Wal-Mart Improves Health Benefits
At a time when many employers are reducing health benefits, one company is taking steps to insure more of its workers.
That company also happens to be the largest employer in Wisconsin and the country.
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. has overhauled its health benefits this year to make health insurance more affordable for its employees. To Robert Kraig, program director of Citizen Action of Wisconsin, that is a watershed event in the debate over whether employers have an obligation to provide affordable health insurance.
“For them to acknowledge it is a responsibility and to make incremental improvement is important,” Kraig said.
Or… it could be that they need to attract and retain employees too and needed to improve their compensation package to do so.
whether employers have an obligation to provide affordable health insurance.
When I was growing up, employer provided health insurance was a “benefit”, not a “right”.
Posted by on November 14, 2007 at 0737 hrsIt’s about time. If we’re going to be stuck with this ridiculous patchwork system of health care where employers supply the bulk of the insurance, then the nation’s largest employer ought to step up to the plate and at least make it marginally more affordable for its employees. How nice that almost half of them are now covered.
I think the most telling sentence in the article is the last one: “They are taking steps to improve their image,” Fronstin said.
Posted by on November 14, 2007 at 0935 hrsImprove their image? Then why is it that when the Super Wal-Mart in Monona put out the “Help Wanted” sign, 4500 people applied to fill 500 positions?
Posted by on November 14, 2007 at 1016 hrsWal-Mart isn’t doing anything that doesn’t ultimately serve their bottom line. That’s how they’re supposed to act. Nothing evil or altruistic going on here.
My problem with Wal-Mart, or rather the Wal-Mart phenomenon, isn’t that they’re evil. it’s that we’re all shopping ourselves out of jobs. The size and influence of Wal-Mart allows them to force manufacturers to break unions and export jobs. And there’s nothing illegal - or even immoral - about that. They’re operating within the law, as far as I know, and maximizing their profits as they should do. The fault lies with the regulatory parameters in which businesses like Wal-Mart are allowed to operate within.
Posted by scott on November 14, 2007 at 1018 hrsCould it be, could it just be, that the reason so many show up for employment is because they have none, maybe because their jobs have been shipped overseas to provide low cost, lead paint encrusted goods to be sold at Wal-Mart?
The other part I love about this equation is we are stoking Chinese industries, driving up their demand for oil, driving up the cost of oil, drinving up the cost of goods anyways.
How do you like being on the hamster wheel Mr. Pants?
Posted by on November 14, 2007 at 1031 hrsI sincerely doubt 4500 people are out of work, but rather looking for something better in the form of employment through Wal-Mart.
You can drone on and on about the Chinese and overseas jobs and continue to throw red-herrings all about, but the bottom line for Wal-Mart haters is that they’re not a union shop. The union goons are pissed because they see billions of dollars exchanging hands, and they don’t get a taste.
Just like Don Fanucci trying to strong-arm young Vito Corleone. He just wanted to “wet his beak”; but in the end, all he got was a bullet in the head for his troubles. Mind your own hamster wheel, Mr. Schmitz.
Posted by on November 14, 2007 at 1046 hrsScott, Thanks for the rationality in your post. It is always appriciated. But I am curious about what regulations you would want to change or impose.
Also, could the consumer effectuate the same result you seek by simply choosing not to shop at Wal-Mart? Or even more to the point, if the consumer does not shop at Wal-Mart isn’t that a pretty good indication that the citizens don’t want the gov’t to do anything to stop Wal-Mart from selling cheap goods? I agree that there are other factors in why peopel shop where they shop but I think the point remains that we could shut Wal-Mart down tomarrow if all the consumers wanted to.
Posted by on November 14, 2007 at 1137 hrsDoubt no more Mr Pants, here are some facts rather than idle partisan conjecture:
11,914 were unemployed in Madison in September 07.
Posted by on November 14, 2007 at 1157 hrsA 3.5% unemployment rate is well under state and national averages; in fact, most economists would view that number as a sign of a strong economy and labor market. But nice try, all the same.
Posted by on November 14, 2007 at 1215 hrsI sincerely doubt 4500 people are out of work, but rather looking for something better in the form of employment through Wal-Mart.
That’s what you said. No qualifiers, not but(t)s just that.
Instead of learning something after being wrong by about half you come back with this;
A 3.5% unemployment rate is well under state and national averages; in fact, most economists would view that number as a sign of a strong economy and labor market.
I didn’t do anything but take the time to know what I am talking about. I like #s, not some pathetic rant that tells us about your prejudicial view of reality, but thanks for the insight.
Posted by on November 14, 2007 at 1233 hrsI like numbers too. And I’ll keep that in mind the next time I read another one of your “pathetic rants that tells us about your prejudicial view of reality.”
Posted by on November 14, 2007 at 1242 hrszzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....
Posted by on November 14, 2007 at 1250 hrsThat’s it?!? That’s the best you can do?? Why are so many afraid of Mr. Pelican Pants?
Kids’ brains taste better when they’ve been thinking of doughnuts.
Posted by on November 14, 2007 at 1320 hrsYeah, they’re just afraid of you. And everybody’s just jealous of Wal-mart. And irrational Bush-hatred drives all criticism of the White House. And the media is intractably biased. And global warming is just an insane conspiracy with no basis in fact.
Your thought process seems to be identical to what concerned mothers tell fat little kids to help them cope with their place in the world. Whatever helps you get out of bed in the morning though.
Posted by on November 14, 2007 at 1648 hrsWallyWorld’s business practices are....how shall we say it....
They play hardball and don’t really concern themselves about their suppliers.
It’s gotten so damn bad that a PRCHINESE businessman was quoted to the effect that it’s suicide to sell to WalllyWorld.
At some point in time, they will run out of willing suppliers, and have the same problems GM did when they told their suppliers to cut prices by 5%/annum for 5 years in a row.
Why do you suppose Delco (Delphi) went Chapter 11? They agreed to GM’s terms…
Posted by dad29 on November 14, 2007 at 2059 hrsMr. Pants;
How many of the 4500 job seekers were undocumented or documented people who did not leave when their permit expired?Dad;
Posted by on November 14, 2007 at 2133 hrs
Your Delco comment seems a bit shallow.That’s it?!? That’s the best you can do?? Why are so many afraid of Mr. Pelican Pants?
Sorry sweetie, Daddy didn’t mean to not pay attention to you.
What more do you want PP?
First you,
sincerely doubt 4500 people are out of work
Then when confronted with, gasp, the fact that 11,914 people were out of work your reply is,
most economists would view that number as a sign of a strong economy and labor market.
And somehow amidst this quandry you pull this one out of the hat;
You can drone on and on about the Chinese and overseas jobs and continue to throw red-herrings all about, but the bottom line for Wal-Mart haters is that they’re not a union shop. The union goons are pissed because they see billions of dollars exchanging hands, and they don’t get a taste.
Your right the union goons don’t get a taste, it either ends up in the hands of the WalMart coffers or the coffers of the Chinese Communists. But your OK with that right.
By the way do you still think Ziegler is HOT ?
Ziegler acknowledged she had a conflict of interest when she presided over 11 cases involving West Bend Savings while serving as a judge on the Washington County Circuit Court.
First she didn’t now she did, is that called waffling?
Posted by on November 14, 2007 at 2139 hrsGetting back to the article, one of my students just wrote her paper on the need for government control of health care. She’s currently a Wal-Mart employee and told the class that the change in health care plans at work is costing her more for less coverage. And she said it wasn’t adequate coverage in the first place.
Posted by on November 15, 2007 at 0115 hrsLloyd, that is crap or a lie- not sure which one. They offer insurance from day one- it’s not great, but it is insurance and the insurance gets better over time, like after an employee passes prbation.
Posted by on November 15, 2007 at 0449 hrs
In fact, there are many different types an employee can choose.
So which is it, Lloyd, crap or lie?whatever happened to, if you don’t like Wal-Mart’s insurance compensation, don’t work at Wal-Mart? Work at Starbucks, they give insurance to even part-time workers.
Posted by Matt on November 15, 2007 at 0923 hrsSo, Matt, evidently you didn’t read the post above that said 4500 people showed for 500 available jobs. It’s not quite so simple as “Oh, I don’t like the benefits at this job, I’ll just go and get another with better benefits.” The bottom line is that only 48% of Wal-Mart’s employees can afford to avail themselves of Wal-Mart’s barely adequate health insurance. Hardly a ringing endorsement.
Posted by on November 15, 2007 at 0938 hrsIs it that only 48% of WalMart’s employees can afford WalMart’s health care plane or that up to 52% of WalMart’s employees are from two-worker homes where the spouse has healthcare from the family’s main source of income? I’m not being argumentative, I’m just asking. Where did the 48% number come from?
Posted by on November 15, 2007 at 0956 hrsWendy, the 48% figure comes from the Journal-Sentinel article. You make a good point about about the other 52% perhaps getting coverage from a spouse’s source of income, though. I hadn’t thought of that.
Posted by on November 15, 2007 at 1053 hrsAnd don’t forget the percentage of kids holding part time jobs at Wally that have insurance coverage through their parents.
Posted by on November 15, 2007 at 1111 hrsWhat’s the quote; lies, damn lies and statistics?
Posted by on November 15, 2007 at 1117 hrsAPC;
Posted by on November 15, 2007 at 1118 hrs
How many of the employees are retired, on SS; receive a former employer pension and healthcare in addition to Medicare?jp, How the hell would I know? My guess is not very damn many.
Posted by on November 15, 2007 at 1146 hrsThat was a rhetorical question.
My local store greeters appear to be Medicare and SS age and I have seen a few in other parts of the store. Of course, my observations are statistically insignificant.
Posted by on November 15, 2007 at 1232 hrs
Ol' Army
