That article is from 2014. The average Walmart employee rate today is $17.06.
And a non-zero amount of those employees can someday make a lot more.
How many other companies of that size can say the same?
I'm not saying it's not a problem, and not saying we shouldn't be trying so solve it. But are we talking about wage reform, or Walmart uniquely being a shithead?
I read the article you linked and it feels like it's got an agenda. Conjecture 1 is that Walmart doesn't pay employees enough, then Conjecture 2 is that it pays its executives "too much," but conveniently defines "executive" as just the CEO, when in reality executives include the very people that OP's article is about - store managers!
I admittedly stopped reading after that because one can always find a convenient fact to backup their view. If I'm misinterpreting, let me know.
It's also complicated. When Walmart announced wage increases in 2015, their stock fell 5%. Who owns Walmart stock? Us.
> How many other companies of that size can say the same?
This is a bit of a strawman argument. How many other companies exist on planet Earth of this size? Very few. And are you insinuating that Walmart is paying well because they want to? I doubt it. They are tried-and-tested mega corp that responds to labour market pressures. I don't attribute anything else to this level of pay. Finally, average isn't a good metric to use; median is more useful.
If we leave size aside, I would say that Starbucks and Whole Foods are very good employers and large.
I was not insinuating that. The bigger you get as a corp, the harder it is to do have a mutually beneficial relationship with your employees, -because- market forces dictate so much of the strategy. So, that Walmart is the literal biggest corp and can still have legit upward mobility and satisfied mid-level employees is no small feat.
And a non-zero amount of those employees can someday make a lot more.
How many other companies of that size can say the same?
I'm not saying it's not a problem, and not saying we shouldn't be trying so solve it. But are we talking about wage reform, or Walmart uniquely being a shithead?
I read the article you linked and it feels like it's got an agenda. Conjecture 1 is that Walmart doesn't pay employees enough, then Conjecture 2 is that it pays its executives "too much," but conveniently defines "executive" as just the CEO, when in reality executives include the very people that OP's article is about - store managers!
I admittedly stopped reading after that because one can always find a convenient fact to backup their view. If I'm misinterpreting, let me know.
It's also complicated. When Walmart announced wage increases in 2015, their stock fell 5%. Who owns Walmart stock? Us.