Where are the fantasy retail jobs?!

Where are the fantasy retail jobs?!

Posted in the Walgreens Forum

First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#1 Nov 24, 2012
I'm curious, with all the Walgreens hatred I see on here, where is this large, successful retail company that meets all your requirements?

I'm trying to imagine what it must look like:

-the employees make like, what,$15/hour?$20/hour?
-the Store Manager makes like $28k/yr
-the CEO makes....$50k/year?
-all the customers are just glowing about their experience
-99% of the employees think they've landed in heaven
-everyone's voice carries equal weight...decisions are made by a ...committee?
-regardless of the economy, no decisions are ever made to scale back pay or benefits
-everyone has free healthcare that covers, among other things, birth control, abortions, tattoo removal, breast enlargements, labiaplasty, their entire extended family

So, anyway, after you guys discuss the companies out there meeting your requirements, please pick the best one and share it with me. I will immediately begin my search on the internet of this marvellous company. I am so excited to see what you guys come up with! Maybe I'll even dig up my resume and get it ready now.
Frmrwagexa

Saint Paul, MN

#2 Nov 24, 2012
Walgreens, 15 years ago
disgovernment wrote:
I'm curious, with all the Walgreens hatred I see on here, where is this large, successful retail company that meets all your requirements?
I'm trying to imagine what it must look like:
-the employees make like, what,$15/hour?$20/hour?
-the Store Manager makes like $28k/yr
-the CEO makes....$50k/year?
-all the customers are just glowing about their experience
-99% of the employees think they've landed in heaven
-everyone's voice carries equal weight...decisions are made by a ...committee?
-regardless of the economy, no decisions are ever made to scale back pay or benefits
-everyone has free healthcare that covers, among other things, birth control, abortions, tattoo removal, breast enlargements, labiaplasty, their entire extended family
So, anyway, after you guys discuss the companies out there meeting your requirements, please pick the best one and share it with me. I will immediately begin my search on the internet of this marvellous company. I am so excited to see what you guys come up with! Maybe I'll even dig up my resume and get it ready now.
so over this

United States

#3 Nov 24, 2012
So it's better to give 50 people poverty wages and they go on welfare,which by the way you are paying for,then give 25 people a living wage and they succeed in life without applying for welfare.The only people that win in this situation is the high wage earners (CEO,VIP,Share holders etc) when a company expands and gets so bloated it burst(Hostess).The workers loose every time and the rich get richer and the exploited get F#%KED! Theres gotta be a better way!
wagsuxxx

Shawnee, KS

#4 Nov 24, 2012
Costco.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#5 Nov 24, 2012
Hostess? Really? The CEO's of Hostess gave themselves 300% raises(google it) which is one of the main reasons it has went under. Besides, I don't think Hostess is going anywhere. I think another company will buy it up......
nick

United States

#6 Nov 24, 2012
What drug store chain can you name that brags about being the biggest drug store chain, brags about grossing over $29 billion, brags about increasing stock dividends for over 25 straight years and the CEO pay increases 10 fold but also took overtime away, cut MGTs out of every store, continuously cuts hours to point of letting people go, telling people they will be forced to take a pay cut or they won't have a job and also telling employees that they no longer are eligible for raises unless you get promoted and that raise will be minimal at best or in some cases the "promotion" won't even warrant a raise.

The problem lies in all of the above. On one hand, Wag tells its employees we are the best and make the most and on the other hand they say we can no longer afford to pay employees current wages, we can not afford to give raises and in fact we can not even give you the hours you depend on to live. Why would you brag about makiing an obscene amount of money and then turn around and tell your employees we can no longer afford to pay you? People talk about "poor" people feeling entitled but who in this situation feels entitled?

Since: Feb 12

United States

#7 Nov 24, 2012
wagsuxxx wrote:
Costco.
That's right! COSTCO! Publicly Traded company with a huge price per share. The CEO Jim Sinegal makes $300k per year & will not take a raise cuz he knows his own stock options are making him rich. He visits stores all over the country & values the contributions of his employees & takes care of them by leading by example!
so over this

United States

#8 Nov 24, 2012
Itdoesntmatter70 wrote:
Hostess? Really? The CEO's of Hostess gave themselves 300% raises(google it) which is one of the main reasons it has went under. Besides, I don't think Hostess is going anywhere. I think another company will buy it up......
Exactly my point.......living wages is a start,no expanding unless you pay every worker a living wage,Hostess went under Twinky will survive.

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#9 Nov 24, 2012
disgovernment wrote:
I'm curious, with all the Walgreens hatred I see on here, where is this large, successful retail company that meets all your requirements?
I'm trying to imagine what it must look like:
-the employees make like, what,$15/hour?$20/hour?
-the Store Manager makes like $28k/yr
-the CEO makes....$50k/year?
-all the customers are just glowing about their experience
-99% of the employees think they've landed in heaven
-everyone's voice carries equal weight...decisions are made by a ...committee?
-regardless of the economy, no decisions are ever made to scale back pay or benefits
-everyone has free healthcare that covers, among other things, birth control, abortions, tattoo removal, breast enlargements, labiaplasty, their entire extended family
So, anyway, after you guys discuss the companies out there meeting your requirements, please pick the best one and share it with me. I will immediately begin my search on the internet of this marvellous company. I am so excited to see what you guys come up with! Maybe I'll even dig up my resume and get it ready now.
Got your answer now dumbarse? Live in the real world with sane people for awhile and see what it feels like.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#10 Nov 24, 2012
@sooverthis: In capitalism, the market determines the rate. It isn't a company's job to determine whether that is above a poverty line or below it. It is what it is.

As I've pointed out in several other posts, no one in the U.S. lives in abjecty poverty anyway. What liberals and socialists describe as "poverty" includes lifestyles containing such luxuries as TV's, fridges, microwaves, cell phones, etc. Heck, many of America's impoverished are OBESE. Tough life huh?!

Historically, in our country, BOTH the wealthy AND the poor have become wealthier. That little fact might be missing in some of the liberal media pieces that you read.

Your post is borderline communist to be honest. It scares me to think I live in a country with such people.

@itdoesntmatter: Hostess failed for a LOT of reasons. Certainly union labor was a MAJOR contributing factor to that.

@nick: you missed the point of the post. So who/what does it better than Walgreens? What system do you propose? One like Cuba or Venezuela?

So Costco is your choice huh? Costco seems to be doing well but they are practically a baby in business terms. They formed when I was in high school and have existed in their present form for really only the last 16 years. That isn't enough time to prove a business philosophy worked.

Furthermore, many investors are worried about Costco's margins and say that they are too low and that Costco is too employee focused. When times get tough for Costco, will they have the balls to stick their philosophy out?

The CEO may have a relatively low salary but I'm sure he has MASSIVE stock options that more than offset his lower salary.

I will nonetheless concede that Costco was a good pick and seems to meet your criteria. So, my next question would be: why aren't you working there instead of on a message board whining about Walgreens.

My wife and I were members of Costco a few years back. It was fun the first couple of times we went, but after a while it lost its luster. They have an extremely limited selection that forces you into buying certain items, if you really want that item. Their prices were ok, but were certainly no better than Walmarts. Basically, you can pick up some neat deals; unfortunately, they usually aren't deals on something you actually NEED.

A couple other problems I see with the Costco business model: Their store locations are far away, so they're not that convenient to most customers. And their business would seem to appeal mostly to middle or upper middle class families who can afford to outlay large sums of cash to stock up on supplies for a longer period of time. That is not something that lower income families can afford to do. I worry about a business that doesn't appeal to such a large segment of America.
wagsuxxx

Shawnee, KS

#11 Nov 24, 2012
disgovernment wrote:
So Costco is your choice huh? Costco seems to be doing well but they are practically a baby in business terms. They formed when I was in high school and have existed in their present form for really only the last 16 years. That isn't enough time to prove a business philosophy worked.
Furthermore, many investors are worried about Costco's margins and say that they are too low and that Costco is too employee focused. When times get tough for Costco, will they have the balls to stick their philosophy out?
The CEO may have a relatively low salary but I'm sure he has MASSIVE stock options that more than offset his lower salary.
I will nonetheless concede that Costco was a good pick and seems to meet your criteria. So, my next question would be: why aren't you working there instead of on a message board whining about Walgreens.
My wife and I were members of Costco a few years back. It was fun the first couple of times we went, but after a while it lost its luster. They have an extremely limited selection that forces you into buying certain items, if you really want that item. Their prices were ok, but were certainly no better than Walmarts. Basically, you can pick up some neat deals; unfortunately, they usually aren't deals on something you actually NEED.
A couple other problems I see with the Costco business model: Their store locations are far away, so they're not that convenient to most customers. And their business would seem to appeal mostly to middle or upper middle class families who can afford to outlay large sums of cash to stock up on supplies for a longer period of time. That is not something that lower income families can afford to do. I worry about a business that doesn't appeal to such a large segment of America.
Costco had over 200 locations in 1976. They are the fifth largest retailer. Try again.
wagsuxxx

Shawnee, KS

#12 Nov 24, 2012
wagsuxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Costco had over 200 locations in 1976. They are the fifth largest retailer. Try again.
Also, why aren't some of us working there? I have tried and applied there. The pharmacy never has any openings cause nobody wants to leave there. Wonder why? Maybe cause they are such a novelty and nobody has heard of this tiny new company.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#13 Nov 24, 2012
Sorry son. Costco's own website states their first warehouse opened in 1983. Not sure where you're getting your data from. A little hint for you: you might want to brush up on that history before you go for your first interview there. I wouldn't want you embarrassing yourself by trying to show off knowledge of company facts which are wrong.

In their current form, Costco has only been around for about 2 decades. That's not enough to prove long term success. That isn't even one human lifespan. Blockbuster video rose and collapsed in 20 years. And when the end came, it came quickly.
Bubba

United States

#14 Nov 24, 2012
disgovernment wrote:
@sooverthis: In capitalism, the market determines the rate. It isn't a company's job to determine whether that is above a poverty line or below it. It is what it is.
As I've pointed out in several other posts, no one in the U.S. lives in abjecty poverty anyway. What liberals and socialists describe as "poverty" includes lifestyles containing such luxuries as TV's, fridges, microwaves, cell phones, etc. Heck, many of America's impoverished are OBESE. Tough life huh?!
Historically, in our country, BOTH the wealthy AND the poor have become wealthier. That little fact might be missing in some of the liberal media pieces that you read.
Your post is borderline communist to be honest. It scares me to think I live in a country with such people.
@itdoesntmatter: Hostess failed for a LOT of reasons. Certainly union labor was a MAJOR contributing factor to that.
@nick: you missed the point of the post. So who/what does it better than Walgreens? What system do you propose? One like Cuba or Venezuela?
So Costco is your choice huh? Costco seems to be doing well but they are practically a baby in business terms. They formed when I was in high school and have existed in their present form for really only the last 16 years. That isn't enough time to prove a business philosophy worked.
Furthermore, many investors are worried about Costco's margins and say that they are too low and that Costco is too employee focused. When times get tough for Costco, will they have the balls to stick their philosophy out?
The CEO may have a relatively low salary but I'm sure he has MASSIVE stock options that more than offset his lower salary.
I will nonetheless concede that Costco was a good pick and seems to meet your criteria. So, my next question would be: why aren't you working there instead of on a message board whining about Walgreens.
My wife and I were members of Costco a few years back. It was fun the first couple of times we went, but after a while it lost its luster. They have an extremely limited selection that forces you into buying certain items, if you really want that item. Their prices were ok, but were certainly no better than Walmarts. Basically, you can pick up some neat deals; unfortunately, they usually aren't deals on something you actually NEED.
A couple other problems I see with the Costco business model: Their store locations are far away, so they're not that convenient to most customers. And their business would seem to appeal mostly to middle or upper middle class families who can afford to outlay large sums of cash to stock up on supplies for a longer period of time. That is not something that lower income families can afford to do. I worry about a business that doesn't appeal to such a large segment of America.
Alas a voice of intelligence and sanity. Spot on.
nick

United States

#15 Nov 24, 2012
The problem with your capitalism statement is you are correct in that the market does dictate certain things BUT Wag is part of a different form of capitalism: Corporate Capitalism where the corporations actually dictate the market. In this, corporations set the market so they can earn more money. Essentially, this leads to a corporation becoming too big, too powerful, and too influential on the government and economy. When this occurs, it can lead to fascism. As much as you are telling people to do more research, I suggest you do the same. Once you find that knowledge, ask yourself if this is what you want for future generations.

If you think that the market is dictating what Wag is doing, take a look at their market share. All $72 billion worth.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#16 Nov 25, 2012
I believe the economic term you are looking for is "crony capitalism." Yes, as I've said before, our economy is a melting pot of crony capitalism and socialism. BUT, that is the system that Walgreens exists in. I am reminded of a rap phrase: "Hate the game, not the player."

The solution to this is NOT MORE regulation and MORE wealth redistribution. The solution is....FREEDOM, or FREE markets. But as long as the TWO big political parties dominate in the America, you can expect more of the same.
nick

United States

#17 Nov 25, 2012
disgovernment wrote:
I believe the economic term you are looking for is "crony capitalism." Yes, as I've said before, our economy is a melting pot of crony capitalism and socialism. BUT, that is the system that Walgreens exists in. I am reminded of a rap phrase: "Hate the game, not the player."
The solution to this is NOT MORE regulation and MORE wealth redistribution. The solution is....FREEDOM, or FREE markets. But as long as the TWO big political parties dominate in the America, you can expect more of the same.
No. I'm talking about corporate capitalism. Two different things. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_capi...
nick

United States

#18 Nov 25, 2012
disgovernment wrote:
I believe the economic term you are looking for is "crony capitalism." Yes, as I've said before, our economy is a melting pot of crony capitalism and socialism. BUT, that is the system that Walgreens exists in. I am reminded of a rap phrase: "Hate the game, not the player."
The solution to this is NOT MORE regulation and MORE wealth redistribution. The solution is....FREEDOM, or FREE markets. But as long as the TWO big political parties dominate in the America, you can expect more of the same.
In a true capitalistic system, power is equal amongst everyone. Meaning everyone has an equal say. Also, you do not need wealth redistribution for you are rewarded for your work through raises and promotion so the wealth is being distributed already.

The problem is not with the system but the people running the system. Hate the player, not the game. For the player is taking away your FREEDOM AND FREE MARKETS by gobbling up the market itself. Then, you have one controlling figure in a market share. Instead of doing what is right and giving some of that money back without being told to redistribute that wealth, you have a company taking more away.

You need a history lesson on global economics. You should look at successful economic systems and how they work, instead you want to point at failing ones and ask if we should follow them.
wagsuxxx

Shawnee, KS

#19 Nov 25, 2012
nick wrote:
<quoted text>
You need a history lesson on global economics. You should look at successful economic systems and how they work, instead you want to point at failing ones and ask if we should follow them.
Kind of like how our system was failing around the beginning of the century when all the wealth was concentrated in the hands of a few, wages were poor cause they held all of the power. And the government and unions had to come in and break up these big corporation.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#20 Nov 25, 2012
disgovernment wrote:
I'm curious, with all the Walgreens hatred I see on here, where is this large, successful retail company that meets all your requirements?
I'm trying to imagine what it must look like:
-the employees make like, what,$15/hour?$20/hour?
-the Store Manager makes like $28k/yr
-the CEO makes....$50k/year?
-all the customers are just glowing about their experience
-99% of the employees think they've landed in heaven
-everyone's voice carries equal weight...decisions are made by a ...committee?
-regardless of the economy, no decisions are ever made to scale back pay or benefits
-everyone has free healthcare that covers, among other things, birth control, abortions, tattoo removal, breast enlargements, labiaplasty, their entire extended family
So, anyway, after you guys discuss the companies out there meeting your requirements, please pick the best one and share it with me. I will immediately begin my search on the internet of this marvellous company. I am so excited to see what you guys come up with! Maybe I'll even dig up my resume and get it ready now.
You sound sexist. Oh wait, you're a neo conservative. Oh gosh! The horror that women don't have to pay for birth control anymore!(I think it's funny half the things you listed are things that only women would require/want/use). I don't know about you, but I'd rather have women who want birth control to be on it for free by PAYING FOR THEIR OWN HEALTH INSURANCE than to have more Welfare babies that no one wanted being paid for by EVERYONE!

But back to actually focusing on Walgreens.

The problem with Walgreens is that they sought out college graduates to fill their MGT positions for years and years and years. When you seek out college graduates to fill your lowest management position, you're going to pay a bit of a premium. This practice was fine when Walgreens was growing exponentially and the economy was doing well.

When Walgreens stopped opening so many stores every year and the economy began to fail this became a failed tactic.

The problem is that now Walgreens is stuck with a decent number of MGTs who have been trying to move up in the company, but have been unable to because of lack of openings.

Now because of the economy, or whatever you want to blame it on.. Walgreens has continually targetted this position for cuts. This has basically pissed off all these people who have been 'stuck' in the MGT position for whatever reason. These people are pissed because they keep getting targetted and pissed on while the CEO has been given raises and is given hardly a slap on the wrist for losing one of the biggest sales accounts for 9 months this year.

I don't think the CEO and other execs should make basically nothing. I don't think that DMs or SMs should either. I believe in accountability and I believe that Walgreens has slacked off in this department. Too many trash SMs have been or were left untouched for too long instead of cutting off the dead limb.

Part of Walgreens problem is that they have continually targeted the same position with almost all of their cuts. These people are their front line and are in a position of management. This makes things a bit 'interesting' because you're ticking off one of your essential management components, but expecting them to be okay with everything. You still can't convince me it's fair that EXAs get their title changed automatically and get to have training to make up for inadequacies in training through the years but you won't offer the same to the MGTs who have gotten the shaft. No instead MGTs have to do tests and interviews and jump through a bunch of hoops to *maybe, hopefully* keep their same amount of pay.

I think it's ridiculous how much some of our cashiers make, but again this is a problem with how Walgreens was running the business.

People are pissed because they're being hit in the pocketbook.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Walgreens Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
No more Red Zone 1 hr cosmetetics 52
Beauty 2000 remodel 2 hr cosmetetics lol 12
Clip Strips 3 hr alli leak 20
Walgreens music playlist from 2011 to the present (Apr '12) 5 hr bellevuewa 2,224
News Walgreens Engages Hispanic Customers with Healt... (Jan '13) 8 hr TukolUserFirstTime 35
rx buget pilot 8 hr Ummm 4
YAY Let's Stay Together 9 hr alli leak 1
Frontier project (Jun '15) 18 hr it was a nightmare 17
2016 changes Mon not jaded 1 55
Leadership Issues Mon Charmer 25
More from around the web