Wal-Mart Asks Suppliers to Give Up Control of Their Deliveries

It was meant to emphasis the radical rights, or lefts, view that no one elses opinion is worth as much as their own. I just have a hard time believing that someone that "appears" to be such a patriot would actually say that basically ones "RIGHT" of free speech, could be construed as meaning you can't talk in any derogatory fashion of an employer. Sounds pretty #### Marxist to me. Especially since your view of the liberals is so derogatory.

But, you are correct, I think it was the Bill of Rights that guarantees free speech.

Oh well, double standards are acceptable, to some.

You are welcome as well.

 

No sorry you are wrong. There is NOTHING in the US Constitution (OR the Bill of Rights) that gives ANYONE the right to say what they want about anyone else.

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment

Notice there is no mention of forbidding a private corporation from writing a policy (rule; law) forbidding "free speech".

There is a BIG difference between what Walmart can do and what Congress can do.

YOU have the "right" to not work for such an employer, if you wish.

 

By my interpretation of the link you provided, sounds like we ARE guaranteed the right to free speech. Now I'm no lawyer by any means, but I am neither right nor left. I tend to think my interpretation isn't clouded by any secular leanings.

And you're correct about my choice of employers.

 

You're correct, on all three counts. I don't see where any of that negates a citizens right to free speech.

Let's say you like the colour green. I can't stand green. Basically, it looks like my right to say that isn't guarenteed, by your interpretation. Very simplistic to be sure, but wasn't the original Constitution written for all to understand?

 

All the Constitution is, is a CONTRACT between YOU (as an individual) and the Government. It does NOT grant (or guarantee) you rights. It is clear in the Document that your rights originate from a HIGHER POWER and there are LIMITS placed upon what Government can do to you (in restricting those rights).
That document does not place limits on what rules a PRIVATE PARTY (person or Corporation) can place on you.
In other words, you cannot walk onto my property (or Walmart's property) and say anything that you think you can say. It would be up to me (or Walmart) to place those limits, because WE have that right.
You do NOT have the right to assemble; peaceably or otherwise, on my property (or Walmart's property).
You do NOT have the right to worship "your" god (or any god) on my property (or Walmart's property).
And you do NOT have the right to "petition" me for redress of grievances, because I just don't care.

Hope that clears things up for you.

 

OK, I think we're muddling mallwarts rights, with the rights of a private citizen?
Should have realized that. My bad.
When on mallwarts property, I have to abide their rules, no matter how anal I feel they are. Agreed. And when a person signs a contract with an employer, if that is what likely happens with that company, the person has actually surrendered his rights.
Now, I wonder why, if that actually happens, does mallwart require that?
From discussions I've had with former and active employees, and from the treatment I've received from mallwart, it seems that the derogatory statements made on this site, pretty much hit the nail on the head.
No, no one is forced to be there, excepting us in a way. But with the sorry state of affairs regarding employment, people are desperate. If I didn't have the bit of insight I have, I may even apply there.
It still does not give mallwart the right to treat their employees as they do, there's simply NO excuse to treat others like that. Mallwart has successfully driven out competition in many areas of North America, to a point competition is good. But at what cost?
IMO, if mallwart continues on this course, they may be pushing antitrust laws? Much like the Bell system?
The low pay most of us receive, us drivers and mallwart employees as an example, does nothing but promote continuation of the erosion of the middleclass. Sounds rather lofty, but think of that.

 

Veering back on topic (for anyone who is still interested )-

This will have BIG implications. Currently, 60 to 80% of Wal-Mart vendors have agreements where the supplier arranges the shipping to regional DCs. They add the freight charges to the bill they send to Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart wants to reach further back into the supply chain and take over that function, using their own trucks and trailers whenever possible. Many of these suppliers use 3PLs like CH Robinson to manage transportation logistics. Bentonville believes they can do it better and cheaper. CHR account reps are paid on commission, many of them making six figures or more. This function will be shifted to salary-based Wal-Mart employees.

As far as small carriers and independents go, they will be hauling direct for Wal-mart, instead of brokers like CHR.

http://www.overdriveonline.com/wal-mart-to-control-more-of-its-freight/

 

No.......Walmart is a PRIVATE Corporation, they have the same rights as a PRIVATE citizen.
NO ONE forces anyone to work for or shop at Walmart.
If you don't like the way Walmart treats their employees or vendors or customers, it is YOUR right to shop elsewhere or do business with a different company.

Don't fool yourself to think that a "UNION" will help matters at all. One only has to look at what has happened to all other "UNION" companies, THEY aren't competitive and they only end up laying off employees.
Isn't that the goal of UNIONS anyway; lay off employees........just as long as they have that "contract"?
Unions don't give a crap about their members. If they did, they would re-negotiate their contracts instead of encouraging their "members" to allow a company to close (and LOSE employees) rather than lower wages for everyone. As has happened in just about every industry in this country, Michigan included.

IF Walmart breaks a law, I expect them to suffer the same (legal) consequences as any private citizen.
Wlamart is only able to "drive out" their competition because they can do the same thing at a lower cost. I know areas where Walmart has actually HELPED their competition do a better business.
And while you say that there are employees that Walmart "mistreats", I say there are employees in every occupation that claim the same about their employer.
Malcontents mostly.
There are far more employees that actually LIKE working at Walmart, perhaps you should listen to them instead of falling for that "Workers of the World Unite" bullshizmet.

 

Now.......I don't have a problem with that. I ALWAYS hated hauling "CHEAP" loads for CHR.

 

I have listened to some, and all I got was basically a recruitment speech.

I know we likely won't agree, but isn't what you said about workers of the world unite, the same thing like mallwart tries with their sweet little cheer at the beginning of the shift? Think like an Asian worker, Japanese/Chinese that is, "My life for the company". How denigrating to any thinking person in our culture.