Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ratbastid
It's true that WalMart/Sams Club are so deeply entrenched in the low-labor, low-cost approach that there's no way out short of a massive corporate overhaul, which won't happen. The point of the article isn't to give Sam's advice. The point is that a worker-centric approach that treats people generously is the more advantageous business strategy, as demonstrated by the contrast between Sam's Club and CostCo.
|
I agree, but the Businessweek article specifically compares Sam's inefficient low paid worker (high number of employees) plan to Costco's high paid more efficient worker (lower number of employees) plan. If both companies adopted the worker-centric approach the result would be many thousands of Sam's workers being laid off (or never hired in the first place) in order to pay the remainder more. This would be great for those who had the higher paid more efficient jobs.
Businessweek (Wall Street) is not concerned with the numbers of employed but is more focused on how much those who are employed are contributing to the bottom lilne. I'm not saying that this is a bad thing. The only downside is the 30,000 or so who would have to go out and also find worker-centric companies to work for.