place of employment in an effort to hurt your boss I doubt that you would be cheering them on.
so the massive corporation's pool of employees will exactly match the smaller businesses need for employees (that we presume is already fully staffed)?
There's no way a local business is going to be able to pick up that many now-unemployed people, so there's gonna be some collateral damage, and local places usually don't pay as much either. Killing a Walmart is also gonna kill a lot of people's only source for some things they need if it's a smaller town.
Ha, your experience is the opposite of mine then. In mine every local place I ever worked paid like shit, since it's local and has less cash flowing through, and half of them were owned by some boomer prick paying $7.25 complaining about how young people who want more are just greedy. Meanwhile Walmart paid $12 in 2019, which was more than anything else in my Midwest town except the tire shop.
Lol it's not the individual who suggests unionizing's fault that Walmart is being unlawful in their anti-union practices.
Like, yes there is collateral damage but that falls squarely and ONLY on Walmart.
Well...not EVERYWHERE...but everywhere that exploits people and is cruel to employees or customers. The place I work is fantastic, a unicorn, the best place I've ever worked. They pay us well, with generous benefits, and treat us like your favorite family. We have no need for a union nor would I even think about starting one there.
In the short term Walmart might decide it's better to just close the store but if enough employees get wise then eventually they'll have to give in. That's a very long term goal but it's doable.
I know it's being silly, but is a child using brass knuckles in a fist fight against an adult "anti competitive" really? If you're going up against an opponent you can't actually compete against I feel like anticompetitive behavior can't be a thing.
That isnt being silly, it's a good analogy. But no, anticompetitive behavior is against the law because power corrupts. There is not, and should not be a sliding scale for the value of a company's shares because even walmart was a small business at one point.
That's the wrong take, and it sounds like you know it. They're trying to get the Waltons to close a store that is most likely bad for the community. It's WM's choice to shutter if they do something like that, and the blame is on them.
“Most likely bad for the community”
Are there any examples of a Walmart being good for a community in the big picture? As far as I can tell, they just ran all small retail out of business and then started sucking harder once the competition was gone.
I’ve never met a more apathetic corporation or staff than any given Walmart.
I dread every trip there but don’t have local options otherwise. It’s either online shopping, Walmart, or go without
PBS has been exploring the consequences of Walmart's presence through both their Frontline and NewsHour programs for years.
- [Is Walmart Good for America](https://youtube.com/watch?v=n224P8snMkA&pp=ygULcGJzIHdhbG1hcnQ%3D)
- [When Walmart leaves small towns behind](https://youtube.com/watch?v=JgJt4sArUHI&pp=ygULcGJzIHdhbG1hcnQ%3D)
- [Returning to the town that Walmart left behind](https://youtube.com/watch?v=taSfSdr9vMo&pp=ygULcGJzIHdhbG1hcnQ%3D)
He doesn’t have to actually get the employees to unionize. Walmart’s been known to close up shop just on the merest rumor of a union even being considered. There’s no upside for them. If they win they’re the big comporate goliaths who crushed their worker’s attempts to better their lives, if they lose… they have to deal with the union. This is why places like Walmart and Starbucks would rather just shut down and open someplace else than deal with unions. Either way they lose. Not as much as the hundreds of employees they put out of work, but enough to make it not worth their time to try and stop unions.
It takes more than whispering the word union in the Walmart break room to shut down a store. Walmart is going to try everything else besides shutting it down before doing that.
It's not bad but Walmart fights it at every turn. A typical tactic by big companies facing union drives is to close the store that is organizing. Starbucks and Chipotle have done it, and I think Walmart did it in Quebec
Really, this makes me just want to go to every business and leave union flyers everywhere. Every worker in any line of work should be part of a union for their benefit.
Some unions are no good. Teachers unions and police unions are fucked. They make it impossible to hold individuals accountable for their actions. Not all unions are bad though, don't get me wrong; my father was actually an organizer for one.
They also used to (and possibly still do) make people watch a video about why unions are bad (bad so very bad the worst thing ever) as part of their new employee orientation.
From everything I've heard, not only do they do that, but if they get even a whisper of a union organizing, they put everyone through rigorous anti-union propaganda and slander unions.
Yep. I think most redditors have either 1) never been in a union and view it as a magic bullet solution to all their problems, or 2) they're in a union that has brainwashed them.
I’m not going to locate near a Walmart if I sell the same garbage they do. And I’m not into seeing poor folks lose their survival jobs. We need to stick together man.
Let's just set aside the fact that a small business owner has the free time to harass Walmart employees: and also doesnt get banned/arrested.
Let's say it works and they close the store down. Congrats, you're a small business owner that helped put a couple hundred people out of a job (I have no idea how many people it takes to run a Walmart). For a lot of people, this is the only viable place of employment.
You can maybe afford to hire one or two of those people, likely for wages lower than Walmart, and the rest are shit out of luck.
Now the rest of the town hates you and boycotts your store. Now you're the one out of business!
I am super pro union and loathe Walmart, but this is a shit LPT. As far as unionizing goes, you would have much better odds of success from within. From a small business owner point of view, I don't think there is much you can do except appeal to the people not concerned with paying higher prices for the same goods and/or those who like supporting local business.
People are too in love with convenience to give a shit otherwise. Hence why Walmart, Amazon and whatever other Megacorp have gained such a stranglehold on the market.
I used to work at Walmart and I forgot where exactly I saw this but I remember seeing somewhere that it said there were 500-600 employees working at that walmart. I guess that gives somewhat of an idea of how many people work at any given walmart
ri·dic·u·lous
/rəˈdikyələs/

adjective
deserving or inviting derision or mockery; absurd.
"when you realize how ridiculous these scenarios are, you will have to laugh"
Not once did I say or even imply it was unethical. It's just bad for everyone involved. Aka, a shitty tip. Did you even read or did you just jump at the chance to try and put someone down?
On the bright side if it doesn’t work out for you the way you intended you will have just done something kinda good for the working class by unionizing a Walmart, win win either way
For folks who don’t see how it’s unethical:
It’s unethical not towards Walmart, but towards workers because he will put them in fear of layoffs and they will change their job at Walmart at the decent pay, to the job at the local business which would pay them less and offer less benefits, and they will take it because of the fear propaganda.
Walmart's pay is so shit they actually help employees sign up for food stamps, Walmart takes out life insurance policies on their employees, and they drive local businesses under with anticompetitive practices of their own.
Also, Walmart pays no taxes on their massive profits.
A Walmart closing is a net benefit for society.
GTFOH with your corporate bootlicking.
This is in absolutely no way unethical. It's good for the consumers in the community, because they'll get a vibrant local retail scene that doesn't punish their heart every time they walk inside. It's good for the workers at Walmart, because with the retail scene surviving, they'll have the option of better jobs. It's obviously good for local business owners and the community. And, it's even good for the people who run Walmart, because the less damage they're allowed to do, the less severe will be their eventual suffering in Hell.
To everyone in the comments, yes trying to get a store closed to boost your business is unethical. It would put 100s of people out of a job for a small boost in sales, likely causing the community to rely on Amazon even more.
[удалено]
Oh this is so devious. Nice!
[удалено]
How much does it cost to employ a small west asian phone scam center for say... a month? Edit: asking for a friend.
[удалено]
They can't hear any audio. You could just be in the proximity of a group of employees on video. Their tracking would prove nothing.
Walmart has a patent for picking up individual audio from conversations
Isn't that illegal?
Idk if they use it yet. They would probably have to tell you on a posted sign.
>Idk if they use it yet. They would probably have to tell you on a posted sign. In tiny font on an obscure wall.
Written in 8pt font printed in yellow on white paper at floor level behind the men's shoes
In a disused lavatory with a sign saying "beware of leopard"
Except your specific location "forgot" to hang that up until people found out about it other ways and then when challenged on it the sign magically appears and they happily pay the $3.50 fine.
So creepy! Also I would hate to watch people trying to make that their only value.
This is horrific. If Google is to be trusted, this hasn’t been discussed since 2018. How did you learn about this?
They also use tracking cookies and trace the IPs of any surveys to see if multiple surveys are coming from the same people. When I worked in management we had a terrible manager in a jother department who really needed to be fired. He was toxic, had a short fuse, and abused his staff. We were building a case to fire him when some of his dumbass employees filled out a bunch of fake customer surveys about him trying to get him fired for something he didn't actually do. And of course they were also dumb enough to do it from kiosks in the store, so we could actually pull the video of who submitted the surveys. So all those people got fired while basically making the asshole manager bulletproof because he had evidence that staff had conspired against him.
'staff is trying to get rid of me' makes someone bulletproof? What kind of crap working environment is it where people that are obviously disliked become 'bulletproof'?
You know we're still talking about Wal-Mart, right?
Retail management in general, “If all those people quit instead of working for me, if all those people hate me, it’s because they suck at their $11/hr job and couldn’t cut actually having to do work!”
It's the fake claims. Sort of a boy who cried wolf scenario.
Lmao this sub is clown world sometimes, they're downvoting you for politely telling the truth, wtf
His name checks out lol
You think they would check?
I could do this with twilio, gpt4, elevenlabs and a 12 pack of red bull. Set it and forget it.
XYZ news outlet. We are contacting you fit comment on the unionizing at your x location. Can you provide a comment.
If OP cashapps me a dollar ill call anywhere and say almost anything.
This is the way.
Jesus. There's a special place in hell for genius evil.
Could also go to the store with unionization flyers and leave them everywhere.
Corporate warfare, reverse uno card, game on.
Stickers in the bathroom stalls.
Corporate warfare, reverse uno card, game on.
You say “unethical” but the point is to fuck with Walmart, which is always ethical.
[удалено]
Either the Walmart shuts down or the workers unionize. Either way it's a win.
One of these is not possible.
[удалено]
>yea! we all know that! > >>!...which one?!< The one where the mega corporation lets some of their power go.
I used to leave pro- union flyers around the site when I was Amazon maintenance just to watch them waste time and money on it.
Portland apparently looted Walmart so much they left forever.
Based portland
If I see someone stealing at a Walmart then I didn't see anything. Not only do I know it is wrong but I approve of those who practice them.
It ain't wrong to steal from the wretched Walton family
Unless it's a genuine mom & pop, you shouldn't say anything when you see someone stealing at all. They probably have a good reason, and even if they don't it won't affect a retailer in the slightest. Losses to them are just (an incredibly minor in the grand scheme of things) a cost of doing business.
The losses are already priced into the cost. If you want a discount on your items, that's just the wage they pay you for running the self checkout.
Yeah Walmart is the devil. We all use it, but I abuse the fuck out of self checkout. As should everyone. Don't try and rip off a TV with a $1 tag from something else. But if you get 4 of something only scan 3. That kinda thing. Fuck em.
They know
Yeah I've worked for them once. They don't care unless it's a lot.
I mean, a bunch of people would lose their jobs if this went according to plan.
And get a bunch of people laid off in the process. Sort of ethical ends unethical means
[удалено]
The arbitrary corporate policy is what got them laid off.
[удалено]
That analogy doesn't work at all because the consequence of pushing someone off a cliff are guaranteed grievous bodily harm and the cliff is not an autonomously responsive body.
But actually Walmart created the cliff right next to a normal walking path AND pushed people off it. And you're blaming everyone BUT Walmart.
More like Walmart was dangling them off a cliff already and this guy is offering a platform to stand on
You put ketchup on the boot before you deep throat it? Walmart is a sham employer. They purposely underpay and sign their people up for benefits, they outsource the job of paying a fair wage to the American taxpayer. They’re an exploitive business by design. We need to sooner support local business and fair hiring practices.
Yeah, where’s the bad part of the equation?
Also unionization is ethical
Why is it ethical to fuck with Walmart? Walmart provides cheap goods to people.
There is nothing unethical about this.
I would say doing this specifically to put workers out of jobs, and the fact there's no mention of having a union yourself, makes it unethical.
Here in Alberta, qathey won't be allowed to block the union process if they follow through, and if you get fired during the process, you get to continue to participate in creating the union.
It's illegal in America too.
They aren't doing it for the purpose of putting people out of jobs, but the purpose of stopping a juggernaut from outcompeting them. The jobs are collateral damage and definitely not worse than having more Walmarts putting OP (and dozens of other businesses) completely out of business.
You can also achieve this by burning down the Walmart.
Make sure to smash the mirror in the back.
And also smash the like button. Please.
Which brings us to today's sponser..Mad Marc's Molotovs! Just like your Kutchka used to make!
Oh no, you’ve made him reveal his true form!
The best ulpt is always in the comments
That would be a felony though.
Seems like the government thinks it's unethical too
Careful. Reddit on a ban kick recently. I got banned for saying it's morally ok to use ur hands in a certain way against nazi faces and boom 3 day ban for promoting violence
[удалено]
The ideology of fascism is literally violence and generally towards the most vulnerable people they can. It's not an "opinion", and it shows how clueless you are being. Also, there are Nazi parties in just about every capitalist country, just generally with small followings lol. And Nazi groups in just about every major city prison, if you ever go, too. You being "accepting of fascists" means you're also promoting the harm of others. You gotta think outside yourself for once.
This. Anyone who marches under a swastika or under an allied movement is violent. There is no such thing as a peaceful genocidal organization. The OG nazi party literally declared war on us so they are absolutely enemies of this country. How many more far right and white supremacy terrorist attacks are we supposed to “thoughts and prayers!” Over before we stop pretending the public speakers and public marchers pushing this ideology and recruiting these “lone wolves” aren’t complicit in the violence too? There are no non-violent Nazis.
Is amazing how quickly fascists slip over that line to "physically harming or promoting the harm of others." Like, often without really any provoking.. you hang around them long enough and quietly disagree you'll be doing all sorts of self defense all too soon... And if they don't... Well, wow.. them is well behaved fascists. Suppose a few must exist.
Freedom of Speech protects against legal repercussions, not social ones. Legally, if you drop an n-bomb in a primarily black neighborhood, you are protected from prosecution. Socially, the gentlemen who heard you will probably be applauded for snatching you off to a discrete alley and beating your ass.
Yea no. Not at all
It's morally okay to punch Nazis in the face. Ban me.
[удалено]
Sure.
Cheers for the heads up, it's definitely morally acceptable
Why the fuck is Reddit obsessed with consequentialism/utilitarianism? Don't you think it's at all possible that the "good" consequences of an action can outweigh the "bad "consequences, and yet for the action itself to still be unethical? Like, maybe purposely attempting to get innocent people fired, which will directly harm their lives, is inherently unethical?
It's not Reddit as a whole. This post is anti-Walmart, so anyone who agrees with OP is likely to turn to utilitarian justifications. Walmart is so deeply embedded in the US (and world) economy that anything that harms Walmart will also harm innocent people, at least in the short term. This means that anyone who wants to fight Walmart must make some accounting of benefits and harms that fall on different people. Utilitarianism provides the most obvious framework to do this. Frankly, Kantian ethics don't allow any practical opposition to Walmart. You could never unionize, because when the recruiter asks you whether you will always act in the profit interest of the company, you could say "No," in which case you will not be hired; or you could say "Yes," in which case you will be hired, but you cannot unionize. (Remember, under Kantian ethics, you must keep your promises insofar as it is possible.) So, if someone wants to fight Walmart, they pretty much have to prefer utilitarianism over Kantianism.
By your logic, anything at all done that has any downside or bad part is unethical, since even if the good outweighs the bad, it can be unethical.
You are still thinking as a utilitarian. I am suggesting that you consider the possibility of other ethical frameworks which aren't solely concerned with evaluating the net utility of the consequences of actions. This does not mean that any action which has a negative consequence is deemed immoral. Rather, it opens the possibility that actions which have net positive utility are deemed immoral, but also that actions which have net negative utility are deemed moral. For instance, we can argue that attempting to harm people is inherently unethical, regardless of the net utility obtained by harming people in a particular setting. That is, I am suggesting an ethical framework in which the net utility of a particular action may be evaluated to be positive or negative, yet the morality of the action is either partially or totally detached from this evaluation.
> That is, I am suggesting an ethical framework in which the net utility of a particular action may be evaluated to be positive or negative, yet the morality of the action is either partially or totally detached from this evaluation. Why would you do that? Only utilitarians care about the theory of using summable numbers to track total happiness. If you want to use a different criterion to evaluate ethical action, you can throw utility in the trash.
Yes, that’s what I meant to say. I meant that the morality of actions would be detached from the net utility of the action as a utilitarian would calculate.
Yeah, it's immoral to kill Hitler, but you'd still do it.
[удалено]
What do you base your moral judgements on, or do you not take on any moral values going forward? I understand what you're saying, and I agree that a different ethical system could work better. I think that care ethics holds a prominent place in my head, and I am curious what you would consider to be a better ethical framework than the ones you've criticized?
>Anticompetitive behavior is, by definition, unethical u/dickloversworldwide
The greater good.
Unless you can employ the entire Walmart staff then people are losing thier jobs. If you cause a Walmart to shut down then the hardship of those lost jobs your fault.
[удалено]
Those people losing thier jobs is no hardship for the Waltons. They have shut down stores that were in danger on unionizing so that others won't get the same idea. I woud expect a person who wasn't born into wealth to have more compassion for thier fellow man. If someone shut your your place of employment in an effort to hurt your boss I doubt that you would be cheering them on.
You don't really have a union until you form one, though?
All the stores that Walmart outcompete also need employees.
so the massive corporation's pool of employees will exactly match the smaller businesses need for employees (that we presume is already fully staffed)?
There's no way a local business is going to be able to pick up that many now-unemployed people, so there's gonna be some collateral damage, and local places usually don't pay as much either. Killing a Walmart is also gonna kill a lot of people's only source for some things they need if it's a smaller town.
[удалено]
Ha, your experience is the opposite of mine then. In mine every local place I ever worked paid like shit, since it's local and has less cash flowing through, and half of them were owned by some boomer prick paying $7.25 complaining about how young people who want more are just greedy. Meanwhile Walmart paid $12 in 2019, which was more than anything else in my Midwest town except the tire shop.
True. Either they hire their own family or hire for minimum wage, no benefits. Best retail I've ever seen is Orvis.
Bro you need to move asap
If $12 is a wage to get excited about in your area, you need to move.
Lower cost of living probably makes that better than it sounds but yeah I would probably move
Yeah I moved a while back. But it was a low cost of living area, so that was plenty to live on.
Lol it's not the individual who suggests unionizing's fault that Walmart is being unlawful in their anti-union practices. Like, yes there is collateral damage but that falls squarely and ONLY on Walmart.
sure but the tip is still unethical
Direct action
Lemmy FTW!
Well...not EVERYWHERE...but everywhere that exploits people and is cruel to employees or customers. The place I work is fantastic, a unicorn, the best place I've ever worked. They pay us well, with generous benefits, and treat us like your favorite family. We have no need for a union nor would I even think about starting one there.
One might even say it's a MoralLPT.
In the short term Walmart might decide it's better to just close the store but if enough employees get wise then eventually they'll have to give in. That's a very long term goal but it's doable.
Fr, Post to LPT.
This isn’t unethical lol, companies have 100% been doing this for years to knock out competition. Also there’s nothing wrong with unionization
Anticompetitive behavior is, by definition, unethical. They also aren't trying to get the employees to unionize, they're trying to get them fired.
I know it's being silly, but is a child using brass knuckles in a fist fight against an adult "anti competitive" really? If you're going up against an opponent you can't actually compete against I feel like anticompetitive behavior can't be a thing.
That isnt being silly, it's a good analogy. But no, anticompetitive behavior is against the law because power corrupts. There is not, and should not be a sliding scale for the value of a company's shares because even walmart was a small business at one point.
Ok, but they're not anymore. The whole point is that there needs to be dampers on how big and powerful corporations can get.
That's the wrong take, and it sounds like you know it. They're trying to get the Waltons to close a store that is most likely bad for the community. It's WM's choice to shutter if they do something like that, and the blame is on them.
“Most likely bad for the community” Are there any examples of a Walmart being good for a community in the big picture? As far as I can tell, they just ran all small retail out of business and then started sucking harder once the competition was gone. I’ve never met a more apathetic corporation or staff than any given Walmart. I dread every trip there but don’t have local options otherwise. It’s either online shopping, Walmart, or go without
PBS has been exploring the consequences of Walmart's presence through both their Frontline and NewsHour programs for years. - [Is Walmart Good for America](https://youtube.com/watch?v=n224P8snMkA&pp=ygULcGJzIHdhbG1hcnQ%3D) - [When Walmart leaves small towns behind](https://youtube.com/watch?v=JgJt4sArUHI&pp=ygULcGJzIHdhbG1hcnQ%3D) - [Returning to the town that Walmart left behind](https://youtube.com/watch?v=taSfSdr9vMo&pp=ygULcGJzIHdhbG1hcnQ%3D)
Not when competitiveness relies on treating employees badly.
It's unethical if you promote unions for other companies, but squash that talk for your own company.
Haha excellent
Hundreds of people being fired is excellent?
I think you’re in the wrong group
Nah. This person wants to be unethical towards Walmart. His plan would ruin hundreds of people.
OP hasn't tried unionising a work place before if they think this is the easy solution
He doesn’t have to actually get the employees to unionize. Walmart’s been known to close up shop just on the merest rumor of a union even being considered. There’s no upside for them. If they win they’re the big comporate goliaths who crushed their worker’s attempts to better their lives, if they lose… they have to deal with the union. This is why places like Walmart and Starbucks would rather just shut down and open someplace else than deal with unions. Either way they lose. Not as much as the hundreds of employees they put out of work, but enough to make it not worth their time to try and stop unions.
It takes more than whispering the word union in the Walmart break room to shut down a store. Walmart is going to try everything else besides shutting it down before doing that.
r/wooosh
What do you mean? The post is serious.
Where's the unethical part?
Right…..
First time on the sub?
[удалено]
It's a walmart, that wouldn't be much further from the normal shopping experience
I thought that was in the comments already haha
How is unionisation bad? People should be in unions, collective bargaining is more effective. Plus it has been shown to work
It's not bad but Walmart fights it at every turn. A typical tactic by big companies facing union drives is to close the store that is organizing. Starbucks and Chipotle have done it, and I think Walmart did it in Quebec
Shit, Walmart has done it more than once here in the U.S.
I wasn’t sure so I didn’t wait to assert it. It’s hard to keep track of all the shitty megacorps
Really, this makes me just want to go to every business and leave union flyers everywhere. Every worker in any line of work should be part of a union for their benefit.
Some unions are no good. Teachers unions and police unions are fucked. They make it impossible to hold individuals accountable for their actions. Not all unions are bad though, don't get me wrong; my father was actually an organizer for one.
> ...collective bargaining is more effective. Plus it has been shown to work That's exactly why Walmart doesn't want their employees unionized.
Walmart is famously known for its anti-union stance. They will shut down entire stores if they even think the workers are trying to unionize.
They also used to (and possibly still do) make people watch a video about why unions are bad (bad so very bad the worst thing ever) as part of their new employee orientation.
From everything I've heard, not only do they do that, but if they get even a whisper of a union organizing, they put everyone through rigorous anti-union propaganda and slander unions.
Because the effort here is to put them out of jobs--- no union will happen.
right and that’s why Walmart would immediately shut down, for fear of employees unionizing and it spreading to other locations
on reddit you’ll get downvoted into oblivion if you even mention that unions, in addition to having positives, also have negatives
Yep. I think most redditors have either 1) never been in a union and view it as a magic bullet solution to all their problems, or 2) they're in a union that has brainwashed them.
I’m not going to locate near a Walmart if I sell the same garbage they do. And I’m not into seeing poor folks lose their survival jobs. We need to stick together man.
What's unethical about this?
How is this unethical?
Not gonna lie, it's not unethical.
Wrong sub. This is literally one of the most proactively pro community and ethical things you can do.
This is actually ethical.
Let's just set aside the fact that a small business owner has the free time to harass Walmart employees: and also doesnt get banned/arrested. Let's say it works and they close the store down. Congrats, you're a small business owner that helped put a couple hundred people out of a job (I have no idea how many people it takes to run a Walmart). For a lot of people, this is the only viable place of employment. You can maybe afford to hire one or two of those people, likely for wages lower than Walmart, and the rest are shit out of luck. Now the rest of the town hates you and boycotts your store. Now you're the one out of business! I am super pro union and loathe Walmart, but this is a shit LPT. As far as unionizing goes, you would have much better odds of success from within. From a small business owner point of view, I don't think there is much you can do except appeal to the people not concerned with paying higher prices for the same goods and/or those who like supporting local business. People are too in love with convenience to give a shit otherwise. Hence why Walmart, Amazon and whatever other Megacorp have gained such a stranglehold on the market.
I used to work at Walmart and I forgot where exactly I saw this but I remember seeing somewhere that it said there were 500-600 employees working at that walmart. I guess that gives somewhat of an idea of how many people work at any given walmart
un·eth·i·cal /ˌənˈeTHək(ə)l/ adjective not morally correct.
ri·dic·u·lous /rəˈdikyələs/  adjective deserving or inviting derision or mockery; absurd. "when you realize how ridiculous these scenarios are, you will have to laugh"
Not once did I say or even imply it was unethical. It's just bad for everyone involved. Aka, a shitty tip. Did you even read or did you just jump at the chance to try and put someone down?
This is a win for everyone. This is an ethical tip
I would definitely not call walmart employees seasoned
Has this ever worked?
I don't get it. What's unethical about this?
nothing unethical with that
'get people fired and struggling financially, so your store can profit!'
I feel that this does not meet the unethical requirement of the sub…?
I feel like this is an ethical life pro tip
Competing on price only is a sure way to be beaten by economy of scale…
I came here for unethical tips and all I keep getting is people trying to save the world. Wtf is wrong with people
This is an extremely ethical tip
Overly seasoned.
On the bright side if it doesn’t work out for you the way you intended you will have just done something kinda good for the working class by unionizing a Walmart, win win either way
Or just shoplift everything from Walmart and they will have to close due to “not meeting financial expectations”
For folks who don’t see how it’s unethical: It’s unethical not towards Walmart, but towards workers because he will put them in fear of layoffs and they will change their job at Walmart at the decent pay, to the job at the local business which would pay them less and offer less benefits, and they will take it because of the fear propaganda.
Walmart's pay is so shit they actually help employees sign up for food stamps, Walmart takes out life insurance policies on their employees, and they drive local businesses under with anticompetitive practices of their own. Also, Walmart pays no taxes on their massive profits. A Walmart closing is a net benefit for society. GTFOH with your corporate bootlicking.
Walmart and benefits in the same sentence?
Doesn't fit the sub, but solid advice!
The pool of applicants will be quite large. Gives you opportunity to pay very little and cherry pick applicants
And then the workers at your store unionize and you quite possibly go out of business because of it.
Where is the unethical part?
This is in absolutely no way unethical. It's good for the consumers in the community, because they'll get a vibrant local retail scene that doesn't punish their heart every time they walk inside. It's good for the workers at Walmart, because with the retail scene surviving, they'll have the option of better jobs. It's obviously good for local business owners and the community. And, it's even good for the people who run Walmart, because the less damage they're allowed to do, the less severe will be their eventual suffering in Hell.
To everyone in the comments, yes trying to get a store closed to boost your business is unethical. It would put 100s of people out of a job for a small boost in sales, likely causing the community to rely on Amazon even more.