Cheap Living

[Anonymous]

From what I'm leaning, WALMART wants truckers to work 16 hours a day, I also understand, the company has decided it is now above any law of the USA.

Jim _ Lawton, NV MP 236

[daveklepper]

Jim, could you explain a bit further? What are the details, and cannot the Teamsters do something about this unfair and unsafe competition?

[Anonymous]

Hey Highiron,

Do you feel cheap, WALL MART is now going to tell you how many hours you must work! They want 16 hours a day!

They now want asian results out of you truckers, work more for less! They also want and need mexican trucking right here is america, just to drive down there costs!

JIm - Lawton, NV MP 236

[Anonymous]

This kinds of sums up the whole deal!

(The following column by David K. Shipler appeared on the Los Angeles Times website on March 6. It is an excerpt from his latest book, "The Working Poor: Invisible in America.")

LOS ANGELES -- If Republicans were true to their stated principles of smaller government, free-market economics and the "ownership society" touted by President Bush, they would do something quite alien to their traditional practice: They would support the spread of labor unions instead of trying every trick to foil workers' efforts to organize.

Unions have almost disappeared from the private sector, where they represent merely 7.9% of workers. Government employees are better organized, at 36%, but overall union membership in the country has fallen to its lowest level since the Depression — about 12.5% of all workers, a steep decline from 35% half a century ago.

This makes pro-business conservatives happy, but it shouldn't, because it throws a monkey wrench into the machinery of capitalism.

Republicans who believe that the source of economic well- being is the private sector, not government programs, cannot shrink government in a just way until the private sector functions well for workers at the bottom rung of our society. That won't happen until employers pay higher wages and benefits. They won't do that until the market requires it, and the market won't make that demand until workers can level the playing field with their employers through collective bargaining. A marketplace works freely only when both sides of the transaction have negotiating power.

Plain, everyday facts subvert the conservative agenda of privatization: Without higher earnings, millions of workers will continue to depend on Medicaid for their children's health insurance, on food stamps to feed their families and on housing subsidies to bring rent down to manageable levels. Either government pays or private employers pay — or people go sick and hungry and homeless.

Yet the Republican Party, seduced by campaign contributions from big business and the wishful thinking of some theorists, marches in near total anti-union lock step.

Is this really good politics? Would broader unionization help or hinder Republicans at the ballot box?

Unions usually campaign for Democrats. John Kerry won 65% of union members' votes last November. But a group of congressional members who call themselves "labor Republicans," mostly from the Northeast, routinely breaks that pattern by supporting unions.

Sen. Arlen Specter won the endorsement of the AFL-CIO last year and got 52% of the union vote in Pennsylvania. He was one of 10 Republican congressional candidates endorsed by the AFL-CIO for supporting a bill to protect workers from harassment and dismissal when they try to organize. The measure — which didn't pass but is being reintroduced in the new Congress — has two main goals. It would stiffen fines against employers found to have harassed employees who wanted to unionize and it would allow for a simpler, faster way for workers to be unionized, replacing all-out, heavily contested elections with a simple "card-check" that recognizes a union if most workers sign up to join. (Elections sound democratic, but they can be delayed by employers to allow time for threats and propaganda. For example, managers have singled out union supporters for extra work, summoned them individually for interrogation and called in police on election day to create an air of intimidation.)

Today, much of organized labor's decline has resulted from the global outsourcing of manufacturing jobs and the fact that rising service and technology industries are not yet unionized. There is also an out-and-out assault on the already unionized.

Two new Republican governors, Matt Blunt of Missouri and Mitch Daniels of Indiana, suspended collective bargaining by their state employees as soon as they took office in January. Bush has proposed revising decades of Civil Service rules by giving managers enormous authority to set the pay and assignments of federal employees.

Certainly unions are not perfect institutions. When they get too powerful, they can drive companies out of business; there are examples in the newspaper, railroad and airline industries. When they are too weak, they can help their members only marginally. Now, for the most part, unions, such as those among janitors and parking garage attendants, are too weak and too small, giving employers excessive power.

Conservatives should not like this. They should not want the free market to fail millions of the employed. They should not want to lose labor votes. "Whatever party you're in," says Andy Levin, director of the AFL-CIO's campaign to change the federal law on organizing, "if you're for the robust protections to form unions, we're for you." The question is, what are Republicans for — a free market or a rigged market?

[Anonymous]

So, Jim, basically the argument of this article can be boiled down to:

1. Private business should be required to pay substantially better wages and benefits to eradicate the social problems of our country.

2. Unions are needed to assure this will happen.

Sounds pretty close to socialism to me.

Where, pray tell are private businesses who must compete in the global marketplace going to get this raft of cash? Who will invest in companies with no hope of making any return on investment as they stagger under this massive burden? Lets not forget that there are already significant payroll taxes in place today as well as numerous other taxes paid by businesses. I find it hard to believe that these taxes would simply disappear.

Sounds like another typical labor solution to a problem. Let us take over and we will line our pockets without fixing the problems... And before you start ranting, please explain to me how the unions fixed anything on the RR on Halloween 1985...or since...

LC

[spbed]

May guess is uncle Sam will go for the owner operator 1st over a trucking company that has teamster drivers. Like a truck bringing a truckload of strawberries to Hunts Point & now looking for a back haul to pay his gas money back to California. [:)]

QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper

Jim, could you explain a bit further? What are the details, and cannot the Teamsters do something about this unfair and unsafe competition?

[mucable]

It was reported on the new last night that WAL-MART is seeking a 16 hour day for its truck drivers. This would include 2 hours (unpaid) rest time...sounds like a real fine deal to me!!! They also reported that WAL-MART's goal is for the drivers to not only haul the loads and loads of cheap Chinese crap they sell...but also to unload it. Again that sounds like a real fine deal to me!!!

[tree68]

At risk of alienating a lot of folks - a major part of our current problem can be laid to Eugene Debs Credo for unions (he was an early organizer - late 1800's). His battle cry - "MORE!"

Why is this a problem? How often do you hear of contract negotiations where the status quo is just fine? So we continue the circle - higher wages mean higher prices which means the worker needs higher wages to maintain his current standard of living which means higher prices which means the worker needs higher wages to maintain his current standard of living which means higher prices which means the worker needs higher wages to maintain his current standard of living which means higher prices which means the worker needs higher wages to maintain his current standard of living which means...You get my drift.

Unfortunately, although I can state what I feel is a portion of the problem, I can't offer a solution that won't hurt somebody somehow. I'm not sure there is such a solution.

Don't get me wrong - labor unions have a place. Many, if not most, of the labor protections we enjoy today are a result of unions looking out for their members. But many of those protections have now been codified, with the government looking out for the working man (at least in theory). In some ways unions have become redundant, which would explain their shrinkage.

Business, of course, doesn't like unions. If a business wants people qualified to do the work they need done, they need to pay competitive wages. The problem is when the union forces business to pay wages at a level above the competitive rate. Guess who pays for the result? Here goes the spiral again... Businesses that pay competitive wages (and that can vary greatly from locale to locale) and offer acceptable benefits generally don't get unionized.

It could probably be argued that unions are driving what is a competitive wage, but only to a certain degree. If the labor pool is larger than the number of jobs needed, they could obtain wage rates five times the competitive rate, but only those people who get to work at that business would benefit. If there are qualified people willing to accept a lower wage, they'll still fill positions at non-union businesses.

My [2c]. Excuse me while I get my asbestos suit out of the closet.

[dharmon]

Seems pretty simple to me. If the job doesn't suit you, don't work there. I haven't been paying too much attention lately, but I hadn't noticed any news regarding impressment of drivers by WalMart.

They are an American company, owned by Americans who apparently, by the the profits and expansion meet the needs of a large number of Americans, employing Americans and using an American business model to work from.

[Anonymous]

Here is the actual Associated Press Article on the Wal Mart bill:

LC

Wal-Mart Wants Truckers to Have 16-Hour Workdays
By LESLIE MILLER, AP


WASHINGTON (March 9) - Wal-Mart and other retailers are lobbying Congress to
extend the workday for truckers to 16 hours, something labor unions and
safety advocates say would make roadways more dangerous for all drivers.

Rep. John Boozman, an Arkansas Republican whose district includes Wal-Mart
Stores Inc.'s headquarters in Bentonville, is sponsoring a bill that would
allow a 16-hour workday as long as the trucker took an unpaid two-hour
break. The proposal is expected to be offered as an amendment during debate
over the highway spending bill on Wednesday.

"Truckers are pushing harder than ever to make their runs within the
mandated timeframe,'' Boozman said. "Optional rest breaks will reduce driver
layovers and improve both safety and efficiency.''

Current rules limit drivers' workdays to 14 hours, with only 11 consecutive
hours of driving allowed, union leaders and safety advocates say. That gives
truckers three hours to eat, rest or load and unload their trucks.

Critics of the proposal accuse Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, of
trying to fatten its profits by forcing truckers to spend more time waiting
at the loading dock without getting paid.

The International Brotherhood of Teamsters "hasn't gotten one complaint from
drivers saying they don't have time for a break or a meal,'' the union's
vice president, John Murphy, said at a news conference Tuesday.

Joan Claybrook, president of the safety advocacy group Public Citizen, said
drivers could end up starting their workday at 8 a.m. and quitting at
midnight.

"This is a sweatshop-on-wheels amendment,'' Claybrook said. "The last thing
we need is for tired truckers to become even more fatigued and threaten the
safety of those around them on the roads.''

The current rule had been struck down in federal court because it didn't
take into account truck drivers' health. In October, Congress reinstated the
rule for one year. If the Boozman proposal is adopted, it would retain the
16-hour workday regardless of any new rule.

Nearly 5,000 people were killed in large truck crashes in 2003, and those
vehicles were three times more likely to be involved in fatal crashes than
passenger cars, according to the National Highway Transportation Safety
Administration.

Wal-Mart spokesman Erik Winborn said the proposal has broad support among
the trucking industry and other retailers.

"We support it because we feel it would actually enhance safety rather than
hurt safety,'' said Winborn, whose company employs about 7,000 truck
drivers.

Wal-Mart employees were Boozman's top contributors in 2003-04, giving him
$48,152 for his re-election campaign, according to the Center for Responsive
Politics. Wal-Mart and its employees gave $44,500 to Boozman for his first
successful bid for Congress in 2001-02, the last year corporations could
give to congressional candidates.

[vsmith]

Unfortunately Dan , they are also a company that kills American jobs by offshoring their supply lines to the cheapest labor markets they can find, squelching US manufacturers who just can't compete with those $1 a day labor rates, and they kill American entire downtowns and particularly the Mom-n-Pop stores when they build there 3 square city block Megastores that suck the life out of the nieghboring businesses.

And who's to blame for all of this, Wallmart? not really... It you , and me , and everyone else who shops there. We've become so crazed over ever cheaper goods, that almost everyone has become blind to the side effects of this craze. Want $5 pants? a $10 toaster, then be prepared to toss the tradition of American Manufacturing and the traditional American main street onto the trashpile of history. We are killing ourselves from within.

[vsmith]

PS I do not shop there and never will again, no matter how cheap they price things.

[dharmon]

Exactly....just as every other large company is doing...going overseas for production and customer service to keep prices low and therefore profits for the investors high.

The business model is sink or swim in captialism. It's kind of like that Meg Ryan movie about the bookstore....either compete, adapt or fail. Mom and Pop stores...like hobby shops have to adapt to change or they will fail. It's not fair, it's business. Darwninsm.

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith

PS I do not shop there and never will again, no matter how cheap they price things.

I do. And I will continue to do so, recognizing them for what they are. Consumables.....dog food, tape, shotgun shells, stuff I intend to use....all day long. I don't go there to buy a piece of furniture I hope to last 20 years or fine jewelry or even CDs. I sleep well at night.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SP9033

Hey Highiron,

Do you feel cheap, WALL MART is now going to tell you how many hours you must work! They want 16 hours a day!

They now want asian results out of you truckers, work more for less! They also want and need mexican trucking right here is america, just to drive down there costs!

JIm - Lawton, NV MP 236

=) right here we go...

Alot of my experience and training revoloved around bypassing the limitations of federal hours of service rules. Now I did get caught from time to time for driving when I should not.

If I did not drive those loads they will put some one else in the rig and tell him or her to deliver it or else.

Walmart has many trucks. They depend on many outside trucks under contract to deliver the freight. They seek to control with a iron grip the time used by the truck driver.

16 hours is not enough time to get a day's work done.

I can bring up many many situations where time just flowed thru the driver's hands as he or she waited all day to get loaded, get empty or waitied for a load. wait wait wait.

40-60 hours a week spent waiting (unpaid) and not counted in the logbook. I would sleep in the berth according to the log book. But in reality stood at the walmart counter with 30 other drivers waiting for that trailer to be unloaded.

Mexican trucks are being upgraded to current US and Canadian standards to be able to operate in the rest of North America. Only along the border you will see transfer trucks waiting a day or more for the cross border loads. Money has nothing to do with it.

You can pay a driver 1 cent or 1000 dollars but they are still going to be stuck waiting. When it is time to drive, they are tired from waiting and need to sleep for a while.

It is the company that seeks to squeeze every last moment of productivity by keeping the wheels rolling at the expense of personal hygene, meals, laundry, home time with family and maintaince that will run the driver into the ground.

Federal hours of service laws are written by those influenced by labs that sprout sleep data that does not take into account CO2 poisioning, stress and threat of firings and unreasonable shipping and recieving schedules.

These driving hour laws are little changed from 1936!

The best drivers will be husband and wife teams that can do the job 24/7 365. They will cook food on the move, bag the laundry and save other tasks for once a month when they are allowed home.

Railroad engineers hog out at the end of thier allowed time driving. At that moment they are legally NOT ALLOWED to move that train one inch.

If truckers were held to the same standard as railroad engineers then you will see thousands of trucks on the shoulders unable to move an inch until they have thier required rest or another driver and or a truck is dispatched to replace them.

This would be totally unacceptable to walmart and virtually every shipper/reciever in the USA.

There are time periods where I have no hours to drive for days at a time. (Max 70 hour rule) and still took loads into the east coast. These time periods were logged as vacation time off at home. Had I been inspected at a scale house by law enforcement they certainly would have shut me down and levied fines to both my company and me.

That is when I decided to train my wife and go as a team. Single drivers dont have the time in a day to do the work safely and correctly.

If you listen to the CB radio you will hear talk along the interstate about when drivers slept.

"last week"

"Maybe today after I get unloaded"

"Maybe I will get a few hours.. Im too tired to keep it between the lines"

Does walmart hear this talk? Or any other outfit? Probably. But that does not matter. What matters is keeping that truck rolling and making money.

I see no relief for drivers until deep root attitudes are changed to foster true rest periods without threat of ternimation, loss of schedules, delays imposed by angry customers who are out of product, inexperienced drivers who need more time to complete a task.

Comapny resources such as satellite tracking and real time dispatching based on miles per hour averaged every 5 minutes and distance to go until arrive at the customer. There is a dead line on the bottom of that screen. Once the numbers go negative, the company knows that load is running late.

They will consume much man hours and resources producting alert reports of late drivers and try to save the promised delivery times. I have had many reports generated against me even though I may set personal records for time/distance endurance.

Walmart once held a honored status among drivers. They were given a truck and told "You are the captian of this ship" and as long they completed thier assigned tasks slowly and safely everything was golden.

Now you look at a walmart distribution center and see many many bobtail trucks sitting empty because there are not enough drivers availible to run the trailers to and from the walmarts.

Why are they not enough drivers? Federal rules hours of service. Walmart can comply with the regulations to the letter and freight moves slowly. Or they can ask for more time to drive (16 hours?) and try to make that tired and unhappy driver do two days's worth of work in one day.

Eventually nothing moves because you cannot pay drivers enough to endure such "Slack action" between the hours law, dispatchers and the demands of the job.

Then you need to hire more drivers at a higher pay. This is unacceptable because everything then cost more money. What do you do? ***ed if you do and ***ed if you dont.

You hire two drivers, put them in two trucks and hope that you get 16 hours work out of them in that day. Or find one team to run the truck 24/7

[BaltACD]

Dam.....where is slavery to really get costs under control.

[vsmith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD

Dam.....where is slavery to really get costs under control.

Malaysia?, where Wallyworlds get those $2 shirts from [;)]

[harpwolf]

If you want to improve something, it costs money. Wal-Mart has nice shelving in their stores. They could go for CostCo cheapie shelving, but they don't. That costs more money, that raises their prices. Oh well, but that's how the world improves.

Safe, rested truck drivers fall into that category.

People panic over having their Oreos cost a penny more... but take a look at the history of such improvements over the last 30 years. The auto industry is a good example, they claimed all those smog control and air-bags would bankrupt them, well they didn't. It always seems to work out well for the economy in the end. It's a rising tide. It floats all boats.

[Anonymous]

O.K. Here's the gist. Truckers have been legally able to log 15 hours on duty time for many years,with only ten behind the wheel. Most drivers(OO's) especially did not nor at present log all hours spent.Reason they would be out of hours (70 total allowed in 8 days )before they got 2 weeks work in.From experience,its no fun trying to finangle logs and still get paid for hours worked and still get home regularly. Thats all from this ol'trucker.

[coborn35]

Isnt there a law that says you have to take a a 4-6 hour break every 8 hours driving?

[BaltACD]

QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith

QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD

Dam.....where is slavery to really get costs under control.

Malaysia?, where Wallyworlds get those $2 shirts from [;)]

Malaysia is a step or two above slavery....the Petronas Towers (worlds tallest buildings to date) and hosting a Formula 1 Grand Prix race....just like a First World country.

[Anonymous]

There's no Eleventh Commandment that says we must be fruitful and multiply. Maybe we should remember that when we get frustrated trying to make the world a better place for future generations.

[selector]

Vsmith said a lot, I think. WE are where the fault lies. If WE decide that $2M dollar salaries for guys on roids who chase pop flies is too much, WE would do something about it. If WE were willing to pay $800 for a 30" colour TV, instead of merely $400, WE would buy only American/Dutch/Canadian, etc products. But every houshold has to have two or three of them...don't they? Most do.

Similarly, when WE decide that Walmart is not the place where WE would like to offer OUR patronage, Walmart would quickly change their practises.

Unions have done much for America and other leading countries, but some of it was like a snake swallowing its own tail. When unions put up the capital and take the risk to run industries, they will quickly agree that paying high wages is not necessarily a good thing. Ask any businessman what percentage of his costs go to wages and other human factors. Then figure out how to run a business so that it stays running...and employing people...lots of them...everywhere!!

[tatans]

Don't worry too much about walmart in the future, the big worry is "free trade" and I don't mean just with Canada and Mexico, It seems the U.S. has forgotten a country called China. I just heard on T.V. they are about to give North America a lesson in free trade this month and this will be just the beginning of products dumped by volumes that even North Americans cannot begin to comprehend and is just the tip of the iceberg before hundreds of freighers invade western North America. This realization was not supposed to happen for another 20 years or so but has crept up to about three years if not sooner. hang on boys.

[spbed]

Actually I think mainland China & Indonesia are the countries of choice these days. Check out what China buys from us vs what we buy from China. A pie chart will be very much in the Chinese favor. [:(]

QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith

QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD

Dam.....where is slavery to really get costs under control.

Malaysia?, where Wallyworlds get those $2 shirts from [;)]

[vsmith]

Last year the China sought and succeeded in removing trade barriers restriction in the garment industry, critics here worried that China would overwhelm the US gament industry with cheap imports, the "Freetrade" advocates said that was poppycock! Well the barriers came down and yesterday i heard on the news that Chinese made garment today account for over 70% of ALL garments in the US, even the Freetraders were dismayed! the shape of things to come?

I have been saying this for a while now, each year proves me more correct in this belief.

We are England, and its 1900!

You history buffs will know what I mean.....

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear

So, Jim, basically the argument of this article can be boiled down to:

Sounds pretty close to socialism to me.

LC

No where in this opinion piece is there a mention of government ownership of the means of production. If there is no mention of govenment ownership of the means of production...

How can you say something like; "Sounds pretty close to socialism to me."

The "Right" sometimes likes to cloud the issues by bringing into the conversation highly charged words, one of these words is "socialism." Well, this is the definition of "socialism" from the NEW WEBSTER"S DICTIONARY:

"A theory or method of social oganization and government whereby the citizenary jointly owns the means of production and distrubution, and the power of administrative control is vested in the state"

In the above quoted opinion piece, there is NO mention of ownership of the means of production and/or distrubution by the state!

So, if you're a thinking man, just how could you make that statement?

Jim - Lawton, NV MP236

[spbed]

As silly as this sounds I think we make our enemies stronger like China when we buy from Uncle Sam. No different then the oil situation where Russia & the middle east countries get stonger when we buy oil products. Sorry to say in both cases we become weaker. [:(]

QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith

Last year the China sought and succeeded in removing trade barriers restriction in the garment industry, critics here worried that China would overwhelm the US gament industry with cheap imports, the "Freetrade" advocates said that was poppycock! Well the barriers came down and yesterday i heard on the news that Chinese made garment today account for over 70% of ALL garments in the US, even the Freetraders were dismayed! the shape of things to come?

I have been saying this for a while now, each year proves me more correct in this belief.

We are England, and its 1900!

You history buffs will know what I mean.....

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper

Jim, could you explain a bit further? What are the details, and cannot the Teamsters do something about this unfair and unsafe competition?

A portion of my union dues have been keeping third-world truckers off your suburban highways for the past 5 years. Thank you Jim Hoffa and the TEAMSTERS.

The planning economists only want Mexican truckers here plying US roads for one reason, if here, they are a down-ward force on wages. Thus making transportation CHEAPER, this in no way makes living better. It only allows production to take place away from consumption!

Jim - Lawton, NV MP236

[Anonymous]

I HAVE ATHEORY THAT CHINA AND ALL OTHER COUNTRIES IN THE WTO CAN NOT DEFEAT US WITH MILITARY MIGHT SP THEY ARE TRYING TO DO IT WITH ECONOMIC FACTORS