Wal-Mart introduces new dress code, employees must buy own clothes

[boedicca]

Let me get something st right here.

Is it your proposal that any employer base what they pay their entry level employees on the bills the employee has to pay?

So if I want to spend my life stocking shelves in the kitty litter aisle at a store when I apply for a job I should bring copies of all my bills including car payments, rent, electricity, food etc and that an employer should base my pay on those bills and then add some extra spending money?

Are you fucking insane?

From each according to his ability
To each according to his bills

 

[Iceweasel]

What they should do is make a dress code for customers. Just look around they are a bunch of slobs without any self-confidence, self-awareness, self-control or any other psychological problem. And this problem does not only occur in Walmart. Look around and you will see slobs in other stores and parking lots. They are just slobs who do not care.

I like that idea. No more rolling out of bed and going to WalMart in your pjs. And if you weigh 350lbs+ your belly must be covered.

 

[Pop23]

What do I mean by a blip on the radar, just that. Frankly these folks are statistically underemployed if they are working min wage while trying to raise a family. If someone is making min wage and can't get a raise or a better job, they are probably not working very hard, sorry to say.

Here is the part that kills me. Are we going on whatever the company does is right? Because if so, then I'd agree that whatever the company pays is correct and shows that the person doesnt have skills.

But if we are going to be objective....Is it possible that a company underpays its employees in order to maximize profit? And has nothing or little to do with the skill associated with that individual?

Or do companies always pay according to their skills? Because there are a shit ton of soldiers, nurses, teachers, policemen etc that will tell you thats not correct

^^^^^ Drama Queen^^^^^

This is simply about people being responsible for buying their own damn clothes.

If that's that's too much to ask then.......

IT'S NO DAMN WONDER THEY WORK FOR MINIMUM WAGE!

And you ain't helping them

 

[OnePercenter]

That only one company has to absorb. If you get too big, watch out! We will knock you down a peg or two.

It's called being responsible. WalMart is clearly taking advantage.

 

[OnePercenter]

The uniform IS a product the store sells.

And you might want to wear a ratty set of clothes that someone else wore but I don't think most businesses would like to see it. So most likely even if Walmart bought a polo shirt and a pair of Khakis for an employee they would just count the value as a benefit and the employee would be liable for the taxes.

The uniform is given to an employee as a benefit. The value of the uniform unless it meets very specific requirements which btw a pair of pants and and a shirt do not meet is then listed as taxable income to the employee.

At that point the employee owns the uniform or clothes and does not have to return them.

How about a uniform allowance?

 

[OnePercenter]

Let me get something st right here.

Is it your proposal that any employer base what they pay their entry level employees on the bills the employee has to pay?

So if I want to spend my life stocking shelves in the kitty litter aisle at a store when I apply for a job I should bring copies of all my bills including car payments, rent, electricity, food etc and that an employer should base my pay on those bills and then add some extra spending money?

Are you fucking insane?

An employer should pay a living wage, which is a wage that is high enough to maintain a normal standard of living. I do.

Living Wage Calculator-Introduction to the Living Wage Calculator

 

[OnePercenter]

Sarcasm is a subtle art. My bad

That wasn't sarcasm, that was bloviating.

 

[OnePercenter]

Yea not sure how or when that happened. On the other hand the troopers generally don't mind the added expense so they've not raised a row over getting it changed.

Well aren't they nice. Being taken advantage of by their employer then rolling over.

I suppose it's possible for some of the three to claim clothes. Still salary isn't self-employed nor contract, which is what a good deal of them are (up here anyway.) But then CPA's can't claim their business clothes, even though they ARE often self-employed. Thing is you have to prove to the IRS that the clothes are necessary for your work - and that's not as easy as one might think. My husband can't write off his coveralls as a mechanic, I can't write of my suits as an interim exec, in fact, the only person I can think of off hand that 'could' write off their clothing are military.

I'll inform my CPA. His working knowledge of tax law seems to differ from your opinion.

Your husbands work clothes should be provided by, and cleaned by his employer. That's called being responsible. That's why I do it.

 

[OnePercenter]

Probably neither one.

A common practice on uniforms is to take the lease cost out of a check, tax it, then put the money back in. That way the company pays the lease on the uniform, but the employee pays the tax.

Common practice usually means screwing the little guy.

Employer determined deductions are taken out before taxes.

 

[OnePercenter]

Walmart subsidies are zero each year. Not one dime of federal money goes to Walmart as a subsidy. That you blatantly lie demonstrates the depths to which the Unions will sink in this campaign to rape and pillage Walmart to satiate the greed of the unions.

Since every state receives Federal monies how would you know this? If WalMart opens in an enterprise zone, wouldn't that make it Federal?

If the employee has 14 kids, it isn't hard to qualify under Obamunism. What is the threshold now, anyone making less than $55K per year is eligible for food stamps?[/QUOTE]

Walmart should pay a living wage and stop nickel and dimeing their employees.

 

[OnePercenter]

I do not know what all the trash talk is about.
All Walmart did was reestablish a dress code they have had for years. Making the clothes available on their web site is a bonus for the employee by making acquisition easier.

What they should do is make a dress code for customers. Just look around they are a bunch of slobs without any self-confidence, self-awareness, self-control or any other psychological problem. And this problem does not only occur in Walmart. Look around and you will see slobs in other stores and parking lots. They are just slobs who do not care.

WalMart 'reestablished' their dress code? Why don't you post WalMarts dress code from two years ago and prove your point.

 

[ClosedCaption]

What do I mean by a blip on the radar, just that. Frankly these folks are statistically underemployed if they are working min wage while trying to raise a family. If someone is making min wage and can't get a raise or a better job, they are probably not working very hard, sorry to say.

Here is the part that kills me. Are we going on whatever the company does is right? Because if so, then I'd agree that whatever the company pays is correct and shows that the person doesnt have skills.

But if we are going to be objective....Is it possible that a company underpays its employees in order to maximize profit? And has nothing or little to do with the skill associated with that individual?

Or do companies always pay according to their skills? Because there are a shit ton of soldiers, nurses, teachers, policemen etc that will tell you thats not correct

^^^^^ Drama Queen^^^^^

Thats what happens when Pop cant answer the question. High brow musings

 

[ClosedCaption]

Let me get something st right here.

Is it your proposal that any employer base what they pay their entry level employees on the bills the employee has to pay?

So if I want to spend my life stocking shelves in the kitty litter aisle at a store when I apply for a job I should bring copies of all my bills including car payments, rent, electricity, food etc and that an employer should base my pay on those bills and then add some extra spending money?

Are you fucking insane?

An employer should pay a living wage, which is a wage that is high enough to maintain a normal standard of living. I do.

Living Wage Calculator-Introduction to the Living Wage Calculator

Or pay the enough so they qualify for welfare then pocket extra profits. So yanno, I wont pay an extra .5 cents for a toilet brush made in China. We have to compete with China....womp womp

 

[EverCurious]

Have you ever been in government?

If I was then I wouldn't be talking so 'freely' on here heh

I had considered a political career when I was younger, but ultimately decided that the public in general would demonize me for my emphasis on self-responsibility. Clearly it was a good call given today's day and age

I've worked a couple of government jobs, but that was back in the 90s, most of my work/knowledge is private sector.

 

[Pop23]

What do I mean by a blip on the radar, just that. Frankly these folks are statistically underemployed if they are working min wage while trying to raise a family. If someone is making min wage and can't get a raise or a better job, they are probably not working very hard, sorry to say.

Here is the part that kills me. Are we going on whatever the company does is right? Because if so, then I'd agree that whatever the company pays is correct and shows that the person doesnt have skills.

But if we are going to be objective....Is it possible that a company underpays its employees in order to maximize profit? And has nothing or little to do with the skill associated with that individual?

Or do companies always pay according to their skills? Because there are a shit ton of soldiers, nurses, teachers, policemen etc that will tell you thats not correct

^^^^^ Drama Queen^^^^^

Thats what happens when Pop cant answer the question. High brow musings

Like I said. ^^^^^ Drama Queen ^^^^^*

 

[Skull Pilot]

The uniform IS a product the store sells.

And you might want to wear a ratty set of clothes that someone else wore but I don't think most businesses would like to see it. So most likely even if Walmart bought a polo shirt and a pair of Khakis for an employee they would just count the value as a benefit and the employee would be liable for the taxes.

The uniform is given to an employee as a benefit. The value of the uniform unless it meets very specific requirements which btw a pair of pants and and a shirt do not meet is then listed as taxable income to the employee.

At that point the employee owns the uniform or clothes and does not have to return them.

How about a uniform allowance?

Still a taxable benefit.

And what Walmart is doing isn't requiring a uniform. All they are saying for example because i don't know the specifics is you have to wear a blue shirt and a pair of khaki pants.

No one on the planet but you thinks this is anything to get your panties in a twist over.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Let me get something st right here.

Is it your proposal that any employer base what they pay their entry level employees on the bills the employee has to pay?

So if I want to spend my life stocking shelves in the kitty litter aisle at a store when I apply for a job I should bring copies of all my bills including car payments, rent, electricity, food etc and that an employer should base my pay on those bills and then add some extra spending money?

Are you fucking insane?

An employer should pay a living wage, which is a wage that is high enough to maintain a normal standard of living. I do.

Living Wage Calculator-Introduction to the Living Wage Calculator

It's up to each individual to earn enough to support himself. If he can't do it on one job then get another.

 

[hipeter924]

Based on your adept use of the above technique, you are what we call a "fucking moron." You spew fantastical idiocy with the idea that people will actually believe your idiotic shit - thus demonstrating your complete break with reality.

Watch bowling for columbine and you might learn a bit about the work for welfare programs. When you start swearing at and claiming someone is an idiot as your argument you have already lost. If all the parents of the kids at Columbine had time to spend with their children, instead of being forced to work for a welfare check all those people who died would still be alive.

Welfare is a human right. No one should be forced to work to have a house over their head, food in their belly, and clothes on their body, and education and healthcare.

But if you ran the world, the underclass would be in chains working at Walmart, with no hope and no future. Because welfare for work is modern day slavery, just cloaked in a nice phrase.

Sure unscrupulous immigration campaigns back in the day too claimed the New World was a paradise, only for the settlers to find hostile natives and that they had to build the 'paradise' themselves. Now many centuries later governments globally proclaim if people 'work harder' or 'get a job' everything will be fine. But there are no decent jobs on the bare minimum wage or on work for welfare - and with education costs so high most are priced into slavery. So much for the American Dream, that died when Reagan began his great works.

 

[hadit]

See, the narrative changes when you talk about Soldiers or Police officers. No one in their right mind believes they get paid according to their skills but all you have to do is mention someone flipping burgers then suddenly everyone does a complete 180 and says that companies pay according to skills.

They change their tune according to what segment of the population you are talking about and it smacks of envy or bullshit....

Or Envious bullshit

I don't know anyone who thinks Soldiers and Police officers do not deserve more. Looks like one big straw man you just put up there. Have fun tearing it down.

 

[hadit]

Welfare is a human right. No one should be forced to work to have a house over their head, food in their belly, and clothes on their body, and education and healthcare.

That's one of the most ludicrous ideas I've ever heard. How do you think those things came to be? They simply don't exist unless someone WORKED to make it.

A "right" is something that you have and can't be taken away. It is not something that someone else can be forced to provide for you. What you are describing is nothing short of slavery, wherein one person is forced to work so the product of his work can be given to another.