The Strategy Employed by Wal-Mart - Essay Example

Up Against Wal-Mart vs. Progressive Wal-Mart. Really Introduction The opposing and defense argument between Olsson and Mallaby is a conflict that can be supported by any individual benefiting from either. The strategy employed by Wal-Mart aims at increasing income to the store and cutting cost to the poor while exposing its employee to desperate living. Therefore, the company’s strategy is a mechanism to ensure people are poor so that it can reap from them by their high input low earning (Coates, 2007). Its constraints are not only to the worker but also to the taxpayer whereby 5% of his employers are beneficiaries of the Medicaid. When this remains a big challenge in America and other developed countries to poor countries, it is not a big story. Countries like China whose population density comprises of individuals from rural areas with relative lower income than Wal-mart can offer this seems a blessing. As captured by Olsson, the impunity of Wal-Mart to its employees is not limiting to income inequality but also other factors like long working with no extra penny among others. The annual income of McLaughlin is $16,800, and she is considered to be among the highest paid (Olsson, 2003). Despite the fact that she is among the best paid, this money is not enough for her up keep. Most of them can only afford a comfortable life by either having another job or find somebody to help. Due to this low income, forty of the Wal-Mart employees cannot afford to subscribe to their annual medical coverage of $2 844 plus a deductible. McLaughlin like any other employee in the company cannot afford medical insurance for her child. This leaves her a beneficiary of Medicaid. Understaffing is the other strategies employed by the stores. This leaves the limited number of employ of man wide range of responsibilities from register restock the shelves among other. The employees are also forced to work over time without an extra penny. Work extra time is not for any wage but for job security (Olsson, 2003). Most employees find themselves in executing tasks that they were not hired for because of understaffing. The management effort to see the company grow despite the employee’s frustration. The company annual gains from low wages to employees and understaffing is estimated to be as high as $4.7 billion (Olsson, 2003). To the surprise of many, this is the exact amount with which the store’s commodity prices are cut, and it is the same amount that gives Wal-Mart up hand than its competitors. For its gain, Wal-Mart has ensured that no promotion and salary rise to 70,000 of the female workers. The case with women promotion is severe. Women make up two thirds of employees, yet they make up less than ten percent of the top management (Olsson, 2003). According to Brad Seligman a lawyer with the Impact Fund, in Bentonville they ration everything from the air conditioning to the music in the store. There has been conflict between management and employees on wages and promotion. The workers who seemed to be focal and aggressive in seeking good working conditions were laid off. To ensure there is no unit among the employees; the stores oppose any move by employees to form a union that will handle their grievances. They do it by frustrating any effort by employees to join the union (Coates, 2007). For example, they do it by” interrogating workers, confiscating union literature, and firing union supporters.” Martin Levitt says in his 35 tenure as an employ he has not seen any company that has gone to the point Wal-Mart has gone to avoid the union. The frustration is so severe that employees cannot attend union meetings in fear of being victimized. Any employee who signs the union card finds his/her way out the union without realizing. In fact, the company clearly stipulates the dress code to ensure T-shirts with writings are not worn to ensure no union T-shirts is worn. Mallaby appears to view Wal-Mart from the customer point of view. According to him, the company’s sale of commodities to its customers at an affordable price enabling them to save $4.7 a year in America alone. For him, Wal-mart is employing marketing strategies that can be employed in any business “enrich shareholders and face competitors out of the market.” Comparing the gains poor and middle-income earners enjoy from the lower food price alone, the inequality of employees is raising (Mallaby, 2005). Individuals who buy in Wal-Mart can manage by salaries of $35,000 as compared to $50,000 and $70000, at Target and Costco respective (Mallaby, 2005). He considers Wal-Mart lo be an equal of technology, which equally encourages inequality. However, his argument considers low prices to most poor to be important than increasing the number of the poor. He plays down the effort of employees and activists to engage the company in addressing employees’ plight. He openly exposes his bias to the poor consumers not considering the poor condition the employs face. Nevertheless, he does not address the injustice to the employee (Mallaby, 2005). Despite the critics, it beat logic to understand why employees are complaining while still working for the same company. Mallaby highlights a situation where the 8,000 individuals applied for 525 jobs an indicator that not everybody believed Wal-Mart is bad. However, this can be out of desperation. Contrary to America where employees feel their rights have been violated, in countries like China, employees in Wal-Mart stores are comfortable. Since most of them come from rural areas where income is limited, Wal-Mart lease appears as a blessing (Mallaby, 2005). Having all the above discussions and critics in mind, it is important for Wal-Mart to grant its employees the right of expressing their filling and seeking their due. Employees stick to the job because of desperation and hope that a good day will be come. Denying employees a right to join the union deprive them the only avenue through which they can air their grievances (Taylor & Archer, 2005). Employees need good working conditions better treatment for motivation. The company’s prosperity is not only how much it can make but also a smile in the face of its employees. Conclusion The approach employed by Wal-Mart is an expression of a greedy master. It aims at suppressing employees for the gain of the company. The approach is a strategy doctored to increase the company’s wealth and ensure constant expansion of Wal-Mart by riding on the back of helpless employees. What hurts most is the way workers’ effort to have their hard work rewarded is frustrated. It is clear that Wal-Mart may not change soon until the union finds its foot in the company. Despite its benefits to the mass poor and middle-income customer, there is a need to address the gender partiality and worker exploitation. References Coates, D. (2007). A liberal tool kit: Progressive responses to conservative arguments. Westport, Conn: Praeger. Mallaby, S. (2005). Progressive Wal-Mart. Really. Washington Post. Retrieved on November 6, 2012 from < http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/27/AR2005112700687.html > Olsson, K. (2003). Up Against Wal-Mart. Mother Jones. Retrieved on November 6, 2012 from < http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2003/03/against-wal-mart> Taylor, D., & Archer, J. S. (2005). Up against the Wal-Marts: Ow your business can prosper in the shadow of the retail giants. New York, N.Y: AMACOM. Read More