If you want to make somewhere close to a “living wage” you need to be in management.

If you don’t think you get paid enough to do your job, I agree retail is hard work, you need to move up or move on to something else.

I actually own a retail store of my own now and if I had to pay every employee $12 or more an hour I would be out of business.

Thanks for wording your comment in a way that I wish I could have worded mine!

I agree with you 100%!

We all know how frustrating it is to work in retail. That’s why we left when we developed enough skills to work for a different employer. The point isn’t that retail is a hard job, the point is that just about anyone can do it. Skilled jobs pay more, as they should. I work in an office now, and get paid worlds more than I ever did at Levi’s. However, when I wanted a flexible schedule, lax dress code, and the employee discount, I chose to work at Levi’s. You can choose to work elsewhere-the amount you are paid shouldn’t correspond to how frustrating the job is, but rather how hard it will be be to find someone else to replace you.

And for the record, the hardest job I ever had was with McDonald’s. I’m an executive now.

If your job sucks, then CHANGE JOBS! Nobody is holding a gun to your head and making you stay in a job that pays a low wage.

It’s economics, plain and simple. Why can’t you figure that out?

But seriously, go to hell. I work retail, and I have to say I have a much harder job than most of my office-bound friends. It’s not easy to go to work every day and work with the general public, smiling all day even when you don’t want to, and pleasing people who always want more for less, like a ten cent raise in the cost of bleach is worse than me not getting paid a fair wage. Why the hell not pay me a fair wage? Ask yourself a serious question: why do you deserve bleach that is ten cents cheaper?

Fair enough but why must you leave a comment to tell me that you don’t like my blog?

David B,

The author of the Target article doesn’t give their point of view one way or the other. They just tell us what the advocate thinks that both Target and Wal-Mart needs to pay their employees more.

Target’s only obligation is to continue to please its customers so that it stays in business. I will concede that in order to please its customers, it needs to have good employees, but the pay for “good” employees is determined by market forces, not what a group of biased extortionists think is “fair”. Basically, Target pays what it needs to in order to attract the type of employees they need, and those employees are fine with it, otherwise they would go and find work elsewhere. Target and Wal-mart do not participate in slave trading (contrary to what some would have you believe), all of their employees choose to work their voluntary. It is a voluntary interaction in which both parties benefit.

This is the main problem I have with unions. They seem to be of the mentality that their employer exists for the sole purpose of providing them with a job. That could not be farther from the truth. Their employer exists to provide a product or service for their customers. Their employees either contribute to that end or they don’t. It is an individual’s responsibility to make themselves invaluable to their company in order to remain employed. And if they feel that their employer does not recognize their performance, they should take their skills elsewhere.

@Ron
I’ve never been part of a union, but I have worked with them a lot and a portion of my company is unionized. Agree with everything you said.

Unions such as the one Rob described are like miniature socialist societies. There is no incentive to work hard, because they are all paid collectively. As a result, productivity goes down, and prices go up for consumers. The chief consideration in an economy should always be the consumer.