A Living Wage for Walmart Associates

Greed

Star
Registered
Re: Walmart Receives 23,000 Applications



Walmart Can Gives [sic] Its Workers a Raise
Without Costing Customers a Dime



Walmart Can Gives [sic] Its Workers a Raise For Absolutely No Reason Other Than Charity
Without Costing Customers a Dime

 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Re: Walmart Receives 23,000 Applications

What's to explain?

You did this in the school voucher thread as well when you questioned why Jindal was having issues when Massachusetts and Connecticut "work." I let it go then because I just assumed it was your usual attention whore choir preaching schtick, but it turns out you actually are oblivious to differences in income, education levels, population, mobility, demographics, culture, laws, industries, etc. between the states.

You should work on that.

You let it go because you knew I was correct, despite your diversionary insults.

...so it has nothing to do with raising the minimum wage.

Translation: you can't explain it!
 
Last edited:

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Re: Walmart Receives 23,000 Applications



Walmart Can Gives [sic] Its Workers a Raise For Absolutely No Reason Other Than Charity
Without Costing Customers a Dime


Typical assumption on your part. If Walmart gave such a raise, it very well could be for legitmate business reasons it then thinks are necessary or prudent, its present position notwithstanding.


 

Uncontainable_Spirit

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
In my opinion, the current paradigm doesn't work for Walmart AND the community, it ONLY works for Walmart. Much of the blame is traced directly back to Reagan, but that's neither here nor there.

There needs to be a paradigm shift. I think that the United States as a whole should no longer treat Walmart as a US company like any other US corporation.

The US should treat Walmart as a country. There should be a trade agreement with Walmart that promotes the best interests of the USA. As it stands now Walmart does not promote the best interests of the USA, it only promotes its own best interests and that would be fine if promoting its own best interests didn't come at the expense of society at large. But it does come at our expense.

Therefore its my contention that Walmart be treated as any other sovereign country wishing to do trade with the US would be treated.

It's not just Walmart either. It's ANY other huge company like that, McDonald's, Target, Home Depot, Toys "R" s, etc., etc.
 
Last edited:

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
In my opinion, the current paradigm doesn't work for Walmart AND the community, it ONLY works for Walmart. Much of the blame is traced directly back to Reagan, but that's neither here nor there.

There needs to be a paradigm shift. I think that the United States as a whole should no longer treat Walmart as a US company like and other US corporation.

The US should treat Walmart as a country. There should be a trade agreement with Walmart that promotes the best interests of the USA. As it stands now Walmart does not promote the best interests of the USA, it only promotes its own best interests and that would be fine if promoting its own best interests didn't come at the expense of society at large. But it does come at our expense.

Therefore its my contention that Walmart be treated as any other sovereign country wishing to do trade with the US would be treated.

But, for the sake of argument, doesn't that involve the potential taking of Walmart property, w/o due process ???
 

Uncontainable_Spirit

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
But, for the sake of argument, doesn't that involve the potential taking of Walmart property, w/o due process ???

Not necessarily. We see what has happened when other companies who aren't US companies have legal disputes (Apple and Samsung). We 'want' Walmart. We want to do trade with Walmart. We simply want for Walmart to trade with the USA in a manner that is fair to the citizens of this country. Because Walmart is viewed as a foreign country they purchase the land from us at a fair rate and they follow the labor practices that are consistent with our country. We want the relationship between Walmart and the USA to be equitable for both parties. As it stands now it's only good for Walmart.

As long as we view corporations like Walmart as "citizens" with all the rights of actual people (aka natural persons), we will have this problem. How can a regular human, with tens of thousands of dollars and a life span of decades defend his interests against a business-citizen, with a potentially limitless lifetime and billions of dollars? He can't, as long as business is left to do as it pleases.
 

Uncontainable_Spirit

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Wal-Mart is the largest employer in the United States and provides a real-world example of the situation. Wal-Mart has 1.3 million "associates". A large portion of these associates are paid hourly, at close to minimum wage. [ref]

The next time you go to a Wal-Mart store, talk to the associates. When I go to the Wal-Mart store closest to me in Cary, NC, I am greeted at the door by a friendly person who is at least 50 years old. The associates who work at Wal-Mart are not kids -- they are adults. They have families. They are good, hard-working people from all backgrounds.

For the sake of this discussion, assume that Wal-Mart pays one million of its rank and file associates $7.50 an hour right now. These are the employees who work in the stores, stock the shelves, man the cash registers, sweep the floors and so on.

Let's say that we changed the following:

  • Wal-Mart pays the associates $12 per hour instead of $7.50 per hour.
  • Wal-Mart provides associates with health benefits. Wal-Mart will allocate $400 per month per employee for that.
  • Wal-Mart provides associates with two weeks of paid vacation per year.

Four hundred dollars per month, spread out over 160 hours per month, represents about $2.50 per hour. Two weeks (10 days) of paid vacation represents about 50 cents an hour. So, in monetary terms, Wal-Mart would be paying its associates $15.00 per hour rather than $7.50 per hour. In other words, by doubling the amount of money paid per hour to employees, Wal-Mart can give its associates jobs that pay $12/hour, provide health benefits and offer 2 weeks of vacation time every year.
Would this cripple the company?

To answer that question, you can look at Wal-Mart's financial statements on a site like http://finance.yahoo.com. Here are the quarterly numbers reported by Wal-Mart for 2002:

wal-mart-table.gif


Quarterly financial results for Wal-Mart [ref]

  • Total Revenue is all of the money Wal-Mart makes in a quarter. You can see that Wal-Mart is currently averaging about $60 billion per quarter, or $240 billion per year (that equals roughly $2,400 per American household).
  • Cost of Revenue is the money that Wal-Mart has to spend to make that $240 billion per year. It represents the wholesale cost of everything Wal-Mart sells plus other expenses that vary with sales. It is averaging $47 billion a quarter, or $187 billion a year.
  • Gross Profit is Total Revenue minus Cost of Revenue -- about $53 billion a year (equaling about $530 per American household).
  • Selling, General and Administrative includes the CEO's salary and benefits, the "senior management team" salaries and benefits, executive salaries and benefits, the corporate headquarters, the ad budget and so on -- about $40 billion a year.
  • Operating Income is the profit before taxes -- about $3 billion per quarter or $13 billion per year (equaling about $130 per American household).

We are assuming that Wal-Mart has one million hourly associates making $7.50 an hour for 40 hours a week, 50 weeks a year. We want to move the associates to $15.00 per hour. That extra $7.50 cents per hour, over the course of a year, represents $15 billion. Quarterly it represents $3.75 billion. Let's round it up to $4 billion per quarter to take FICA and other odds and ends into account.

There are two ways to look at that $4 billion quarterly increase in associate pay:

  • The first way is to compare it with the $10 billion that Wal-Mart is currently spending on Selling, General and Administrative plus the $3 billion per quarter in Operating Income. Spending $4 billion per quarter to double the wages of one million associates is a small amount of money compared to the $13 billion the company is already spending on things like ads, executive salaries, corporate jets (Wal-Mart has 20 jets) and dividends.
  • The second way is to compare it to the $60 billion in Total Revenue that Wal-Mart makes every quarter. Four billion dollars is about 7% of the total revenue. If Wal-Mart raised its prices by 7%, it could give one million hourly employees $15/hour.

Wal-Mart could cut $4 billion out of Selling, General and Administrative and Operating Income. Wal-Mart could eliminate its 20 jets, cut the CEO salary by a factor of 20, cut thousands of executive salaries in the same way, cut back on the $1.3 billion/year in dividends and so on. Prices would not have to go up at all, and Wal-Mart could double the pay of one million associates. Or Wal-Mart could increase its prices by 7% and double their pay in that way.

Let's split the difference. Wal-Mart raises its prices by 3.5 percent, and executive pay and perks are reduced by $2 billion. That means that the price of a can of Chunky Soup at Wal-Mart goes from $1.49 per can to $1.54 per can. Would anyone really care? Several major grocery store chains routinely charge $1.99 or more for a can of Chunky Soup and no one appears to care at all. [a survey of the four major grocery chains in Raleigh, North Carolina found the price of a can of Chunky soup ranging from $1.99 to $2.50 per can. At Target the price was $1.69 per can. At Wal-Mart the price was $1.49 per can.]

Now imagine that we did the same thing across the board, doubling the wages at McDonald's, Target, Home Depot, Toys "R" s, etc., etc.

If a $500 tax rebate stimulates the economy, imagine what an extra $700 per month plus health benefits plus paid vacation for millions of employees would do for the economy, and for the spirit of our nation.

LINK
 

Uncontainable_Spirit

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Invaders from Mars

By Charlie Stross

"Voting doesn't change anything — the politicians always win." 'Twas not always so, but I'm hearing variations on that theme a lot these days, and not just in the UK.

Why do we feel so politically powerless? Why is the world so obviously going to hell in a handbasket? Why can't anyone fix it?

Here's my (admittedly whimsical) working hypothesis ...
The rot set in back in the 19th century, when the US legal system began recognizing corporations as de facto people. Fast forward past the collapse of the ancient regime, and into modern second-wave colonialism: once the USA grabbed the mantle of global hegemon from the bankrupt British empire in 1945, they naturally exported their corporate model worldwide, as US diplomatic (and military) muscle was used to promote access to markets on behalf of US corporations.

Corporations do not share our priorities. They are hive organisms constructed out of teeming workers who join or leave the collective: those who participate within it subordinate their goals to that of the collective, which pursues the three corporate objectives of growth, profitability, and pain avoidance. (The sources of pain a corporate organism seeks to avoid are lawsuits, prosecution, and a drop in shareholder value.)

Corporations have a mean life expectancy of around 30 years, but are potentially immortal; they live only in the present, having little regard for past or (thanks to short term accounting regulations) the deep future: and they generally exhibit a sociopathic lack of empathy.

Collectively, corporate groups lobby international trade treaty negotiations for operating conditions more conducive to pursuing their three goals. They bully individual lawmakers through overt channels (with the ever-present threat of unfavourable news coverage) and covert channels (political campaign donations). The general agreements on tariffs and trade, and subsequent treaties defining new propertarian realms, once implemented in law, define the macroeconomic climate: national level politicians thus no longer control their domestic economies.

Corporations, not being human, lack patriotic loyalty; with a free trade regime in place they are free to move wherever taxes and wages are low and profits are high. We have seen this recently in Ireland where, despite a brutal austerity budget, corporation tax is not to be raised lest multinationals desert for warmer climes.

For a while the Communist system held this at bay by offering a rival paradigm, however faulty, for how we might live: but with the collapse of the USSR in 1991 — and the adoption of state corporatism by China as an engine for development — large scale opposition to the corporate system withered.

We are now living in a global state that has been structured for the benefit of non-human entities with non-human goals. They have enormous media reach, which they use to distract attention from threats to their own survival. They also have an enormous ability to support litigation against public participation, except in the very limited circumstances where such action is forbidden. Individual atomized humans are thus either co-opted by these entities (you can live very nicely as a CEO or a politician, as long as you don't bite the feeding hand) or steamrollered if they try to resist.

In short, we are living in the aftermath of an alien invasion.
 

Uncontainable_Spirit

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
The bottom line is that we are assuming that Walmart has a duty to humanity because Walmart is 'human' when in fact Walmart is NOT human at all. Walmart is a completely different being. It's an immortal being with nigh infinite resources and no sense whatsoever of responsibility to humanity or human kind.

Humans should treat Walmart as though they are not human. Mind you, I'm not 'mad' at the corporation. Corporations could be and were restrained by laws until they bought the system. From their own point of view their behaviour is quite rational - loot what you can and destroy the rest. Just as Welles's Martians were an allegory of colonialism, so corporations are the new invaders from beyond, like the European slave traders in West Africa.
 

COINTELPRO

Transnational Member
Registered
Walmart and similar companies represent faux capitalism that will eventually result in cities, state, or federal government regulating their wages. In effect, these companies become state run enterprises where the government has to intercede in management decisions due to the lack of a market.

If you go into other countries, where there are markets with 100 of businesses, this represents capitalism. The U.S. use to embody this principle, yet these large companies managed by glorified employees, rather than a business owners begin to trick the public.

The monopolist of today does not overcharge it customers - in fact it offer low prices to keep small business out. It knows that high prices will outrage customers, attract competition, and draw the attention of federal regulators.


Today's monopolist abuses its dominance in the employment market to offer low wages to its employees. This is how they make their profits and hoard cash.
 
Last edited:

Uncontainable_Spirit

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Walmart and similar companies represent faux capitalism that will eventually result in cities, state, or federal government regulating their wages. In effect, these companies become state run enterprises where the government has to intercede in management decisions due to the lack of a market.

If you go into other countries, where there are markets with 100 of businesses, this represents capitalism. The U.S. use to embody this principle, yet these large companies managed by glorified employees, rather than a business owners begin to trick the public.

The monopolist of today does not overcharge it customers - in fact it offer low prices to keep small business out. It knows that high prices will outrage customers, attract competition, and draw the attention of federal regulators.


Today's monopolist abuses its dominance in the employment market to offer low wages to its employees. This is how they make their profits and hoard cash.

Good post.
 

Louis Koo

Star
BGOL Investor
Re: Walmart Receives 23,000 Applications

Why would you hate to say the obvious truth?

because my parents (and most of the immigrant community) come from lower middle class, and it would be against their interest to say such a thing.
 

Uncontainable_Spirit

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Re: Walmart Receives 23,000 Applications

Corporate entities, specifically industrial ones, originally acted as a beneficial mutation that helped the United States and western countries exert dominance over the globe. But in recent years the market pressure for continuous growth (brought on in part by the World Wide Web and increased amounts of capital in the stock exchanges) has caused corporations to metastasize into cancerous bodies that are causing significant harm to the organism as a whole, that is society. At the same time they are suppressing normal immune responses (regulation) in order to promote their own growth, allowing other societal ills to take root.

(Gosh it's fun to do metaphors on the fly!)

So of course, as cancer patients we either feel resigned to our fate, or we seek out increasingly radical treatments of dubious effectiveness, all the while terrified that the best option might be to cut out the growths entirely and pray the surgery isn't fatal. And it's very likely to be fatal, since the worst growths are firmly rooted in our financial nervous system.

--- from another board.
 

Greed

Star
Registered
Why Do 1.4 Million Americans Work At Walmart, With Many More Trying To?

Applicants For Jobs At The New DC Walmart Face Worse Odds Than People Trying To Get Into Harvard
ASHLEY LUTZ
NOV. 19, 2013, 10:17 AM

A new Wal-Mart store in Washington D.C. has been inundated with applications for associates.

The store is currently combing through more than 23,000 applications for 600 available positions, reports NBC Washington.

That means that Wal-Mart will be able to hire one person for every 38 applications it receives — i.e., just 2.6% of applicants will walk out with a job.
Why Do 1.4 Million Americans Work At Walmart, With Many More Trying To?
By Doug Altner
11/27/2013 @ 7:30AM

Observe any hiring center for a new Walmart and you will see thousands of individuals eager to become a Walmart associate. Many already have jobs at fast food restaurants, supermarkets, or other retail stores. LaShawn Ross, 29, worked for McDonald’s and Winn-Dixie before taking a job at a brand new Walmart in Pinellas Park, Florida. Ross aptly summarizes the sentiments of many applicants: “They are huge, so I know there is a huge amount of opportunity.”

Yet, a few pundits, policymakers, and activists insinuate that these people should not be excited, but outraged at the company for its wages—and some groups are even calling for protests on Black Friday.

Walmart “can easily afford to pay $15 an hour,” says Robert Reich, Chancellor’s Professor of Public Policy at U.C. Berkeley, who is also urging shoppers to “oycott Walmart on the most important sales day of the year, November 29.” “Their net income was $17 billion,” says Vincent Orange, a D.C. city councilman who voted to force Walmart to pay a minimum wage of $12.50 per hour in the nation’s capital, adding, “You don’t want to share a little bit with the citizens? Come on.” OUR Walmart—a union-backed activist group—accuses the company of showing disrespect to its employees because it doesn’t pay so-called living wages.

Well, nobody has to work at Walmart if he feels underpaid or underappreciated. He can always seek another job. So why do 1.4 million Americans choose to work at Walmart, many for well under $12 per hour?

Many entry-level Walmart jobs consist of comparatively safe and non-strenuous work such as stocking shelves, working cash registers, and changing price labels. Walmart also pays competitive wages, which, for these jobs, are generally under $12 per hour, because these positions require little or no work experience or technical skills. For anyone with modest credentials, these jobs provide good work experience—experience which they can use to eventually land a higher paying job.

Listen to the critics, though, and you’ll hear Walmart portrayed as if it is holding its employees down. But in fact the company offers incredible opportunities for any hard-working, ambitious person who wants to work his way up in retail. Three out of four Walmart store managers started out as hourly associates, and those managers can earn up to $170,000 per year. Some former hourly associates, such as Patricia Curran, have worked their way up to top executive positions. Curran was named by Fortune magazine as one of the 50 most powerful women of 2006. Walmart even encourages associates to complete training courses during fully paid work time and offers raises to associates who complete these courses.

Little wonder that when Walmart opens a new store, it’s not uncommon for as many as 10,000 people to apply for just 300 jobs.

For Walmart, the pay, opportunities, and perks it offers must serve its goals for long-term growth and profitability. It offers training and development because it judges this to be good business. Such programs reward talent, motivate employees and recruit managers with extensive firsthand knowledge of store operations. With regards to wages, the company pays what it needs to in order to recruit an enormous number of competent and content associates. And it recognizes that it does not make business sense to pay more than it needs to.

This is what many Walmart critics detest: the company will not offer higher wages and benefits when it calculates that it will not be good business. According to these critics, every Walmart employee should be paid at least $12-$15 per hour, regardless of the role he fills, regardless of whether he has the skills or experience to justify such a wage, regardless of whether he is a model employee or a slouch, regardless of how many other individuals are willing and able to do his job for less, regardless of whether raising wages will be good for the company’s bottom line. In effect, their premise is that $12+ per hour wages shouldn’t have to be earned or justified; they should be dispensed like handouts.

Walmart’s relationship with its employees is win-win. Every wage that it pays is one that the employee accepts and a large number of individuals have successfully worked their way up the retail giant. So, let’s stop attacking Walmart for paying market wages.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspi...ans-work-at-walmart-with-many-more-trying-to/
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Re: Why Do 1.4 Million Americans Work At Walmart, With Many More Trying To?

Why Do 1.4 Million Americans Work At Walmart, With Many More Trying To?
By Doug Altner
11/27/2013 @ 7:30AM


source: NPR

Manufacturing Jobs Aren't Coming Back, No Matter Who's President

by Jacob Goldstein


<!-- END CLASS="BUCKETWRAP BYLINE" ID="RES163074706" PREVIEWTITLE="BYLINES" -->
manufacturingshare_custom-abc7c2f2e24638873a2a2e18877ee41fc5aac45a-s3-c85.png



The percentage of Americans working in manufacturing fell under President Reagan. It also fell under Presidents Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama (respectively).

Which is to say, the decline of manufacturing jobs in the U.S. economy is not about who is president or what his policies are. It's the result of long-running, irreversible, historical factors (read: technology and globalization).

But when the subject of jobs came up last night, President Obama and former Gov. Romney talked a lot about manufacturing. There are gauzy, nostalgic reasons for this. In the decades after the second world war, high school dropouts could walk onto factory floors all around America and find decent, secure middle-class jobs.

By the early '70s, a a quarter of American workers worked in manufacturing. But in the decades that followed, technological improvements allowed manufacturers to produce more stuff with fewer workers. And the workers factories did need had to be more highly skilled. They were needed not for their brawn, but for their ability to operate and maintain high-tech equipment.

Today, only 9 percent of Americans work in manufacturing. That's not nothing. And, in fact, the sector has been adding jobs recently after getting hammered during the recession.

But the long-run picture is clear. Manufacturing jobs will never again hold the central place in our economy that they once did. At the same time lots of other sectors — health care, professional services — will continue to become more important, and will continue to offer good, middle-class jobs. But those jobs will not, for the most part, be open to high school dropouts.

Education, not manufacturing, is the key to long-term job growth in America. As Cristina Romer, the former chairwoman of Obama's Council of Economic Advisers has written:
There are sectors where workers with good educations could earn good wages if the economy were healthy. Why focus on manufacturing to create such jobs? Instead, government could make it easier for workers to get the education needed for high-skilled jobs in many fields — and encourage business formation wherever entrepreneurs see a promising opportunity. ...

AS an economic historian, I appreciate what manufacturing has contributed to the United States. It was the engine of growth that allowed us to win two world wars and provided millions of families with a ticket to the middle class. But public policy needs to go beyond sentiment and history. ... So far, a persuasive case for a manufacturing policy remains to be made ...

 

Greed

Star
Registered
Re: Why Do 1.4 Million Americans Work At Walmart, With Many More Trying To?

source: NPR
Manufacturing Jobs Aren't Coming Back, No Matter Who's President
Retail workers and manufacturing workers aren't interchangeable.

There are already hundreds of thousands of unfilled manufacturing jobs that people are unqualified to do.

A Walmart worker is working alongside a high school student doing the same work. A mill operator isn't.
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Re: Why Do 1.4 Million Americans Work At Walmart, With Many More Trying To?

Retail workers and manufacturing workers aren't interchangeable.

There are already hundreds of thousands of unfilled manufacturing jobs that people are unqualified to do.

A Walmart worker is working alongside a high school student doing the same work. A mill operator isn't.

Not logical. Are auto workers in Mexico more educated than auto workers in the US?
 

Greed

Star
Registered
Re: Why Do 1.4 Million Americans Work At Walmart, With Many More Trying To?

Not logical. Are auto workers in Mexico more educated than auto workers in the US?
It's only not logical to you because you don't have any instincts that would lead you to believe that people are individuals and not some big mass of legos.

Mexico, China, and the US have different jobs along the production chain. Manufacturing is considered skilled labor unlike retail work, and different countries offer different skill-sets with the US representing the highest tier. Work has shifted to Mexico, China, or India to handle varying levels of grunt-work that doesn't require much thinking or innovation.

People like you is why that is. Instead of telling low-skilled people to get more training to get higher pay, you promote they should complain to their bosses about how many kids they can't afford or they should get politicians to pass laws to force higher wages. The companies are doing the smart thing by paying workers what the job is worth.

Since an American thinks it's a human rights violation to get paid what a job is worth, the work has shifted outside the country.

Americans aren't dumber than Mexicans, Americans are lazier.

With that said, manufacturing has never been dead in this country. There are hundreds of thousands of unfilled manufacturing jobs in America. You have to have skills to get them. A Walmart worker doesn't have those skills.

There were 3.9 million job openings on the last business day of September. 250k in Manufacturing.

If you think Walmart workers deserve better, then tell them to try for one of the other 4 million jobs available. That makes more sense than saying Walmart should pay people more because they have three kids, have a college degree, or any other factor that has nothing to do with the actual job they're tasked with doing.
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Re: Why Do 1.4 Million Americans Work At Walmart, With Many More Trying To?

It's only not logical to you because you don't have any instincts that would lead you to believe that people are individuals and not some big mass of legos.

Mexico, China, and the US have different jobs along the production chain. Manufacturing is considered skilled labor unlike retail work, and different countries offer different skill-sets with the US representing the highest tier. Work has shifted to Mexico, China, or India to handle varying levels of grunt-work that doesn't require much thinking or innovation.

People like you is why that is. Instead of telling low-skilled people to get more training to get higher pay, you promote they should complain to their bosses about how many kids they can't afford or they should get politicians to pass laws to force higher wages. The companies are doing the smart thing by paying workers what the job is worth.

Since an American thinks it's a human rights violation to get paid what a job is worth, the work has shifted outside the country.

Americans aren't dumber than Mexicans, Americans are lazier.

With that said, manufacturing has never been dead in this country. There are hundreds of thousands of unfilled manufacturing jobs in America. You have to have skills to get them. A Walmart worker doesn't have those skills.

There were 3.9 million job openings on the last business day of September. 250k in Manufacturing.

If you think Walmart workers deserve better, then tell them to try for one of the other 4 million jobs available. That makes more sense than saying Walmart should pay people more because they have three kids, have a college degree, or any other factor that has nothing to do with the actual job they're tasked with doing.


Let me try this again for the umpteenth time!

<IFRAME height=315 src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Rkgx1C_S6ls" frameBorder=0 width=420 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>
 

Greed

Star
Registered
Wal-Mart brings more than its stores to D.C.; it brings lessons learned from other ci

Wal-Mart brings more than its stores to D.C.; it brings lessons learned from other cities
By Jonathan O’Connell,
Published: December 6

CHICAGO — Wal-Mart welcomed hundreds of shoppers to its first two D.C. stores last week with holiday decor, high school bands and handshakes from Mayor Vincent C. Gray.

The arrival of the world’s largest retailer into the nation’s capital marked the culmination of more than a decade of lessons it learned fighting its way into Los Angeles, Boston and Chicago — particularly a hardscrabble neighborhood here, Austin.

When Wal-Mart chose a site next to the railroad tracks off North Cicero Avenue for its first Chicago location, this West Side neighborhood became a national battleground between the company and organized labor, a a case study for academics interested in the effect it has on urban communities and a model for D.C.

Boosters of the chain in Chicago say the company lowered prices for strapped families, created thousands of jobs and offered fresh foods and other goods that were otherwise unavailable in poor and minority neighborhoods like Austin. A CVS, Food 4 Less, Aldi and Menards soon followed.

On a summer afternoon this year, Joy Lambert entered the Austin store armed with flyers from other retailers — Jewel-Osco, Dominick’s and Walgreens — stores she said she frequented more often before Wal-Mart opened and offered to match competitors’ prices. “Now I can just come and get everything at one store,” she said.

Martha Frimpong, 21, came out with four pairs of shoes for her 3-year-old daughter’s birthday, which cost her about $43. She said she didn’t follow the debate years before in Chicago about whether Wal-Mart ought to pay higher wages — a debate D.C. officials nearly duplicated this year — but remembers paying more for shoes before the Wal-Mart opened. “Normally when I shopped at other stores, it cost like $16 for a pair,” she said.

Critics argue that the selection and lower prices have come at a cost to other retailers and workers in Chicago, a troubling sign for businesses near Wal-Mart’s first D.C. stores along Georgia Avenue and North Capitol Street.

When he heard that Wal-Mart was opening a superstore down the street from his carry-out restaurant in Austin, Ali Qureshi thought things were finally looking up. Candy factories nearby had laid of thousands of workers that used to buy his fish sandwiches, gyros and hot wings. That Wal-Mart had chosen a site not two blocks away seemed to be a change in fortune. “I was very, very excited,” he said. “I thought, ‘I am lucky.’ ”

But when it opened, the 141,000-square-foot superstore included a popular fried chicken restaurant that sold similar items. Qureshi tried dropping his prices — four pieces of fried chicken with french fries, hot sauce and a slice of white bread goes for $3.99 — but he said business has waned.

“You sit here four or five hours,” he said, “and nobody comes.”

From candy land to Gotham

When Chicago was at its peak as America’s candy-making king, the sweet smells of Starbrite mints, Milk Maid caramels and Maple Nut Goodies wafted down North Cicero Avenue. The Brach’s plant, first opened in 1924, grew into one of the world’s largest candy factories, home to thousands of union workers pumping out 200 varieties of chocolates and hard candies.

But in the 1990s, as American manufacturing moved overseas, the stream of departing blue-collar jobs here turned into a tidal wave. In 1993, Leaf Candy closed its factory, laying off 500 workers who used to make Whoppers malted milk balls. After dropping 2,800 jobs in 15 years, Brach’s moved its final 1,100 jobs to Mexico in 2003.

Elce Redmond started working as a community organizer in Austin in 1987, when it was still a largely middle-class neighborhood. Little replaced the lost factory jobs, he said.

Brach’s towering brick factory has remained vacant but for its cameo as Gotham General Hospital in the 2008 movie “The Dark Knight,” when part of it was detonated.

By 2003, when Wal-Mart announced its plans to open there, Redmond said the needs of the poor for housing, health care and jobs had increased dramatically. As factories continued to downsize, Austin’s jobless rate topped 22 percent from 2007-2011, with a quarter of families below poverty.

“Those jobs were wage jobs in the factories,” he said. “People could afford their car payments, their child care and had health care. And we wanted retailers to support those same things.”

Redmond and other activists campaigned for Chicago’s city council to require Wal-Mart and other big box stores to pay $10 per hour and another three dollars an hour in benefits. The Illinois minimum wage was $6.50 at the time (it is $8.25 now).

“We knew that it was an inevitability that Wal-Mart was going to come into Chicago. They had already taken over the suburbs,” Redmond said. “If you can’t pay your rent, if you can’t pay your energy bills, if you can’t feed your family, how the hell is that a job?”

The campaign grew into one of the most bruising political battles in the city’s history. Wal-Mart touted the jobs it would create, fresh produce it would sell and its low prices. Officials said they would make $20 million in local charitable contributions over the next five years and pay competitive wages. The company agreed to open an outpost of Uncle Remus Chicken & Barbecue, a local, African American-owned business, inside the store. It also offers a bakery, eye care center and pharmacy and services like photo printing and tax preparation.

Few other companies were willing to invest in Austin at the time, which Redmond said aided the company’s campaign. “They came and said, ‘Hey, we’re the savior.’ So I think it was a very calculated strategy.”

Backers of the bill were unable to attract support from some of the council members who represented poor, largely minority neighborhoods where Wal-Mart was eyeing new stores, including Emma Mitts, the alderman whose ward includes Austin. Although the measure passed the city council, Mayor Richard M. Daley issued Chicago’s first mayoral veto in 17 years, and three aldermen switched their votes to crack labor’s veto-proof majority.

Howard Brookins Jr., who represents the South Side neighborhood of Chatham, said the proposal unfairly targeted Wal-Mart while exempting chains like Walgreens.

“I agree that the workers at Wal-Mart should get paid more,” Brookins said. “If they can get more money they should get more money. But the ordinance that they proposed was a terrible ordinance. It exempted certain organizations and corporations that could certainly pay higher wages. The argument that it was connected to the size of the store didn’t make any sense to me.”

Wal-Mart now has 10 Chicago stores: four supercenters, four smaller Neighborhood Market stores (which primarily sell groceries) and two Wal-Mart Express stores as small as 13,000 square feet. Wal-Mart employs more than 4,000 people in Chicago. In September, the retailer opened its newest supercenter, in the South Side neighborhood of Pullman.

Applying lessons learned

For all the differences between the two cities, drive down North Cicero Avenue through Austin and you could almost confuse it with upper Georgia Avenue in D.C.

One- and two-story brick storefronts advertise discount auto parts, liquor, manicures and Cash 4 Gold. Most of the restaurants are carry-out joints selling meals in foam or tinfoil containers.

There are no shuttered candy factories in the D.C. neighborhoods near the new Wal-Mart at the corner of Georgia and Missouri avenues, but the company’s arrival coincided with the closure of Walter Reed Army hospital, leaving Brightwood, Shepherd Park and Manor Park with a fenced-off campus where 5,000 people once worked.

When Wal-Mart plotted its entry into D.C., it again targeted neighborhoods lacking fresh groceries and jobs, just as it did in Chicago. It again offered tens of millions of dollars in charitable donations. And it furiously opposed a living wage bill that, like the Chicago bill, ended with a mayoral veto.

But it also learned from Chicago and other urban markets like Los Angeles, said Virginia Parks, associate professor at the University of Chicago School of Social Service Administration. Wal-Mart enhanced its store design further, agreeing to build two stores on the ground floor of apartment complexes. It touted its charitable contributions earlier. And it put many of its commitments to the District in writing (although the document is not a legal contract).

“They had years of experience by the time they got to D.C.,” Parks said.

Wal-Mart opened its fourth Chicago store, a 174,000-square-footer in the South Side neighborhood of Chatham, where Brookins is alderman. There are other grocery stores in the neighborhood, but he said the store offered some merchandise that was otherwise unavailable nearby.

“If you were a grandfather and wanted to take your grandson fishing, there wasn’t a place to buy a fishing pole,” Brookins said.

Brookins said that since the store opened last year, Wal-Mart has made good on promises to pay all its workers at least 50 cents more than minimum wage and to hire some people with felonies on their record. “Has it been the be-all and end-all and has it ended poverty and joblessness?” he said. “No, but it definitely helped.”

Impact of stores debated

Brookins said he did not think the Chatham Wal-Mart has had a negative effect on small businesses or job growth, but academics from local universities say Wal-Mart has likely had a flat impact on jobs and that small businesses near some of its stores have suffered.

A three-year survey by researchers from Loyola University in Chicago found that 82 of 306 businesses near the Austin Wal-Mart went out of business within three years of Wal-Mart’s opening, causing the loss of some 300 full-time equivalent jobs, about the same number the store created.

Analyzing sales tax data, the authors found no net growth in economic activity.

If the pattern holds true in D.C., stores selling competing merchandise along Georgia Avenue NW or North Capitol Street, near the Wal-Mart at 99 H Street NW, could face new challenges.

“Having Wal-Mart is not a very good economic development strategy because what it sells other retailers can sell,” said one of the authors, David Merriman, now at the University of Illinois-Chicago. “It may be appropriate because you want an open retail market or you want lower prices, but it’s not a job creation strategy.”

Wal-Mart officials say the study failed to account for new businesses created and based its finding on an excessively large geographic area.

“The small businesses that surround our stores generally have products and services we don’t offer or are strong in areas where we can’t compete,” the company said in its rebuttal. “Chicago is a terrific example of our positive impact: Since we opened our doors there in 2006, we’ve helped attract close to two dozen new businesses to the surrounding neighborhood.”

The company’s first two D.C. stores, as well as another under construction and three others it plans for the city, will mostly serve neighborhoods with above average poverty rates that are often defined as food deserts — places that lack access to fresh groceries. None are west of Rock Creek Park.

But if Chicago continues to serve as a blueprint, the District’s tonier neighborhoods will be next up. In Lakeview East, there is a Neighborhood Market and an Express Wal-Mart located amongst bustling commercial and residential corridors. While vacancies mar the street scape in Austin, in Lakeview rents can reach as high as $50 per square foot, said Maureen Martino, executive director of the Lakeview East Chamber of Commerce. Martino said she and her members resisted Wal-Mart’s entry, saying they did not suffer from a lack of shopping options.

Once the stores opened, she was disappointed not to see the retailer play a more active role in sponsoring public schools or charities: “I don’t see them giving back without asking for anything back.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...cda2dc-5b5b-11e3-a49b-90a0e156254b_story.html
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Re: Wal-Mart brings more than its stores to D.C.; it brings lessons learned from othe





<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/4InCis9FH6c" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>




 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Re: Wal-Mart brings more than its stores to D.C.; it brings lessons learned from othe


Walmart Raising Wage to at Least $9


20WALMART1alt-articleLarge.jpg



Walmart, the largest private employer in the country, said on Thursday that it would increase wages for a half-million employees, a move that comes amid persistent scrutiny of its labor practices and high employee turnover.

The retail giant, which for years has been the target of widespread criticism over its low pay structure and increasing reliance on part-time workers, said that all of its United States workers would earn at least $9 an hour by April and at least $10 by next February. Some labor advocates, however, who are demanding $15 an hour for service workers, called the plan inadequate.

The pay raise also signals that a tightening job market — with the unemployment rate now at 5.7 percent, compared with 9.8 percent five years ago, is leading to higher wages. Walmart has had significant trouble retaining employees in a job market where its competitors like Costco Wholesale offer better wages.



FULL STORY



 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Re: Wal-Mart brings more than its stores to D.C.; it brings lessons learned from othe

B-OM5JuCQAAnm6b.png
 

BigATLslim

Rising Star
BGOL Investor

Walmart Raising Wage to at Least $9


20WALMART1alt-articleLarge.jpg



Walmart, the largest private employer in the country, said on Thursday that it would increase wages for a half-million employees, a move that comes amid persistent scrutiny of its labor practices and high employee turnover.

The retail giant, which for years has been the target of widespread criticism over its low pay structure and increasing reliance on part-time workers, said that all of its United States workers would earn at least $9 an hour by April and at least $10 by next February. Some labor advocates, however, who are demanding $15 an hour for service workers, called the plan inadequate.

The pay raise also signals that a tightening job market — with the unemployment rate now at 5.7 percent, compared with 9.8 percent five years ago, is leading to higher wages. Walmart has had significant trouble retaining employees in a job market where its competitors like Costco Wholesale offer better wages.



FULL STORY




And $10 a year after that. Long overdue, period.
 

Greed

Star
Registered
Wal-Mart Cuts Some Workers’ Hours After Pay Raise Boosts Costs

In other news, the sky is blue.


Wal-Mart Cuts Some Workers’ Hours After Pay Raise Boosts Costs
Shannon Pettypiece
August 31, 2015 — 7:33 AM CDT

Wal-Mart Stores Inc., in the midst of spending $1 billion to raise employees’ wages and give them extra training, has been cutting the number of hours some of them work in a bid to keep costs in check.

Regional executives told store managers at the retailer’s annual holiday planning meeting this month to rein in expenses by cutting worker hours they’ve added beyond those allocated to them based on sales projections.

The request has resulted in some stores trimming hours from their schedules, asking employees to leave shifts early or telling them to take longer lunches, according to more than three dozen employees from around the U.S. The reductions started in the past several weeks, even as many stores enter the busy back-to-school shopping period.

Chief Executive Officer Doug McMillon is trying to balance a desire to improve service -- partly through increased spending on his workforce -- against investors’ pressure to keep profit growing. Labor costs, which rose after Wal-Mart increased its minimum wage to $9 an hour in April, have weighed on earnings, which missed analysts’ expectations last quarter. At the same time, Wal-Mart is trying to maintain low prices to fend off rivals.

The reduction in hours is taking place only in locations where managers have overscheduled workers, staffing the store for more time than they’ve been alloted, said Kory Lundberg, a spokesman for Bentonville, Arkansas-based Wal-Mart. The reductions won’t affect efforts to better staff stores, shorten checkout lines, and improve cleanliness and stocking, he said.

Dual Goals

Greg Foran, the head of Wal-Mart’s U.S. operations, has said the retailer has dual goals of containing expenses and spending more to improve its stores.

“Amid the investment, we’re focused on growing sales and controlling costs, as you would expect from Wal-Mart,” Foran said earlier this month after the company announced disappointing earnings. “We are staying true to our roots. However, we are committed to improving the customer experience and we will protect the investments necessary to achieve this goal.”

Striking that right balance is proving challenging for the world’s biggest retailer, according to accounts from some employees.

A Wal-Mart employee at a location near Houston, who asked not to be identified because she didn’t have permission to talk to the media, said her store had to cut more than 200 hours a week. To make the adjustment, the employee’s store manager started asking people to go home early two weeks ago, she said. On Aug. 19, at least eight people had been sent home by late afternoon, including sales-floor associates and department managers.

Long Waits

The employee said she’s covering an area once staffed by multiple people at one of the busiest times of the year -- the back-to-school season. On a recent weekday, she had a customer who had to wait 30 minutes for an employee to unlock a product the shopper wanted to purchase, she said. In e-mails, interviews and social-media posts, employees in a range of positions across the country shared similar stories of hours being cut.

The staff at a location in Fort Worth, Texas, were told that the store needed to cut 1,500 hours, according to a worker who asked not to be named for fear of being reprimanded. After being asked to stay late to help with extra work earlier in the week, some were told to take two-hour lunch breaks to make up for the additional hours they’d clocked, the employee said.

Senior Workers

McMillon’s move to raise Wal-Mart’s minimum wage to $9 an hour in April has stirred other frustrations. Some of the chain’s more senior employees have criticized the increase, saying it mostly benefited newer workers and that more experienced staff shouldn’t be making at or near what new hires are paid.

Wal-Mart has said it anticipated some employees being disappointed about not getting raises and is trying to create more opportunities for workers to advance within the company. It also has a new scheduling system.

By cutting hours, Wal-Mart now risks losing some of its best employees to competitors that can provide more stable schedules, said Burt Flickinger, managing director at Strategic Resource Group LLC. The company also may alienate customers if the staffing levels result in poorer customer service and products not getting on store shelves, he said.

Wal-Mart has made strides during the past year in addressing customers’ complaints of barren shelves, dirty stores and long check-out lines, Flickinger said. But some locations still aren’t staffed well enough during peak times, he said.

“Wal-Mart risks a talent drain at a time when McMillon has made meaningful improvements in the company,” Flickinger said. “All these competitors will take Wal-Mart workers to make themselves strong and help make a major competitor weaker.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...me-workers-hours-after-pay-raise-boosts-costs
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
source: Reuters

Wal-Mart strikes lawful, must reinstate workers: NLRB judge



r

A shopper carts her purchases from a Wal-Mart store in Mexico City, April 24, 2012.


Wal-Mart Stores Inc (WMT.N) unlawfully retaliated against workers who participated in strikes in 2013 and must offer to reinstate 16 dismissed employees, a National Labor Relations Board judge ruled on Thursday.

Administrative Law Judge Geoffrey Carter said in a ruling posted on the board's website that the U.S. retailer violated labor law by "disciplining or discharging several associates because they were absent from work while on strike".

The ruling was hailed by one labor group as a "huge victory" for employees, although Wal-Mart indicated it would likely appeal the decision to the labor agency's board in Washington, and pointed to its recent efforts to improve worker benefits and raise pay.

"We disagree with the Administrative Law Judge's recommended findings and we will pursue all of our options to defend the company because we believe our actions were legal and justified," Wal-Mart spokesman Kory Lundberg said.

Carter was ruling on a complaint filed by the NLRB on behalf of a union-backed worker group, OUR Walmart, in 2014. Most of the allegations related to a coordinated set of strikes collectively referred to the "Ride for Respect" because they involved traveling by bus to the company's headquarters in Arkansas for protests at its shareholders' meeting in June 2013.

Wal-Mart had argued that it was lawful to discipline workers with unexcused absences to participate in the protests because the strikes constituted "intermittent work stoppages" not protected under labor law.

But the judge found the "Ride for Respect" differed materially from other previous work stoppages not protected by law because, among other factors, it was not a brief strike -- meaning the risk for workers was higher -- and because it was not scheduled close in time with other strikes.

Carter ordered Wal-Mart to offer 16 former workers their previous jobs and make them "whole for any loss of earnings and other benefits suffered as a result of the discrimination against them".

Wal-Mart was also ordered to hold a meeting in more than two dozen stores to inform workers of their rights to organize under U.S. labor law.

Jessica Levin, spokeswoman for labor group Making Change at Walmart, which is backed by the United Food & Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW), described the ruling as a "huge victory" for the dismissed workers as well as "Walmart workers everywhere".

It was unclear what impact, if any, the decision would have on the efforts by Making Change at Walmart and other groups to pressure Wal-Mart on wages and benefits. The UFCW has tried for years to organize Wal-Mart workers and the hurdles remain high.

The ruling comes a day after Wal-Mart announced that it was raising wages for 1.2 million U.S. workers in 2016 as part of a $2.7 billion investment over two years in wages and training.

While denting profits near term, Wal-Mart has said the investments are helping improve customer service and worker engagement scores.
 

COINTELPRO

Transnational Member
Registered
Walton-wealth-2013.jpg


Here the problem with Walmart and other companies, if you did an analysis of the price paid for shares outstanding per investor you will see a huge block owned by the family where very little if any was paid. It is this warped sense of worth that causes serious inequality.

This crashes their EPS which makes the company have to suppress wages, force suppliers to move to China, raise prices, or limit supplier cost. With their economy of scale and other factors, prices should be much cheaper. They also are forced to dump a bunch of money in share buybacks to help further boost the share price instead of wages and benefits. The accounting on this is seriously flawed causing earnings to be substantially overstated. Their profitability is much less without the trick accounting.

If you look at other companies like Apple, this problem is not as bad, they don't have somebody that own 25% with very little contributed capital. The founders had a very small percent in shares even though they were central to the success of the company. The Walton family are not important to the success of Walmart.

The Walton family should give a substantial amount of shares back to the company. They could still run the company with a couple percent ownership just off their namesake. This would allow the employees and suppliers to get paid and boost the shareprice to other investors. This will help ensure the company their father built survives.

Your father founded the company and did well but you are not worth 150 billion dollars, when other company founders are worth much less. Nobody even knows their names.

 
Last edited:

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Yesteryear WalMart, now Amazon, tomorrow . . .

Study: More Than One in Ten Amazon Employees in Ohio Is on Food Stamps

KELLY WEILL
01.07.18 5:52 PM ET


180107-weill-amazon-lede_cao9jn

PHOTO ILLUSTRATION BY LYNE LUCIEN/THE DAILY BEAST


In 2015, Ohio gave Amazon more than $17 million in tax breaks to open its first two distribution centers in the state. The handout was heralded as a job-creator.

By August 2017, more than one in ten of those new Ohio Amazon employees or their family members received government food assistance, state data show.

The data, obtained by the research group Policy Matters Ohio and shared with The Daily Beast, suggest chronic poverty in the once-promising Amazon centers. Policy Matters Ohio estimates that more than one in ten Amazon employees in Ohio receive Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits, which are available to people and families living below the poverty line. Meanwhile, Amazon is living large in Ohio, receiving more than $125 million in tax breaks and cash grants to open new facilities in the state since 2014.

The Policy Matters Ohio study, compiled from Ohio Department of Job and Family Services data, ranks the state’s employers with the most employees in families that receive SNAP benefits. Fast food restaurants and discount stores dominate the list’s top spots. Walmart leads the rankings, with 11,560 employees in households dependent on food assistance.

But Amazon is one of the fastest-risers through the ranks. As of the August 2017 data, Amazon ranked nineteenth in the state, with 1,430 employees in families receiving SNAP benefits.

In a statement to The Daily Beast, Amazon said it was paying its full-time workers a living wage.

“Amazon full-time hourly employees in Ohio earn between $14.50 and $15 an hour as a starting wage with regular pay increases plus Amazon stock and performance based bonuses,” a company spokesperson said. “We also provide comprehensive benefits which include health, vision, and dental insurance coverage starting on day one, generous maternity and family leave, tuition for career education, and a network of support to succeed.”

Amazon’s appearance on the list is a steep rise in the rankings for a company that, until recently, had no Ohio employees.

2015 statement, after it was revealed that the Ohio Tax Credit Authority had tried luring Amazon with a 75 percent, 15-year tax credit.

Ohio’s return on those handouts is often vague. Amazon’s first two fulfillment centers were among a series of deals brokered in part by JobsOhio, a privately owned jobs development agency that works with the state’s government. Not even Ohio officials know the full details of deals JobsOhio brokered with Amazon. JobsOhio is part of Governor John Kasich’s push to privatize the state’s jobs creation efforts, and the agency is notoriously opaque.

When Ohio State Auditor David Yost pushed for more transparency from JobsOhio in 2013, Kasich backed a bill barring state officials from auditing the agency, Bloomberg previously reported.

The often-murky origins of the state’s massive Amazon tax breaks have led to speculation that the e-commerce giant is getting too good a discount, without passing the wealth onto its employees.

Ohio’s average SNAP-receiving household is a two-person family, Schiller said. Based on the state data, which shows 1,430 Amazon employees in families that receive food assistance, “it seems likely about 700 employees get benefits,” Schiller said. Out of the state’s approximately 6,000 Amazon employees, that’s more than one in 10 on SNAP benefits.

Amazon employees’ SNAP eligibility might not be a matter of wages. Full-time staff at the Ohio centers receive between $14.50 and $15, job listings show. But workers might not be getting enough hours to earn a living wage.

“To the degree that Amazon has a lot of part-time employees, even if Amazon paid much more than minimum wage, they might still show up on the list,” Schiller said. “If you have a lot of temporary workers, as Amazon does, you might also show up on the list.”


https://www.thedailybeast.com/study...?ref=home?ref=home?ref=home?ref=home?ref=home

.
 

Mrfreddygoodbud

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
The best solution would be for Walmart to not open those stores anywhere near DC. The second best solution would be for Walmart to open the stores just outside of the city, hire non-DC residents, and deny DC as much tax revenue from those stores as possible.

They are not stupid they are looking at the big picture....
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Yesteryear WalMart, now Amazon, tomorrow . . .

Study: More Than One in Ten Amazon Employees in Ohio Is on Food Stamps

KELLY WEILL
01.07.18 5:52 PM ET



.

On a related note, Ohio is suffering under the republicans. Let them take their medicine!

source: Cincinnati.com

People are moving out of Ohio, Kentucky. Here's where they're going instead.

If United Van Lines' annual "Most Moved From States" list tells us anything, it's that Ohio and Kentucky are in need of the fresh start the new year brings.

In 2017, Ohio became the seventh most-moved-from state in the country, with 56 percent of moves being outbound, according to the company's study.

Most people — 65 percent — said they were moving out of state for another job. That was followed by moving for retirement (19 percent), family (14 percent), lifestyle (6 percent) and health (4 percent).

But they weren't going south. According to the company, Kentucky trailed closely behind Ohio as the eighth most-moved-from state at 56 percent outbound. The moving patterns echoed that of Ohio, with jobs being the reason 54 percent of people left.
 
Top