I believe, in fact, that being a good steward of the environment and in our communities, and being an efficient and profitable business, are not mutually exclusive. In fact they are one in the same. And I can show you why.That's part of the full text of H. Lee Scott's speech, Twenty-First Century Leadership, which is the source of all the recent articles about Wal-Mart's future environmental and labor plans. (The speech is full of specific targets and goals, and is well worth a read).
Basically, Wal-Mart is going to leverage its size to obtain environmental goals. It will use the same exact tactics it uses against its suppliers to lower prices, only this time very, very few people will bemoan them as an abuse of corporate power. Think I'm exaggerating?:
And about "sandwich balers" and waste:By being the leader, we will not only change OUR fleet, but eventually change truckseverywhere in the world.
This means working with our 60,000-plus suppliers and educating them. If it has to be thrown away, we don’t want it. We intend to reach the point in the near future where there will be no dumpsters at our stores, and no landfills with Wal-Mart throwaways.To do that, we have to address packaging.
Posted by Kevin on October, 26 2005 at 08:37 AM
Bob wrote:Just a lot of spin as far as I'm concerned. They should first implement these measures (as well as better health coverage for their employees) before making the big announcement. This speech would have been a lot better if H. Lee Scott gave it a year from now and had results to back up his big words.
-- October 26, 2005 04:32 PM ∞
Kevin Brancato wrote:You don't think they're going to go through with it?
-- October 27, 2005 10:16 AM ∞
Bob wrote:History is the best prediction of future behavior. They'll implement these tactics with the same ruthlessness and bottom-line orientation as they have in the past. The memo demonstrates that they will continue with their usual business practices. There's nothing wrong with that. I believe in a free market. If Wal-Mart can make a ton of money while paying its employees poor wages, more power to them. The employees should quit. (By the way, the average Wal-Mart employee makes $17,500 a year. H. Lee Scott makes over $12 million.) The problem I have with this whole situation is the spin. Wal-Mart shouldn't talk like they are a caring, community-focused company until they can back it up with results.
-- October 27, 2005 03:38 PM ∞
Kevin Brancato wrote:OK, that's pretty fair.
But where did you get your $17,500 figure?
According to those suing Wal-Mart, in 2001 the average full-time hourly worker with at least one year of experience made ~$17,800.
Of course, that doesn't include the salaried folks or the part-timers (the data for the latter aren't available).
-- October 27, 2005 04:20 PM ∞
Bob wrote:I got the number from a NYT article.
-- October 27, 2005 04:45 PM ∞
demiozkan wrote:Lee Scott:
Bad Busines and poor staffing Mr. Scott needs to go and push some carts into the stores. The company that does not care. It is all about money and immage.
Scott along with Susan Chambers do not worry about health care because they are making millions they would not know or care about associates. This is why people are sick and tired of the spin and lies. Smoke and mirrors. They are so full of themselves they can fertilize the state of Arkansas. They are spouting all that methane gas they can heat the state of Arkansas.
Tar and Feather them send them packing let Chambers and Scott need to go to a third world country and tell them how much they care and what they intend to do. I am almost crying now.
Fire Chambers and let Scott go with her.
Wal Mart you can do Better. You all should be ashamed.-- October 27, 2005 05:47 PM ∞
