Joe Economist
Council Member
The recent headlines "Walmart Unveils Embarrassingly Tone-Deaf Thanksgiving Charity Drive -- For Its Own Employees!" hold a lesson for writers. Check your sources.
A week ago, a picture circled the net that showed a food drive at a Walmart store for its employees in need. Instead of looking into the photo, the class warriors unreleased tirades at the corporate giant for low-pay for its employees. The Boston Global, The Atlantic, and Time all ran similiar stories with the same conclusion, "Walmart employees shouldn’t have to rely on charity."
The picture served to foster the image that low-wage workers were tasked with caring for low-wage workers by an uncaring corporate giant bathing in cash. While the image is compelling, the facts are not. The charity drive was not held by Walmart. It was held by a specific store within the Walmart chain. The drive was not for low-wage employees, but rather for employees in need. According to ABC News, only 12 out of close to 300 employees benefited from last year's drive. Wages aren't the issue - the issue was misfortune such as fire.
The party is irresistable. Ashton Kutcher is tweeting. Steven Colbert is milking the picture for all it is worth. And we follow along blindly instead of asking whether any of the story that we are about to tell is real because the picture so convenient.
When I saw the headline, I had hoped that Walmart had in fact opened a food drive for its own employees that would be funded by customers who are worried about wage fairness. These are the people like Ashton Kutcher who ask "Walmart is your profit margin so important you can’t Pay Your Employees enough to be above the poverty line?” Let's put bins at the front door where they can put action to their words.
The problem with that hope is that the Ashton Kutchers of the world don't shop at Walmart. Walmart serves those with moderate incomes. So the Ashtons of the world who are pained at the thought of Walmart encouraging low-wage workers to help low-wage workers are completely OK with forcing low-wage workers to help low-wage workers through higher prices.
The story here isn't about wages. It is about misfortune and the decency of people to take care of those in their community. The outcome of this story will probably be felt next year when Walmart tells its store that these efforts however noble must be run away from corporate property. It isn't worth the trouble.
A week ago, a picture circled the net that showed a food drive at a Walmart store for its employees in need. Instead of looking into the photo, the class warriors unreleased tirades at the corporate giant for low-pay for its employees. The Boston Global, The Atlantic, and Time all ran similiar stories with the same conclusion, "Walmart employees shouldn’t have to rely on charity."
The picture served to foster the image that low-wage workers were tasked with caring for low-wage workers by an uncaring corporate giant bathing in cash. While the image is compelling, the facts are not. The charity drive was not held by Walmart. It was held by a specific store within the Walmart chain. The drive was not for low-wage employees, but rather for employees in need. According to ABC News, only 12 out of close to 300 employees benefited from last year's drive. Wages aren't the issue - the issue was misfortune such as fire.
The party is irresistable. Ashton Kutcher is tweeting. Steven Colbert is milking the picture for all it is worth. And we follow along blindly instead of asking whether any of the story that we are about to tell is real because the picture so convenient.
When I saw the headline, I had hoped that Walmart had in fact opened a food drive for its own employees that would be funded by customers who are worried about wage fairness. These are the people like Ashton Kutcher who ask "Walmart is your profit margin so important you can’t Pay Your Employees enough to be above the poverty line?” Let's put bins at the front door where they can put action to their words.
The problem with that hope is that the Ashton Kutchers of the world don't shop at Walmart. Walmart serves those with moderate incomes. So the Ashtons of the world who are pained at the thought of Walmart encouraging low-wage workers to help low-wage workers are completely OK with forcing low-wage workers to help low-wage workers through higher prices.
The story here isn't about wages. It is about misfortune and the decency of people to take care of those in their community. The outcome of this story will probably be felt next year when Walmart tells its store that these efforts however noble must be run away from corporate property. It isn't worth the trouble.