Sheesh, I'm trying to help YOU out. The PBS link backs up the 45% number and my own personal experience with WalMart backs up that they have made a concerted effort in the last 5 years to reduce turnover.
And no, I'm not going to tell you how I know that. Believe me or don't believe me. I really don't fucking care.
As for the 65% or 70% numbers, the information I gathered in 15 minutes of searching was inconclusive. So I went with the lower number to be fair.
I understand what you did, however, you could have posted: "Wal-Mart's labor turnover rate is 44 percent per year -- close to the retail industry average."
So I suspect we'll see Diego now loudly complaing about the entire retail industry regarding high turnover and that being indicative of the employers being exploitive... :roll:
Maybe for general managers who manage multiple "big box" locations.
Your link simply says "managers."
I can assure you that store managers are making half that number at best.
$50,000/yr is pretty good money.
And that includes bonus money. Nobody else in WalMart is within shouting distance of that kind of money.
If you say so... :roll:
Did you read about where WalMart managers help employees file for welfare benefits? Also, did you read this?
No, I didn't read that...so what?
Re: the two-thirds of employees being seniors, college students, or second income providers...more evidence that the typical employee is not a head of household, hence any considerations of pay related to being the primary breadwinner is irrelevant and only services to divert from the real issues.
Basically, WalMart is admitting that their hiring practices are parasitical.
Krugman says what??
How are they supposedly admitting this, B?
A job at Wal-Mart is not intended to be a career job that supports a family. Hence, a great place to work for people who don't want to work full-time or need additional income.
Like I said, Krugman has infected you people.