RSN Fundraising Banner
Sanders Wants to Penalize Walmart's Owners Unless They Pay Their Workers $15 an Hour.
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=46943"><span class="small">Jeff Stein, The Washington Post</span></a>   
Thursday, 15 November 2018 09:17

Stein writes: "Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) will unveil legislation on Thursday to force Walmart to raise its workers' wages to at least $15 an hour, the latest move in the senator's campaign to target large U.S. corporations over low pay."

Walmart employee Kenneth White scans items while conducting an exercise during a Walmart Academy class session at the store in North Bergen, N.J. Walmart will be rolling out a program that allows its staff to check out customers and provide receipts right on the spot in the busiest sections of the store. (photo: Julio Cortez/AP)
Walmart employee Kenneth White scans items while conducting an exercise during a Walmart Academy class session at the store in North Bergen, N.J. Walmart will be rolling out a program that allows its staff to check out customers and provide receipts right on the spot in the busiest sections of the store. (photo: Julio Cortez/AP)


Sanders Wants to Penalize Walmart's Owners Unless They Pay Their Workers $15 an Hour.

By Jeff Stein, The Washington Post

15 November 18

 

en. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) will unveil legislation on Thursday to force Walmart to raise its workers’ wages to at least $15 an hour, the latest move in the senator’s campaign to target large U.S. corporations over low pay.

Sanders’s “Stop Walmart Act” is designed to pressure the biggest employer in America to raise wages for nearly 1 million workers. The bill would bar big corporations from buying their own stock — a move that rewards shareholders — unless they pay all employees $15 an hour, provide them seven days of sick leave, and prevent CEO compensation from rising more than 150 times above median employee pay.

The effort comes after Sanders spearheaded a campaign over low worker pay at Amazon.com, which culminated last month in the online retailer agreeing to pay all workers at least $15 an hour.

Critics say Sanders’s bill would constrict the flow of capital by preventing firms from buying back shares from their investors — money those investors then plow back into to the broader economy.

Supporters say the plan would benefit a huge number of underpaid workers as the company’s founders, the Walton family, have seen their wealth balloon dramatically amid a broader increase of wealth inequality in the United States.

In a statement, Sanders pointed out that the Walton family is the richest in America, with an estimated net worth of about $180 billion. The Walton family owns about 50 percent of Walmart’s stock, according to the company, while the starting wage for a Walmart employee is $11 an hour — which translates into a little more than $19,000 a year, according to the Roosevelt Institute, a left-leaning think tank.

“Most Walmart retail workers are working for horrendously low wages with minimal benefits. The wealthiest family in America must pay its workers a living wage, and the Stop Walmart Act will do just that,” said Sanders, who is introducing the bill along with Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.). “Amazon did the right thing by raising their minimum wage to $15 an hour. Walmart can and must do the same.”

In a statement, a Walmart spokesman said the company has already raised starting wages by more than 50 percent in the last three years, while awarding $625 million in quarterly cash bonuses over the last year as well as bolstering paid family leave, paid time off and job-training opportunities.

Looking at all compensation — including benefits, paid time off and its 401(k) match — the average hourly compensation for Walmart employees is more than $17.50 an hour, the company said.

“Our big focus for our company is making it easy for people to get in the front door for a job and empowering them to grow as fast as their skill will take them,” said Kory Lundberg, the Walmart spokesman. “We have been very deliberate about our job offerings, and we will continue listening to our people and investing in the training, benefits and wages that they tell us are important.”

Sanders’s legislation, though not likely to be signed into law, given Republican control of the White House and Senate, proposes fining big companies that buy back stock while failing to pay employees $15 an hour. Corporate executives that fail to follow the rule would also be barred from their jobs. (A big company is defined as one with more than 500 employees.)

Raising Walmart’s wages to at least $15 an hour would cost the company $3.8 billion, said Ken Jacobs, chair of the University of California at Berkeley Labor Center. Walmart announced last year that it would authorize $20 billion in stock buybacks over a two-year period.

“Overall, the cost to Walmart of doing this would be a tiny, tiny fraction of their revenues, while its impact on workers’ lives would be huge,” Jacobs said.

Walmart workers say they are encouraged by Amazon’s recent decision to hike wages. Kristi Branstetter, 54, a Walmart employee for seven years in Kansas City, Mo., said she struggles to pay her rent, utility and grocery bills every month on $11 an hour of pay. She was with about two dozen other Walmart employees when she learned that Amazon had agreed to the $15 an hour minimum wage.

“We said, ‘Hey, if Amazon can do it, Walmart can do it. Walmart, it’s your move. Now, it’s your turn,’” said Branstetter, who cleans and stocks shelves at the store. “That really encouraged us to fight harder.”

Some critics called the legislation counterproductive. Samuel Hammond, director of poverty and welfare policy at the libertarian-leaning Niskanen Center, said stock buybacks help circulate capital to faster-growing firms. When companies repurchase stock from investors, those investors are free to put that cash into other businesses and companies.

The Republican tax law passed last fall left companies flush with cash by lowering tax rates, which in turn set off a boom in stock buybacks. Liberals have pointed out that these stock buybacks primarily enrich wealthy shareholders, while investors have defended buybacks as a sign of a quickly growing economy.

“Preventing investors from buying back shares would essentially trap capital within the very firms that don't need it, which will hurt wages and productivity in the long run,” Hammond said in an email. “This is the latest in the worrying trend of politicians threatening specific companies with ruinous regulations in order to win short term concessions.”

But other experts disagreed. Lenore Palladino, a senior economist and policy counsel at the think tank the Roosevelt Institute, said there is no evidence buybacks generate a surge in private investment rather than simply enriching shareholders. Companies did not begin buying back their stock until regulatory changes under President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, she noted.

“Of course wealthy shareholders could reinvest in other firms, but the data shows that’s not what happens,” Palladino said. “Over the last 20 years, more money has been generally been flowing out to shareholders than has been invested back into public corporations.”

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+1 # Wise woman 2018-11-15 13:38
Good for him. No one can live on $11/hr unless they work two jobs or overtime. Huge companies like Wal-Mart have been living off the public role for years as low paid employees need food stamps and/or other assistance just to survive while the CEO makes how many millions? How did this country get so out of balance?
 
 
+1 # Texas Aggie 2018-11-15 16:40
Walmart might want to consider this to be a good deal because otherwise Mr. Saunders has a bill that would make them liable for the government benefits such as Medicaid, low cost housing, food stamps, and all the rest of it that their workers are eligible for. That would cost a lot more than giving them a raise to almost livable income. It's their choice.