|
Boywhiz88 posted:I will say that if Joly leaves, I'd be interested to see if they can get someone as good as him. I think that without him as CEO, we probably would be having a very different conversation about Best Buy. Yeah, this. For a retail job, bby isn't bad. But without joly actually offering decent benefits, and actively encouraging us to like our jobs, the company wouldn't exist.
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 23:10 |
|
|
ReidRansom posted:I don't see them providing portable terminals to the employees doing deliveries on their way home, though. I suppose you could ask they use some sort of app on their phones, provided they have one that is capable of such a thing and should that app be developed, but in that case would they be subsidizing those employees' phone bills? And of course what if the customer isn't home to sign for the package? You can't expect they'll always be there. It just sounds like something that isn't very well thought through. There are a whole mess of issues there that postal services and other parcel delivery services have been through and sorted out and honed, and the only way Walmart is going to be able to do it themselves at a lower cost id probably by cutting those corners and ignoring the regulations and responsibilities that those industries deal with. The stores already have portable terminals to aid with parcel collection from the store so they could be dual purposed or additional ones provided, they aren't taken out of store normally but then employees aren't expected to do out of store stock handling normally either so that would have to change. If the customer isn't home the courier then takes the package back on their next shift (if it's the next day) or they have to go in and return it as extra work (this would need paying for, though lol I'm sure in practice it's just going to be contractor liability). They could also go the roaming merchandiser route and make the courier photograph the poo poo out of everything as liability cover but obviously wal mart isn't set up for that kind of model.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
ReidRansom posted:I don't see them providing portable terminals to the employees doing deliveries on their way home, though. I suppose you could ask they use some sort of app on their phones, provided they have one that is capable of such a thing and should that app be developed, but in that case would they be subsidizing those employees' phone bills? And of course what if the customer isn't home to sign for the package? You can't expect they'll always be there. It just sounds like something that isn't very well thought through. There are a whole mess of issues there that postal services and other parcel delivery services have been through and sorted out and honed, and the only way Walmart is going to be able to do it themselves at a lower cost id probably by cutting those corners and ignoring the regulations and responsibilities that those industries deal with. Walmart is a disgusting company and I really wouldn't be surprised if they did everything in their power to get around that sort of thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
ReidRansom posted:I don't see them providing portable terminals to the employees doing deliveries on their way home, though. I suppose you could ask they use some sort of app on their phones, provided they have one that is capable of such a thing and should that app be developed, but in that case would they be subsidizing those employees' phone bills? And of course what if the customer isn't home to sign for the package? You can't expect they'll always be there. It just sounds like something that isn't very well thought through. There are a whole mess of issues there that postal services and other parcel delivery services have been through and sorted out and honed, and the only way Walmart is going to be able to do it themselves at a lower cost id probably by cutting those corners and ignoring the regulations and responsibilities that those industries deal with. I don't have much to add directly to this conversation, except to ask how Fed-Ex handles all the complications you talked about. Fed-Ex has independent contractors running the Fed-Ex Ground routes, and company drivers for other parts of the distribution chain. I would think think WM would figure out a independent contractor system. Being in the grocery buisiness, they don't have to look far to see the benefits of using I/Os. Having to deal with Walmart myself sometimes, I would not expect a good deal for their employees out of any program like this. I would expect a contract to be signed that iron-clad covers the company's rear end, putting most risk and responsibility on the person driving around. ...or someone high up in WM has a "killer" pet project no one has been able to talk them out of yet. That poo poo happens a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:The stores already have portable terminals to aid with parcel collection from the store so they could be dual purposed or additional ones provided, they aren't taken out of store normally but then employees aren't expected to do out of store stock handling normally either so that would have to change. If the customer isn't home the courier then takes the package back on their next shift (if it's the next day) or they have to go in and return it as extra work (this would need paying for, though lol I'm sure in practice it's just going to be contractor liability). I don't know if WM leases or owns those hand helds, but I seriously don't see them letting anyone run around with a Telxon handheld outside the store. A decent quality hand held computer is $375 and up, not even counting the cost of batteries, charging equipment, tech support, etc. I think all stores make you sign them in/out, some even have those big automated cardlock tool cabinets for the HHC's and printers. Managers will call people by name over the intercom to return that poo poo towards shift change. What I'm saying is, they're real anal about that. e: Wow. My nothing to add, uh, added up. Sorry about that, just think of me as some nocturnal trog who yells, "Walmart can be even nastier to deal with than you think!", from the cave mouth every once and a while. I will say there are good people to work with in almost any situation, and it's pleasant when you find them anywhere. madeintaipei fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Jun 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
madeintaipei posted:I don't know if WM leases or owns those hand helds, but I seriously don't see them letting anyone run around with a Telxon handheld outside the store. A decent quality hand held computer is $375 and up, not even counting the cost of batteries, charging equipment, tech support, etc. I think all stores make you sign them in/out, some even have those big automated cardlock tool cabinets for the HHC's and printers. Managers will call people by name over the intercom to return that poo poo towards shift change. What I'm saying is, they're real anal about that. Not the telxons, they have a separate thingy for in store collection of deliveries, home shopping uses it as does in store collection from other online retailers (might not be a thing in the US) it looks like a bulky mobile phone. They are fussy about giving them out yes but that will necessarily have to change if they want employees to be able to do home delivery, they'll need something like whatever the home shopping vans use for their deliveries. They would obviously be signed in/out as they are now for instore use but they're going to have to give their delivery staff something to record receipt of goods onto whatever they do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
Yeah, having worked for the Walmart, I don't see this working out well. Store-level managers love to make their own tweaks to anything Corporate sends down, so I can see this being "voluntary" in name only. Though it does sound like Amazon Flex, but with actual employees instead of contractors. I do that on my off days if I have nothing else to do, and it's a decent gig. Stop at the delivery depot, pick up 40-60 packages, and spend 3-4 hours dropping packages off. Depending on the route, it can be a quick $80, or take half of forever of you get a lot of apartments with no access/office/nobody home.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Meanwhile... http://www.ocweekly.com/news/fbi-used-best-buys-geek-squad-to-increase-secret-public-surveillance-7950030
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Not all companies offer commercial insurance though. I was talking with some drivers while looking at doing pizza delivery and it seemed like everyone had the same idea: Take out a personal policy, and if they got in a crash, lie to their insurance company. So, yeah, it's pretty much capitalism at its finest, make a job that dumps a ton of non-obvious expenses on employees, doesn't pay enough to cover it, and gets all of the employees to rely on tax fraud and insurance fraud to make it work. OneEightHundred fucked around with this message at 07:50 on Jun 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 07:44
|
|
|
SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:Micro center by me does fine. But they have their own in house brand of computers, so you can get a desktop priced like you built it yourself without building it. And most of the store is stuff like routers or electrical outlet internet connector dodads That's one of the many things I miss about living in Atlanta. Not only was there a Micro Center just around the corner, but there was also a Fry's Electronics just a short drive away. Now I gotta drive 200 miles if I don't want to shop exclusively at Best Buy or the numerous mom-and-pop computer shops that sell lovely system builds at hilariously marked-up prices.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
The microcenter near me is the poo poo when it comes to needing tech stuff in a pinch.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
I was a pizza delivery driver. If we got in an accident we were told to put the magnetic sign on the roof into the trunk and change shirts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
Did you have to eat all the pizza too?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
"In the event of a car accident, scuttle the vehicle with this brick of plastic explosive."
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
Be sure to burn the company uniform in nearest trash can. Our brand's future depends on a proper lack of evidence.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
HEY NONG MAN posted:Did you have to eat all the pizza too? one time i left the delivery bag on the roof and drove off, spilling it all over the street at the first turn i still delivered it
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
Somewhat related question, but we have a lot of mom and pop restraunts and stores, bodegas, etc going out of business here in the Bay Area. While our minimum wages ranges from $12 to $15 (or going to be soon in various cities), most restaurants and stores admit they were already paying that much already so it's not been a major factor in their closing, but rather increased rents and so on since theres no rent control for small businesses. But I see so many drat commercial space vacancies here (Berkeley) and other nearby cities, and it seems giant land holdings would rather ask for $5 per sq ft than lower it to something businesses could afford, so vacant it sits. Are they able to write off vacany losses or something? I just don't understand how so many would rather keep asking for insane amounts and be vacant than ask for less and actually make good money. It's a shame since there's been so much businesses in extremely primo corner foot trraffic spots that have been sitting there vacant the past 3+ years. How do they even benefit from that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 22:04
|
|
|
The thing to remember is that losses from vacancies don't mean that much when the owners of the building are making plenty of money from high rents elsewhere. My understanding is that the losses are usually on the order of a few cents per square foot per month that goes vacant, as that's the total costs needed for maintenance that must be done to keep the space rentable later. So if you have say 500 square feet of former store space sitting vacant, you're maybe spending $10 on that space as the landlord per month while nobody rents it. That's not 0 or anything, but it's hardly something that's going to make them think cutting from their existing $5 per square foot per month asking price for $2500 a month is worth it. They could leave the space empty for 20 years and a month at $5 per square foot would more than make up for those losses.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 22:24
|
|
|
If you own enough real estate it can make horrible sense to hold properties vacant just to avoid depressing the average rent in the area. If your competitors held those spaces and rented them out cheaper than you, suddenly you have to lower your rent and then where would we be. I think they can write off the losses of vacancies too. Everything about real estate is hosed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 22:33
|
|
|
I know they can write off depriciation, I've seen that called "phantom cash flow". Edit: and one can insure against commercial vacancy .
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 22:51
|
|
|
fishmech posted:The thing to remember is that losses from vacancies don't mean that much when the owners of the building are making plenty of money from high rents elsewhere. My understanding is that the losses are usually on the order of a few cents per square foot per month that goes vacant, as that's the total costs needed for maintenance that must be done to keep the space rentable later. That's retarded, you're not including the forgone rent.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
RBC posted:That's retarded, you're not including the forgone rent. You shouldn't do that, because that's not a real direct loss. Their actual losses from leaving a space vacant are vanishingly small. You might as well claim that since they could get $100 a square foot on a choice block in Manhattan, that renting out your strip mall space in Irvine must actually be a massive loss at only $5 a square foot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 23:17
|
|
|
This is why there should be a vacancy tax
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
fishmech posted:You shouldn't do that, because that's not a real direct loss. Their actual losses from leaving a space vacant are vanishingly small. NOPE
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:37
|
|
|
got any sevens posted:This is why there should be a vacancy tax Many cities, such as Toronto, do the opposite and subsidize commercial vacancies by exempting them from property taxes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
RBC posted:NOPE Exactly, claiming losses based on nobody wanting to buy at a given price is ludicrous. The only real losses are the extremely minor upkeep costs. Glad you saw reason for once instead of buying in to landlordist propaganda.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:41
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Exactly, claiming losses based on nobody wanting to buy at a given price is ludicrous. The only real losses are the extremely minor upkeep costs. You're dumb as gently caress
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:42
|
|
|
RBC posted:Many cities, such as Toronto, do the opposite and subsidize commercial vacancies by exempting them from property taxes. this is why they should purge their government and pass a vacancy tax
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
RBC posted:You're dumb as gently caress Nope, sorry but rent no one wants to pay isn't a loss, it's simply money you couldn't make. Your actual loss is the actual upkeep costs. I might as well claim I'm making a loss because you refuse to give me $10,000 right now for this used plastic cup I have on my hospital table.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:46
|
|
|
fishmech posted:a loss, is simply money you couldn't make no really, gee thanks smartest kid in america
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:50
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Nope, sorry but rent no one wants to pay isn't a loss, it's simply money you couldn't make. Your actual loss is the actual upkeep costs. kill rentiers imo
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:53
|
|
|
RBC posted:no really, gee thanks smartest kid in america Not sure why you're attempting to change it to something that's wrong. A loss is something that you actually lose, ya moron. No bank is going to swoop into your business accounts and take $2500 away from your accounts because you didn't receive $2500 that month for that one rental slot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:53
|
|
|
go look up what the accounting definition of a loss is please, then return
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:54
|
|
|
RBC posted:go look up what the accounting definition of a loss is please, then return The accounting definition of a loss is a decrease outside of normal operations. A lease not being renewed is surely normal operations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
It's not a loss, but it's certainly a failure to realize potential gains. EDIT: However, arguably renting your building for less would decrease the value of that building on paper, creating an unrealized loss. PT6A fucked around with this message at 01:01 on Jun 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
fishmech posted:The accounting definition of a loss is a decrease outside of normal operations. A lease not being renewed is surely normal operations. Gonna have to agree there unless you believe that the natural state of land is "being rented by someone".
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
fishmech posted:The accounting definition of a loss is a decrease outside of normal operations. A lease not being renewed is surely normal operations. You are so loving dumb omg
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
I dunno RBC you seem to be melting. Is that an account gain of energy?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 01:00
|
|
|
I also refuse to believe that any real estate company doesn't practically consider land going unrented as not being normal because there's shitloads of places that go unrented for ages without anybody doing anything about it. Like I'm sure they lie about how terrible it is for tax reasons but no people are always buying poo poo and doing gently caress all with it for ages.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 01:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 23:10 |
|
|
RBC posted:You are so loving dumb omg Actually the people like you who think a place no longer getting rented means a business is losing huge sums of money is what's "loving dumb". In reality they actually lose very small sums of money, and can usually sustain that for decades on end and make it up in a few months to a year or so of renting the place again. PT6A posted:It's not a loss, but it's certainly a failure to realize potential gains. Exactly. And yes, renting out at a lower value just to get income would formalize a "loss" in asset value. Letting it sit vacant usually won't do that on its own so long as other parts of the building or whatever are still getting rented.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 01:02
|
|