Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

The Anti-Walmart


  • Please log in to reply
235 replies to this topic

#211 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,005 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 12:23 PM

Wal-Mart Nixed Paying Bangladesh Suppliers to Fight Fire

By Renee Dudley & Arun Devnath - Dec 5, 2012 10:57 AM ET
At a meeting convened in 2011 to boost safety at Bangladesh garment factories, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (WMT) made a call: paying suppliers more to help them upgrade their manufacturing facilities was too costly.
The comments from a Wal-Mart sourcing director appear in minutes of the meeting, which was attended by more than a dozen retailers including Gap Inc. (GPS), Target Corp. and JC Penney Co.
Details of the meeting have emerged after a fire at a Bangladesh factory that made clothes for Wal-Mart and Sears Holdings Corp. killed more than 100 people last month. The blaze has renewed pressure on companies to improve working conditions in Bangladesh, where more than 700 garment workers have died since 2005, according to the International Labor Rights Forum, a Washington-based advocacy group.

http://www.bloomberg...fight-fire.html


now... my question is. Why do you think that walmart (or most companies) would treat their workers here ANY different if they weren't legally obligated to?

Now perhaps Cantrell's metaphor is fitting.

#212 Panthro

Panthro

    aka Pablo

  • Moderators
  • 24,367 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 12:42 PM

capitalism bro capitalism

#213 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,653 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 05 December 2012 - 12:56 PM

So Walmart didn't front more cash for a business they don't own to upgrade its factory??

#214 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,005 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:01 PM

So Walmart didn't front more cash for a business they don't own to upgrade its factory??


so walmart chooses suppliers that allow their workers to die due to poor work conditions in order to keep prices low?


3rd largest company in the world... victim of conniving bangledeshi garment factory.

#215 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hari kari for amari

  • ALL-PRO
  • 21,791 posts
  • Locationthird spur east of the sun

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:02 PM

the more "skilled" women workers of bangladesh's garment factories earn eleven cents an hour and work 20-hour days, usually sleeping at their workstations instead of going home, have two days off a month, aren't paid for overtime, only are allowed two bathroom breaks per shift, and are often beaten or fired if they don't meet quotas (which always involves assembly-line-style production, sewing, for instance, 4000 buttons per day without a break all but two days of the month every month of the until you're fired at age of 35 with no pension plan because the 9-year-olds getting paid nine cents an hour to fold clothes have a higher ceiling.

man's inhumanity to man transcends national borders. don't think for one second this couldn't happen here if regulations were removed that prevent this sort of thing from legally happening.

#216 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,653 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:07 PM

so walmart chooses suppliers that allow their workers to die due to poor work conditions in order to keep prices low?


3rd largest company in the world... victim of conniving bangledeshi garment factory.



I see the wrong here on Walmart's part in using that particular company.
But shouldn't that actual owner of the factory get the blame ?

#217 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,770 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:07 PM

What is Walmart thinking...they should just quit buying from them and shut down the plant.

#218 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hari kari for amari

  • ALL-PRO
  • 21,791 posts
  • Locationthird spur east of the sun

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:11 PM

I see the wrong here on Walmart's part in using that particular company.
But shouldn't that actual owner of the factory get the blame ?


ultimately, yes, the factory owner is a douchehound and should get the bulk of the blame. but i think the larger question at play here is one of ethics, specifically relating to making a massive profit by shipping jobs overseas to exploit unbelievably poor people, which is exactly what this is.

#219 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,005 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:13 PM

I see the wrong here on Walmart's part in using that particular company.
But shouldn't that actual owner of the factory get the blame ?


do you actually believe that the owner of this factory holds ANY cards in his relationship with walmart? they could've forced the factory owner to upgrade... but it would have increased prices...walmart knew of the situation... said "f*ck it, abusing people keeps our prices low" and 100 people died. It doesn't matter who is responsible in addition to walmart, walmart is in the drivers seat with EVERY SINGLE DEAL THEY MAKE. They actively lobby for low wages and poor working conditions... how much more culpable can you be? I mean, i guess you could blame the fire department or the architect as well... but really...


this is all beside the point... the question was... if companies like walmart were allowed, do you believe they'd treat their workers in this country the same way?

#220 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,770 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:15 PM

Much better for those people to not have jobs than succomb to exploitation by Walmart and fat Americans.

#221 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,005 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:17 PM

Much better for those people to not have jobs than to have burned to death making disposable bullshiat for fat americans


ftfy.

#222 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,653 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:18 PM

do you actually believe that the owner of this factory holds ANY cards in his relationship with walmart? they could've forced the factory owner to upgrade... but it would have increased prices...walmart knew of the situation... said "f*ck it, abusing people keeps our prices low" and 100 people died. It doesn't matter who is responsible in addition to walmart, walmart is in the drivers seat with EVERY SINGLE DEAL THEY MAKE. They actively lobby for low wages and poor working conditions... how much more culpable can you be? I mean, i guess you could blame the fire department or the architect as well... but really...


this is all beside the point... the question was... if companies like walmart were allowed, do you believe they'd treat their workers in this country the same way?



Guys I'm no fan of Walmart.
They are a big problem with how many injustices go down.

#223 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,770 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:22 PM

ftfy.


That works too.

#224 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,504 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:30 PM

so walmart chooses suppliers that allow their workers to die due to poor work conditions in order to keep prices low?


3rd largest company in the world... victim of conniving bangledeshi garment factory.


Wait, are you talking about Walmart or Apple?

#225 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,770 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:36 PM

Apple products are high-brow products...not plastic kitchenware and clothing.

Apple is justified in exploitation because they pay their workers more.

Is that the correct logic?


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com