News, How Walmart's 'Dress Code' Costs Employees (taxes, claim, money)

[alphamale]

I had a dress code in the car business when I was ONLY paid commission!

I invested in myself. It was a worthwhile investment.

[Csiko]

Originally Posted by Moby Hick

Not by much you weren't unless you are either ignoring inflation or you were being cheated out of the minimum wage by your employer. In 1980, the minimum wage was worth a bit over $8/hour, which is what WalMart pays now.

This just in: Walmart decides what the minimum wage is. More at 11.

[I_Like_Spam]

Originally Posted by L210

It is barely outside of the definition of a uniform.

All I can think about is how much tax money is already spent to subsidize Walmart's labor costs. I wonder how many Walmart employees are receiving government assistance.

There is some money that subsidizes Wal-mart labor costs, the special tax credits that are available for signing people up off of the welfare rolls.

But that kind of money is usually scooped up by the larger employers, it really isn't free money either.

Disabled people and welfare recipients often need special training on being on time and other essentials. They also get the credits for hiring mentally challenged folks who might need extensive instruction even on simpler tasks.

[Travelassie]

Originally Posted by John1960

Some Walmart employees were recently angry about a new clothing mandate. Workers would have to wear khaki or black bottoms and navy blue or white collared shirts.

How Walmart's 'Dress Code' Costs Employees - Forbes

Interesting. The way I'd look at it, is that they've got to wear *something* to work, and whatever dress code they have wouldn't include old jeans or cutoffs and tank tops, or whatever it is employees wear to hang out in, so it might as well be blue shirts and khaki pants. Both of these items can be obtained relatively inexpensively in many stores, and could even be used worn in other places by the employees, so I really can't see them complaining about it- most retailers do have some sort of dress code.

And... if the employees can't see themselves wearing these blue shirts and khaki pants anywhere else, if they only use them for work, and they can show this, their expenses for getting those clothes might even be tax deductible. That's if they pay income taxes, that is.

[mkpunk]

Originally Posted by Baconisgood

Pants are Pants, who cares what color they have to be? If you don't want a career at Walmart, better stay awake in Science and Math class!

My ex-girlfriend works in Walmart and she wasn't that bad in school and is in fact going to college for social work. Nice try.

[Nonesuch]

Originally Posted by L210

It is barely outside of the definition of a uniform.

Really? You think requiring khaki-colored or black pants/skirts and a blue or white shirt with a collar is barely outside the definition? The Department of Labor disagrees.

OTOH, the vest? Sure, that is a uniform, and as such, is supplied by WalMart at no cost to the employee.

Originally Posted by FLSA2004-1NA

If an employer merely prescribes a general type of ordinary basic street clothing to be worn while working and permits variations in details of dress, the garments chosen by the employees would not be considered to be uniforms. On the other hand, where the employer does prescribe a specific type and style of clothing to be worn at work, e.g. where a restaurant or hotel requires a tuxedo or a skirt and blouse or jacket of a specific or distinctive style, color, and quality, such clothing would be considered uniforms.
. . .
Based on the information provided in your letter, we are inclined to view the khaki shorts or trousers, and navy blue golf shirts required of the employees as ordinary basic street clothing and not a uniform under the FLSA. Accordingly, the restaurant may require the employees to wear such garments to work without reimbursing the employees for the cost.

[North Beach Person]

Originally Posted by s1alker

Most retailers I have worked for usually provided the polo company logo shirts for little to no cost. The pants you had to buy of course. I personally would never work or even shop at Walmart. It's a shame they are killing retailers that treat their employees well and provide a living wage.

Who would that be, the local Mom and Pop? Not likely.

[mizzourah2006]

I was under the impression that the uniforms were going to be available at Walmart at a huge discount to employees plus their 10% discount. I had heard that the polo's would be available for around $3-$4 and pants at a similar price.

I could be wrong though. I worked at a grocery store and they supplied 1 shirt, but it had the company logo on it and I had to wear dress pants and dress shoes. Maybe I'm odd, but I have never worked for an employer that provided all of my clothing. Why is this a big deal? They want their employees to dress in a standard uniform.

Originally Posted by s1alker

This is very true. The only people who make a living wage at Walmart would be the store manager or the pharmacist. But WalMart clerk jobs aren't exactly meant to be someones main income. Workers there are so easily replaceable that Walmart has no real incentive to try to keep anyone.

So now 100-150k is the threshold for a living wage? Pretty impressive society you live in.]

Originally Posted by Moby Hick

That must be counting management. The average associate makes under $9. I don't think anybody chooses to work there so much as isn't able to get hired anywhere else.

Where do you guys get your info from? According to glassdoor the average cashier (the lowest paid position at Walmart) makes on average $8.55 an hour.

http://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/wa...RCH_KO0,16.htm

[Osito]

Originally Posted by I_Like_Spam

When I worked in retail, back in the 1980's before Wal-mart came to Pennsylvania, we had to wear a dress shirt, slacks and a tie, to make less than what WMT associates make.


I think these Walmart employees are complaining too muc.

The cost of living was also lower, wise one.

[Osito]

Originally Posted by North Beach Person

Who would that be, the local Mom and Pop? Not likely.

When I worked at Dairy Queen in 2001, we got our shirts free. They were in horrible shape but...it's not like they wouldn't have ended up that way anyway.