Wal-Mart Cuts Over 13,000 Of What It Calls Jobs | The Onion - America's Finest News Source
Business
Wal-Mart Cuts Over 13,000 Of What It Calls Jobs
February 9, 2010 | Issue 46?06
Walmart
BENTONVILLE, AR?Retail giant Wal-Mart has announced in recent weeks that, effective immediately, it is cutting as many as 13,000 of what it somehow has the audacity to refer to as "jobs" from its corporate payroll.
According to Wal-Mart representatives, the, for lack of a better word, positions will be cut from the company's underperforming Sam's Club division. Analysts reported that Monday's layoffs marked one of the largest so-called downsizings of what can hardly even be termed employment in the company's history.
"Obviously, it is a sad day whenever we have to let go of any of the people we have dehumanized so thoroughly that we can barely muster the will to describe them as employees," Wal-Mart CEO Mike Duke told reporters. "However, this is a business, and we must do what we can to stay competitive while still paying our existing workforce what we actually refer to with a straight face as wages."
Sources inside the company confirmed that roughly 1,200 people will be forced to leave what one might very charitably characterize as their careers in the neon-lit dungeon known as the membership recruitment office. In addition, another 10,000 worn husks of human beings will be relieved of what it literally induces pain to say are their job responsibilities handing out free in-store samples to customers.
"We tried to solve the problem by cutting what is hard for me in good conscience to even call benefits," Duke said. "We even tried negotiating with what we would probably refer to as the workers' union if, in fact, they even had such a thing. But ultimately, our only feasible option, financially, was to make what I'm going to just lie and call a very hard decision and let go some of the faceless drones that I condescendingly refer to in public as members of our 'corporate family.'"
Enlarge Image Jobs Chart
"There's no way I can actually say what I am about to say without literally inducing deep, hearty peals of unbelieving laughter from anyone within earshot," he added. "But all those laid off should still hold their heads up high."
Thousands of what it just feels really, really wrong to describe as anything other than wage slaves have responded to the layoffs with strong objections.
"It doesn't seem fair, after all the time I put in with this abusive prison state regarded for some reason as a company," said former membership recruiter Robert Weldon, 46. "Obviously, this is going to severely reduce the overall quality of the unceasingly grim reminder of financial hardships that I call my life."
Replies
33
Beach Fanatic
The Telegraph Agency had a pretty big following too, it doesn't mean they reported unbiased news.What are you talking about? If I am watching a news report I am interested in what the reporter, whoever it may be, is presenting, not thinking about whether I agree with them or not. I learned many years ago to seperate commentary from news and if commentary should occur sometimes I agree and sometime I don't. That, to me, is a rather normal reaction.
I'm curious, when you are watching Fox News how often, estimate, do you agree with the person delivering the news? Not a commentator or pundit.
SoWal InsiderAuthor
Always Fox News, never MSNBC, always Hanity, never Olberman, always Beck, never Maddow, always ... how many of the fox bashers on this board regularly tune into MSNBC, CBS, or NBC to get their fill of the nightly news?we are all smart enough? today's quiz....how do you tell if someone is spinning the news?
This argument has been hashed and rehashed on this board a thousands times, nobody is every going to change thier mind. I say watch whatever channel you want. We're all smart enough to know when somebody is spinning something. Personally I *like* certain fox shows, especially Bret Baier and his crew, they serve as welcome balance to CNN. Hannity and Olby should get together and go bowling, they're like peas in a pod.
Beach Fanatic
News is not presented today the way it once was partly because most of it comes through television which is basically an entertainment medium. Consequently, news gets spun according to what you watch and how you, personally interpret it, according to your beliefs when spin is involved.
There has been only one time in my life when I heard the news without some occasional spin. It was when I was stationed in England and listening to the BBC. The newscaster would come on and say, "This is the BBC and here is the news." and read it without comment of any kind. This is also not the case with the BBC nor any other network today, IMO.
There has been only one time in my life when I heard the news without some occasional spin. It was when I was stationed in England and listening to the BBC. The newscaster would come on and say, "This is the BBC and here is the news." and read it without comment of any kind. This is also not the case with the BBC nor any other network today, IMO.
Edited
SoWal InsiderAuthor
we are all smart enough? today's quiz....how do you tell if someone is spinning the news?the tv is on
SoWal InsiderAuthor
News is not presented today the way it once was partly because most of it comes through television which is basically an entertainment medium. Consequently, news gets spun according to what you watch and how you, personally interpret it, according to your beliefs when spin is involved.
There has been only one time in my life when I heard the news without some occasional spin. It was when I was stationed in England and listening to the BBC. The newscaster would come on and say, "This is the BBC and here is the news." and read it without comment of any kind. This is also not the case with the BBC nor any other network today, IMO.
someone decided which news was to be read, and which "news" is unworthy of comment. that's 99 percent of spin.
SoWal Insider
we are all smart enough? today's quiz....how do you tell if someone is spinning the news?
By getting your information from multiple sources doofus.
SoWal InsiderAuthor
By getting your information from multiple sources doofus.stop rubbing your ron paul poster
Beach Fanatic
"There is no such thing as an objective point of view"
Very interesting article on media bias especially the questions for detecting bias.
Critical questions for detecting bias
- What is the author's / speaker's socio-political position? With what social, political, or professional groups is the speaker identified?
- Does the speaker have anything to gain personally from delivering the message?
- Who is paying for the message? Where does the message appear? What is the bias of the medium? Who stands to gain?
- What sources does the speaker use, and how credible are they? Does the speaker cite statistics? If so, how were the data gathered, who gathered the data, and are the data being presented fully?
- How does the speaker present arguments? Is the message one-sided, or does it include alternative points of view? Does the speaker fairly present alternative arguments? Does the speaker ignore obviously conflicting arguments?
- If the message includes alternative points of view, how are those views characterized? Does the speaker use positive words and images to describe his/her point of view and negative words and images to describe other points of view? Does the speaker ascribe positive motivations to his/her point of view and negative motivations to alternative points of view?
This is another good article and states what 30ashopper stated, get your news from various sources.
Don’t just accept what you hear on the radio or TV as fact — do some research.
Instead of jumping to a conclusion based on a 10-second sound bite, find the context of what was said. You will not only be more informed, but you will also be able to help inform others and, if we are all more informed, our elected officials are more likely to be accountable for their
actions.
The media needs to be unbiased | Central Michigan Life
Edited
Checking your forum account
Please wait while we verify your forum account.