Walmart Employees Getting a Raise

[iamwhatiseem]

This was fun and easy.

Search Results for Query Regulations US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

those are just facts

i never used the term over regulated.

But then again you don't know anything about what it takes to run a business do you?

You've been bitching about government regulations for YEARS.

I own a business, dummy. My third, actually. Been running businesses since 1996. You fail again.

Sure you do

Tell me how much time do you have to take to comply with OSHA regs I hope you're at least replacing all your MSDS sheets so as to comply with the new format

How many silly posters do you have to display in your business that are required by law?

My current business is not brick and mortar.....dummy. I'm a one man show. I'm supposed to display my business license somewhere in my home office. That's about it. I'm not supposed to warehouse any product here.....but I do. I'll let you know if anyone ever comes to check. I'm in year 6 and not a peep out of anyone.

One of my former businesses was a sports training center for young athletes. There were a lot of safety regs involved with that one. My biggest headache was keeping about thirty emergency lights operational. They were 25 feet up and I am shaky on a ladder. I remember getting pissed that I had to paint the parking lot spaces. I had a huge lot. I also had to post the standard human resources posters. I think it takes about a minute to thumb tack them to a bulletin board. I used Paychex to handle my payroll and benefits package. It was a breeze. The business didn't succeed past year three...but that is not due to regulations.

It sounds like you are very concerned with meeting safety regs for your employees. Why.....are you an asshole? Their safety should be a top priority for you. OSHA is supposed to save lives.....not jobs. If you can't maintain a safe work environment....you don't deserve the business.

You don't want to hang any posters? What a burden! I don't know how you do it!

So IOW you don't run a business.

A one man show is NOT a business. You don't seem to know the difference between being self employed and owning a business.

If you don't show up you don't make anything so you own a job.

I can be gone for a month and not only still make money but make more than I did the year before.

And I have no problem with employee safety. I have never had a Workers comp claim so I am doing something right. I have a problem with stupid rules like having to replace thousands of pages of MSDS sheets for no good reason.

And I asked the question about posters because I knew you wouldn't know the answer. Anyone who owns a business knows the answer to that question you don't

As an employer for many years in manufacturing, Skull is right.
Safety on the job is a concern for everyone, and most employers spend time and money to invest in worker safety, and address issues when they arise. Most.
Having said that, the sheer volume of "worker safety" mandatory bulletins has gotten waaaaaaaay out of hand, as well as MSDS requirements.
For years we had a bulletin board for said required postings, it was I believe a 4'x4' cork board. Today - we have two 4'x8' boards. With so much crap, that no one looks at any of it. Our MSDS sheets have become a joke.
If/when something does happen, and needs specific information about a chemical spill or contact - you have to look through a BIBLE sized book, many times a SERIES of books filled with unnecessary crap.
Today the required information overload is a testament to how the industries are over regulated to the point that it actually has a reverse effect.

 

[LoneLaugher]

My current business is not brick and mortar.....dummy. I'm a one man show. I'm supposed to display my business license somewhere in my home office. That's about it. I'm not supposed to warehouse any product here.....but I do. I'll let you know if anyone ever comes to check. I'm in year 6 and not a peep out of anyone.

One of my former businesses was a sports training center for young athletes. There were a lot of safety regs involved with that one. My biggest headache was keeping about thirty emergency lights operational. They were 25 feet up and I am shaky on a ladder. I remember getting pissed that I had to paint the parking lot spaces. I had a huge lot. I also had to post the standard human resources posters. I think it takes about a minute to thumb tack them to a bulletin board. I used Paychex to handle my payroll and benefits package. It was a breeze. The business didn't succeed past year three...but that is not due to regulations.

It sounds like you are very concerned with meeting safety regs for your employees. Why.....are you an asshole? Their safety should be a top priority for you. OSHA is supposed to save lives.....not jobs. If you can't maintain a safe work environment....you don't deserve the business.

You don't want to hang any posters? What a burden! I don't know how you do it!

So IOW you don't run a business.

A one man show is NOT a business. You don't seem to know the difference between being self employed and owning a business.

If you don't show up you don't make anything so you own a job.

I can be gone for a month and not only still make money but make more than I did the year before.

And I have no problem with employee safety. I have never had a Workers comp claim so I am doing something right. I have a problem with stupid rules like having to replace thousands of pages of MSDS sheets for no good reason.

And I asked the question about posters because I knew you wouldn't know the answer. Anyone who owns a business knows the answer to that question you don't

Look at you!

If you can be gone for a month and make more money than if you were there......why are you there? Are you stupid? You just might be.

You can be a man any time and issue your apology for questioning my sincerity. I own and operate a business. Pisses you off, doesn't it.

Thank you for illustrating that you do not understand how a business operates.

A business is a set of systems put in place so as to continue the revenue stream no matter who is there.

I have an asst manager and employees that I have trained over the past 8 years in every aspect of the business from simple things like how they answer the phones to the most complicated things.

So I can now take time off and still see increases over the previous year because of the systems I have in place.

A one man show is not a business because it cannot operate unless you are there. You own a job not a business.

Michael E. Gerber Companies

If your business depends on you, you don't own a business-you have a job. And it's the worst job in the world because you're working for a lunatic... You can't close it when you want to, because if it's closed you don't get paid. You can't leave it when you want to, because if you leave there's nobody there to do the work. You can't sell it when you want to, because who wants to buy a job?


—Michael Gerber

Weeeeeeeee! I don't own a business!!! I'm just a working stiff! I'm gonna go see my boss about that raise I've been wanting!

I have it on good authority that your boss is a complete asshole

You are damned right he is.

 

[Iceweasel]

Maybe you didn't know that employee benefits around the country are diminishing rapidly. Rare now is an employer who provides a pension plan. Companies everywhere have chucked dental and eye insurance, or greatly reduced the employer portion.
Sick pay has quietly vanished across the U.S. replaced by "PTO" days. Employees had vacation time, and sick pay was a paid, separate, set of time on top of vacation time.
No more.
Or perhaps you haven't noticed that companies everywhere are using loop holes to terminate higher paid employees with lower paid replacements? Anyone who is working for a company, and either received a letter or a sit down meeting with HR notifying them that their job description has been "updated". Should be very afraid.
Now take your letter and compare it with your co-workers...what do you see? Almost no ones description is identical. Slight variances in most of them. Why?
Because that way they can eliminate any individual they want, and legally say they are not firing the employee, but eliminating the position.
If you think employee wages and benefits are improving in this corporatocracy we have today - you are woefully misinformed.

Why should companies even need an excuse to fire someone? True, they may have found clever ways to do it to avoid litigation but that's because so many people these days feel they are entitled to a job.

Corporations are merging, becoming bigger and getting more ruthless but they do it because they can. In a better economy they have to treat people better. The more government dicks around in the marketplace the worse it gets, now with obamaCare they want to bail on health insurance and I can't say I blame them.

 

[Iceweasel]

A one man show is not a business because it cannot operate unless you are there. You own a job not a business.

Michael E. Gerber Companies

If your business depends on you, you don't own a business-you have a job. And it's the worst job in the world because you're working for a lunatic... You can't close it when you want to, because if it's closed you don't get paid. You can't leave it when you want to, because if you leave there's nobody there to do the work. You can't sell it when you want to, because who wants to buy a job?
—Michael Gerber

I don't agree with that at all. I've been a one man business for most of my 28 years in business. The federal, state and local governments think it's a business. They make me tax and license like a business and regulate it like a business. I'm supposed to ignore all that in favor of someone's opinion?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Why should companies even need an excuse to fire someone? True, they may have found clever ways to do it to avoid litigation but that's because so many people these days feel they are entitled to a job.

Corporations are merging, becoming bigger and getting more ruthless but they do it because they can. In a better economy they have to treat people better. The more government dicks around in the marketplace the worse it gets, now with obamaCare they want to bail on health insurance and I can't say I blame them.

It goes both ways Ice.
The last thing on earth I would even think of supporting is guaranteed jobs legislation, or have a government operative in my office telling me I need to hire more people.
However, that doesn't mean that companies who have a history of eliminating older employees, as an example, should be able to do so. I do support legislation that provides protection of long time employees. It is ethically decrepit for employers to let 25-30 year employees go because their wages and benefits cut into profits, and are let go to be immediately replaced by two part-timers making literally half their wages.

 

[Skull Pilot]

A one man show is not a business because it cannot operate unless you are there. You own a job not a business.

Michael E. Gerber Companies

If your business depends on you, you don't own a business-you have a job. And it's the worst job in the world because you're working for a lunatic... You can't close it when you want to, because if it's closed you don't get paid. You can't leave it when you want to, because if you leave there's nobody there to do the work. You can't sell it when you want to, because who wants to buy a job?
—Michael Gerber

I don't agree with that at all. I've been a one man business for most of my 28 years in business. The federal, state and local governments think it's a business. They make me tax and license like a business and regulate it like a business. I'm supposed to ignore all that in favor of someone's opinion?

If you have to be there to make money then you have a job not a business . It's a job you own but it is a job nonetheless.

It's not just one guy's opinion it's a pretty well known axiom

 

[Iceweasel]

Why should companies even need an excuse to fire someone? True, they may have found clever ways to do it to avoid litigation but that's because so many people these days feel they are entitled to a job.

Corporations are merging, becoming bigger and getting more ruthless but they do it because they can. In a better economy they have to treat people better. The more government dicks around in the marketplace the worse it gets, now with obamaCare they want to bail on health insurance and I can't say I blame them.

It goes both ways Ice.
The last thing on earth I would even think of supporting is guaranteed jobs legislation, or have a government operative in my office telling me I need to hire more people.
However, that doesn't mean that companies who have a history of eliminating older employees, as an example, should be able to do so. I do support legislation that provides protection of long time employees. It is ethically decrepit for employers to let 25-30 year employees go because their wages and benefits cut into profits, and are let go to be immediately replaced by two part-timers making literally half their wages.

After that amount of time I think one should be willing to give the younger generation a shot. They should have made some retirement, semi retirement plans, not hang on until they are carried out on a gurney.

I do think it's wrong if you have a retirement plan and they let you go just prior to realizing it. I can see suing for that as it's a breech of contract. I personally think most people should be self employed and sub-contract their services to a company. For one thing, they'll start voting smarter.

 

[Iceweasel]

If you have to be there to make money then you have a job not a business . It's a job you own but it is a job nonetheless.

It's not just one guy's opinion it's a pretty well known axiom

Axioms aren't legal definitions. It is an opinion. It doesn't even really make sense. A job is a set work load, dictated by the owner(s) for x amount of dollars, which may or may not include sick leave, vacations, retirement, etc.

That doesn't describe me as a business owner. For many people like me, it isn't just a job or business it's a life. I live it even when I'm not working, looking stuff up, thinking about it, etc. Never did that with a job either. When I was off I was off.

 

[kaz]

Paying less, which drives business overseas, which closes factories, which leaves employees jobless is NOT good for our economy.

That's not cause and effect, it's delusion. Economic efficiency is good for the economy. I'm still looking for your evidence that liberal lawyers are right and the field of economics is wrong.

Fear and hysteria is the worst way to make economic decisions. The more government protects us from progress, the more we suffer, and the more you want government to protect us from progress.

That I'll agree with. I don't like progressive lawyers either. However, go try and buy ANY household item made in the USA. Go ahead. Try and find a waffle maker made here in the states. Try and find a blender. Try and find anything at all made here. I see the figures stating that manufacturing is doing great, but i would love to know what they're making. Other than cars of course, and even there many parts are made overseas, shipped here and assembled here.

There is a lot made in and outside the USA, I don't see the relevance of what is and what isn't made here. Lawyers are costing us jobs, not businesses acting efficiently

Holy shit.

40 years ago...this country was the worlds LEADING IMPORTER of raw materials and the worlds LEADING EXPORTER of finished, manufactured goods. That situation has been reversed. We now import more finished goods than any nation in the world. Therefore....WE ARE NOT MANUFACTURING.

Why are all of you unable to understand this?

Manufacturing statistics don't back that up. Manufacturing continues to increase. However, move up the value chain from low margin manufacturing to high margin services is a good thing for the economy.

And if you actually cared about competing in low margin manufacturing, you would oppose the government's endless punishment of US corporations operating here instead of rooting them on. Manufacturing should not be driven offshore by government, only economics. Now it's both.

 

[kaz]

And they did it because of market forces

That's really gotta leave the libs butt sore

Silly nutter. Libs LOVE it when wages go up. Kind of like we love it when Americans succeed. When American workers can buy more shit. When the future becomes a little brighter.

The idea that you and your nutter friends THINK that this is some kind of affirmation of policies which you promote.....you know...the ones that are not being employed right now....is FUCKING funny.

Yeah you love it but you hate the fact that market forces and not the government made it happen

Say what? Market forces? Interesting. The OVER REGULATED market? The one that has been DESTROYED by Obama and his policies?

You fucking clown.

Once again, you show you are a Marxist

Der......der......der......OTAY!

Blah, blah, the rich, blah, blah corporations, blah blah capitalism, you constantly show what you are, Karl

 

[kaz]

Paying less, which drives business overseas, which closes factories, which leaves employees jobless is NOT good for our economy.

That's not cause and effect, it's delusion. Economic efficiency is good for the economy. I'm still looking for your evidence that liberal lawyers are right and the field of economics is wrong.

Fear and hysteria is the worst way to make economic decisions. The more government protects us from progress, the more we suffer, and the more you want government to protect us from progress.

That I'll agree with. I don't like progressive lawyers either. However, go try and buy ANY household item made in the USA. Go ahead. Try and find a waffle maker made here in the states. Try and find a blender. Try and find anything at all made here. I see the figures stating that manufacturing is doing great, but i would love to know what they're making. Other than cars of course, and even there many parts are made overseas, shipped here and assembled here.

There is a lot made in and outside the USA, I don't see the relevance of what is and what isn't made here. Lawyers are costing us jobs, not businesses acting efficiently

I agree that the trial lawyers are responsible for a great deal of the economic devastation this country is experiencing. But take my challenge. Go find some household item made here in the States. New Balance used to make shoes here so we bought New Balance. They too have been forced to close up shop and move overseas.

The claim that the US is still producing vast quantities of things is simply not believable. It is nearly impossible to find ANYTHING made here anymore. The same is true in France and Germany. The vast majority of products for sale in Europe is likewise made in China.

Trial lawyers are just the tip of the iceberg. The lawyers in congress are passing endless laws to tax and regulate and mandate corporations so they go overseas to escape that. We have the highest corporate tax rate in the west, we are the only western power that taxes overseas profits and prevents our companies from bringing money home. Obamacare is a catastrophe for keeping jobs at home.

You want jobs, open the borders, don't close them. Allow US corporations to compete on an equal footing because right now we're seriously disadvantaging them. Why do you think US corporations keep moving overseas? Clearly the playing field is not level if they are willing to pay all that money to escape our government. Dude, they are moving to ... socialist ... countries to escape us. Think about that.

As for manufacturing, it goes down as a percent of the economy, but it goes up in terms of how much we produce. Manufacturing is low margin, clinging to that isn't going to make us rich. That said, we shouldn't have our government driving manufacturing offshore as we do now. The decision should be made for economic efficiency.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

After that amount of time I think one should be willing to give the younger generation a shot. They should have made some retirement, semi retirement plans, not hang on until they are carried out on a gurney.

I do think it's wrong if you have a retirement plan and they let you go just prior to realizing it. I can see suing for that as it's a breech of contract. I personally think most people should be self employed and sub-contract their services to a company. For one thing, they'll start voting smarter.

Oh c'mon, I don't know your age, but surely you know of and know the importance of - "peak earning years". It is an imperative part of one's career. When you are younger, you earn less and have more expenses. After your children have grown, and have graduated from college - finally they stop shooting holes in your wallet.
This is a time in your life when you need to save the most, and are usually in the best position in your life to do so.
I will be 50 a week from tomorrow, no credit cards, no car payments and our house will be paid off in a few years. Our grocery bill is less than it has ever been, we, thankfully, have almost no doctor bills etc. etc.
I am earning less now than before 2008, however I am still earning way-way more than I did 20 years ago. I plan to retire at 62, as long as everything continues I will be able to do that as confirmed by our financial advisor.
The ONLY reason it is possible is that we have been saving/investing copious amounts each month. If I was having to start all over again at a lower paying job a few years ago - no way would it be possible. And I would be working longer - AND THE NEXT generation would not have my job.

 

[Iceweasel]

After that amount of time I think one should be willing to give the younger generation a shot. They should have made some retirement, semi retirement plans, not hang on until they are carried out on a gurney.

I do think it's wrong if you have a retirement plan and they let you go just prior to realizing it. I can see suing for that as it's a breech of contract. I personally think most people should be self employed and sub-contract their services to a company. For one thing, they'll start voting smarter.

Oh c'mon, I don't know your age, but surely you know of and know the importance of - "peak earning years". It is an imperative part of one's career. When you are younger, you earn less and have more expenses. After your children have grown, and have graduated from college - finally they stop shooting holes in your wallet.
This is a time in your life when you need to save the most, and are usually in the best position in your life to do so.
I will be 50 a week from tomorrow, no credit cards, no car payments and our house will be paid off in a few years. Our grocery bill is less than it has ever been, we, thankfully, have almost no doctor bills etc. etc.
I am earning less now than before 2008, however I am still earning way-way more than I did 20 years ago. I plan to retire at 62, as long as everything continues I will be able to do that as confirmed by our financial advisor.
The ONLY reason it is possible is that we have been saving/investing copious amounts each month. If I was having to start all over again at a lower paying job a few years ago - no way would it be possible. And I would be working longer - AND THE NEXT generation would not have my job.

I'm not sure how that counters anything I said. I've been self employed for 28+ years and don't have the job security mentality most people seem to have. I never know where next month's pay is coming from. You seem to be saying a company is obligated to keep a guy on since he's past his prime. I don't see that as the purpose of a business.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

After that amount of time I think one should be willing to give the younger generation a shot. They should have made some retirement, semi retirement plans, not hang on until they are carried out on a gurney.

I do think it's wrong if you have a retirement plan and they let you go just prior to realizing it. I can see suing for that as it's a breech of contract. I personally think most people should be self employed and sub-contract their services to a company. For one thing, they'll start voting smarter.

Oh c'mon, I don't know your age, but surely you know of and know the importance of - "peak earning years". It is an imperative part of one's career. When you are younger, you earn less and have more expenses. After your children have grown, and have graduated from college - finally they stop shooting holes in your wallet.
This is a time in your life when you need to save the most, and are usually in the best position in your life to do so.
I will be 50 a week from tomorrow, no credit cards, no car payments and our house will be paid off in a few years. Our grocery bill is less than it has ever been, we, thankfully, have almost no doctor bills etc. etc.
I am earning less now than before 2008, however I am still earning way-way more than I did 20 years ago. I plan to retire at 62, as long as everything continues I will be able to do that as confirmed by our financial advisor.
The ONLY reason it is possible is that we have been saving/investing copious amounts each month. If I was having to start all over again at a lower paying job a few years ago - no way would it be possible. And I would be working longer - AND THE NEXT generation would not have my job.

I'm not sure how that counters anything I said. I've been self employed for 28+ years and don't have the job security mentality most people seem to have. I never know where next month's pay is coming from. You seem to be saying a company is obligated to keep a guy on since he's past his prime. I don't see that as the purpose of a business.

It isn't a purpose of a business. The main purpose of any business, large or small, is to make money. Hopefully honestly annnd ethically.
What I am saying, and not sure why you aren't getting it, is it is wrong for companies to TARGET higher wage employees for the purpose of replacing them with cheaper, younger ones.
There are very heavy fines for doing this. But companies have been finding ways around it by getting creative with job descriptions.

 

[Iceweasel]

It isn't a purpose of a business. The main purpose of any business, large or small, is to make money. Hopefully honestly annnd ethically.
What I am saying, and not sure why you aren't getting it, is it is wrong for companies to TARGET higher wage employees for the purpose of replacing them with cheaper, younger ones.
There are very heavy fines for doing this. But companies have been finding ways around it by getting creative with job descriptions.

I got it and responded to it a while back. They are getting around it to avoid litigation obviously. What you aren't getting is answering why you believe a company shouldn't replace someone if they can get what they need done cheaper? Why are they morally obligated to provide someone with lifelong employment regardless of cost? That's unless there was a contract of course.

 

[SwimExpert]

After that amount of time I think one should be willing to give the younger generation a shot. They should have made some retirement, semi retirement plans, not hang on until they are carried out on a gurney.

I do think it's wrong if you have a retirement plan and they let you go just prior to realizing it. I can see suing for that as it's a breech of contract. I personally think most people should be self employed and sub-contract their services to a company. For one thing, they'll start voting smarter.

Oh c'mon, I don't know your age, but surely you know of and know the importance of - "peak earning years". It is an imperative part of one's career. When you are younger, you earn less and have more expenses. After your children have grown, and have graduated from college - finally they stop shooting holes in your wallet.
This is a time in your life when you need to save the most, and are usually in the best position in your life to do so.
I will be 50 a week from tomorrow, no credit cards, no car payments and our house will be paid off in a few years. Our grocery bill is less than it has ever been, we, thankfully, have almost no doctor bills etc. etc.
I am earning less now than before 2008, however I am still earning way-way more than I did 20 years ago. I plan to retire at 62, as long as everything continues I will be able to do that as confirmed by our financial advisor.
The ONLY reason it is possible is that we have been saving/investing copious amounts each month. If I was having to start all over again at a lower paying job a few years ago - no way would it be possible. And I would be working longer - AND THE NEXT generation would not have my job.

Who forced you to have children?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

It isn't a purpose of a business. The main purpose of any business, large or small, is to make money. Hopefully honestly annnd ethically.
What I am saying, and not sure why you aren't getting it, is it is wrong for companies to TARGET higher wage employees for the purpose of replacing them with cheaper, younger ones.
There are very heavy fines for doing this. But companies have been finding ways around it by getting creative with job descriptions.

I got it and responded to it a while back. They are getting around it to avoid litigation obviously. What you aren't getting is answering why you believe a company shouldn't replace someone if they can get what they need done cheaper? Why are they morally obligated to provide someone with lifelong employment regardless of cost? That's unless there was a contract of course.

Because we are all human beings and should be above the pack mentality of an animal.
I do not, or would not, work for a company who does not have ethical policies.
A business is not a charity, I get that. Completely.
At the same time a business should have an obligatory humaneness and appreciation for years of dedication and value when that employee reaches an age where they may not be as fast and productive as a new recruit. I am speaking of course of a laborer, or someone whose contributions are mainly physical.
I personally have no worries. My contacts and reputation in the industry make me far more valuable than an inexperienced person with little to no contacts/experience. Just so you know where I stand.

 

[RKMBrown]

So awesome!!! The nations largest employer will now pay $9 an hour!!
At 28 hrs a week that is $252 a week, or about $195 after taxes.
WOW...so that is $780 a month!
Let's see...after paying forced Obama"care" of $130 a month for absolutely nothing in return ever - that leaves $650 a month,
After paying rent...nothing left.
Let's celebrate!!

Maybe you are confused about what lowest common denominator wages means.

Maybe you are confused that it isn't great that, again, the nations largest employer pays absolute paltry wages and no real benefits.
Maybe you didn't know that employee benefits around the country are diminishing rapidly. Rare now is an employer who provides a pension plan. Companies everywhere have chucked dental and eye insurance, or greatly reduced the employer portion.
Sick pay has quietly vanished across the U.S. replaced by "PTO" days. Employees had vacation time, and sick pay was a paid, separate, set of time on top of vacation time.
No more.
Or perhaps you haven't noticed that companies everywhere are using loop holes to terminate higher paid employees with lower paid replacements? Anyone who is working for a company, and either received a letter or a sit down meeting with HR notifying them that their job description has been "updated". Should be very afraid.
Now take your letter and compare it with your co-workers...what do you see? Almost no ones description is identical. Slight variances in most of them. Why?
Because that way they can eliminate any individual they want, and legally say they are not firing the employee, but eliminating the position.
If you think employee wages and benefits are improving in this corporatocracy we have today - you are woefully misinformed.

You know we are talking about a job that comprises taking items out of boxes and putting them on shelves, right? You know, jobs that high school kids do.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

You know we are talking about a job that comprises taking items out of boxes and putting them on shelves, right? You know, jobs that high school kids do.

Good Point.
The nations largest employer is a discount retail chain. Awesome.

In 1955 the nations largest employers were movers and shakers. Builders, and organizations of great accomplishments that contributed greatly to the countries well being. They were - GM, US Steel, Amoco and Goodyear. All well paying jobs with solid benefits. Anyone would do well to begin and end their careers at any of them.
Today??
Paradise...the top 4 employers are...wait for it... WalMart, - Yum! (KFC, Taco Bell and Pizza Hut) - McDonalds - ad finally a decent employer IBM.

Hallelujah!!

 

[Delta4Embassy]

As someone who worked for Target as a teen, I can tell you it's not fun. And unless you want disgruntled employees driven mad by your tedious workplaces bringing guns to work , paying them whatever they ask isn't the worst idea in the world.

I often joke with the checkout people at Wal-Marts here, "Bet the scanner's beeps stay with ya a while after you leave huh?" Gets on my nerves after only a few minnutes. Can't imagine what's it's like after hours.