They took two weeks to determine the store mgr did not follow company
rules. So the dumped him. The company also reports that no
discrimination was found.
Also the story told the tampa police he
(the gaf employee ) tried to pass a forged check. That was because they
could not get into the gaf bank to determine if good. The bank had a
block on this type of info.
Do not know why the bank wants to block info but........
Funny part is the forgery was reported and in a very short time tampa
police determined all was legit. Wal mart mgr still would not say they
were sorry. So if anyone out there wants a $22,000 a year job at
wal-mart in tampa fl. apply on line.
Company now says all mgrs will go to
CHARM school.
"O D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> They took two weeks to determine the store mgr did not follow company
> rules. So the dumped him. The company also reports that no
> discrimination was found.
> Also the story told the tampa police he
> (the gaf employee ) tried to pass a forged check. That was because they
> could not get into the gaf bank to determine if good. The bank had a
> block on this type of info.
> Do not know why the bank wants to block info but........
> Funny part is the forgery was reported and in a very short time tampa
> police determined all was legit. Wal mart mgr still would not say they
> were sorry. So if anyone out there wants a $22,000 a year job at
> wal-mart in tampa fl. apply on line.
> Company now says all mgrs will go to
> CHARM school.
>
Wooooo.. $22,000 uh year. Where do I sine up?
Charles Self wrote:
> "George" <George@least> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>"Charles Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>"O D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>>They took two weeks to determine the store mgr did not follow company
>>>>rules. So the dumped him.
>>
>>>>Company now says all mgrs will go to
>>>>CHARM school.
>>>
>>>Yeah, no discrimination. Charm school is probably just as good an idea as
>>>is the ethics training GWB is making his people take. Like you can teach
>>>dolts to be polite and 40-50-60 year olds to be ethical if their mommas
>>>ain't already done it.
>>>
>>
>>Yep, much easier to sit back and say it's impossible. Too bad the neocoms
>>don't say the same thing about entitlement "safety nets" which become
>>hammocks.
>
> You worry so damned much about entitlements, where is it written that the
> bunch of crooks that each administration appoints should receive ethical
> training at my expense. If they want to charge it to you, fine. I don't want
> to pay for something they should already know.
>
> WalMart is rapidly fading into a "who cares" category for many people, but,
> in fact, all their personnel screw ups, and the suits they engender, end up
> in the final price people pay for items there.
>
> I don't recall saying it wasn't possible, nor do I recall writing about
> safety nets and hammocks. That's your personal aberration.
>
>
Not to worry. Given the administration's track record with truth and
integrity, none of this is going to happen anyway.
grumble,
jo4hn
Leon wrote:
> "O D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>They took two weeks to determine the store mgr did not follow company
>>rules. So the dumped him. The company also reports that no
>>discrimination was found.
>>Also the story told the tampa police he
>>(the gaf employee ) tried to pass a forged check. That was because they
>>could not get into the gaf bank to determine if good. The bank had a
>>block on this type of info.
>>Do not know why the bank wants to block info but........
>>Funny part is the forgery was reported and in a very short time tampa
>>police determined all was legit. Wal mart mgr still would not say they
>>were sorry. So if anyone out there wants a $22,000 a year job at
>>wal-mart in tampa fl. apply on line.
>>Company now says all mgrs will go to
>>CHARM school.
>>
>
> Wooooo.. $22,000 uh year. Where do I sine up?
>
>
You sine up around the corner!
On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 03:57:47 GMT, "Leon" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>"O D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> They took two weeks to determine the store mgr did not follow company
>> rules. So the dumped him. The company also reports that no
>> discrimination was found.
>> Also the story told the tampa police he
>> (the gaf employee ) tried to pass a forged check. That was because they
>> could not get into the gaf bank to determine if good. The bank had a
>> block on this type of info.
>> Do not know why the bank wants to block info but........
>> Funny part is the forgery was reported and in a very short time tampa
>> police determined all was legit. Wal mart mgr still would not say they
>> were sorry. So if anyone out there wants a $22,000 a year job at
>> wal-mart in tampa fl. apply on line.
>> Company now says all mgrs will go to
>> CHARM school.
>>
>Wooooo.. $22,000 uh year. Where do I sine up?
>
... and what someone was saying that's for 6 days a week, wohoo! [Not
sure if that is true or urban legend. Seems a pretty small salary for that
kind of responsibility and hours.]
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 20:14:11 -0500, O D <[email protected]> wrote:
> They took two weeks to determine the store mgr did not follow company
> rules. So the dumped him. The company also reports that no
> discrimination was found.
I'm probably not alone in wondering what the heck you're talking about.
"Charles Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "O D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> They took two weeks to determine the store mgr did not follow company
>> rules. So the dumped him.
>> Company now says all mgrs will go to
>> CHARM school.
>
> Yeah, no discrimination. Charm school is probably just as good an idea as
> is the ethics training GWB is making his people take. Like you can teach
> dolts to be polite and 40-50-60 year olds to be ethical if their mommas
> ain't already done it.
>
Yep, much easier to sit back and say it's impossible. Too bad the neocoms
don't say the same thing about entitlement "safety nets" which become
hammocks.
"Charles Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "George" <George@least> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Charles Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> "O D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> They took two weeks to determine the store mgr did not follow company
>>>> rules. So the dumped him.
>>
>>>> Company now says all mgrs will go to
>>>> CHARM school.
>>>
>>> Yeah, no discrimination. Charm school is probably just as good an idea
>>> as is the ethics training GWB is making his people take. Like you can
>>> teach dolts to be polite and 40-50-60 year olds to be ethical if their
>>> mommas ain't already done it.
>>>
>> Yep, much easier to sit back and say it's impossible. Too bad the
>> neocoms don't say the same thing about entitlement "safety nets" which
>> become hammocks.
> You worry so damned much about entitlements, where is it written that the
> bunch of crooks that each administration appoints should receive ethical
> training at my expense. If they want to charge it to you, fine. I don't
> want to pay for something they should already know.
>
> WalMart is rapidly fading into a "who cares" category for many people,
> but, in fact, all their personnel screw ups, and the suits they engender,
> end up in the final price people pay for items there.
>
> I don't recall saying it wasn't possible, nor do I recall writing about
> safety nets and hammocks. That's your personal aberration.
>
I forget how obtuse and close-minded you really are sometimes. Thanks for
reminding me.
It's written in federal law that those who take federal dollars home take
certain forms of training as a condition of employment. Among others,
courtesy of pressure groups on the left not the current president, we have
sensitivity training, and EEOT briefing, among others. Feel free to
disparage them, and call for their elimination as ineffective. At the same
time, consider how many other programs and regulations, an example of which
was given, could be rescinded if the same cost/benefit analysis were
applied.
Shouldn't have taken you much mental effort to bridge the two thoughts.
"O D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> They took two weeks to determine the store mgr did not follow company
> rules. So the dumped him. The company also reports that no
> discrimination was found.
> Also the story told the tampa police he
> (the gaf employee ) tried to pass a forged check. That was because they
> could not get into the gaf bank to determine if good. The bank had a
> block on this type of info.
> Do not know why the bank wants to block info but........
> Funny part is the forgery was reported and in a very short time tampa
> police determined all was legit. Wal mart mgr still would not say they
> were sorry. So if anyone out there wants a $22,000 a year job at
> wal-mart in tampa fl. apply on line.
> Company now says all mgrs will go to
> CHARM school.
Yeah, no discrimination. Charm school is probably just as good an idea as is
the ethics training GWB is making his people take. Like you can teach dolts
to be polite and 40-50-60 year olds to be ethical if their mommas ain't
already done it.
"George" <George@least> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Charles Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> "O D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> They took two weeks to determine the store mgr did not follow company
>>> rules. So the dumped him.
>
>>> Company now says all mgrs will go to
>>> CHARM school.
>>
>> Yeah, no discrimination. Charm school is probably just as good an idea as
>> is the ethics training GWB is making his people take. Like you can teach
>> dolts to be polite and 40-50-60 year olds to be ethical if their mommas
>> ain't already done it.
>>
> Yep, much easier to sit back and say it's impossible. Too bad the neocoms
> don't say the same thing about entitlement "safety nets" which become
> hammocks.
You worry so damned much about entitlements, where is it written that the
bunch of crooks that each administration appoints should receive ethical
training at my expense. If they want to charge it to you, fine. I don't want
to pay for something they should already know.
WalMart is rapidly fading into a "who cares" category for many people, but,
in fact, all their personnel screw ups, and the suits they engender, end up
in the final price people pay for items there.
I don't recall saying it wasn't possible, nor do I recall writing about
safety nets and hammocks. That's your personal aberration.
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> George wrote:
> > It's written in federal law that those who take federal dollars home take
> > certain forms of training as a condition of employment. Among others,
> > courtesy of pressure groups on the left not the current president, we have
> > sensitivity training, and EEOT briefing, among others. Feel free to
> > disparage them, and call for their elimination as ineffective.
>
>
> No problem, then. Now I know why I have to attend ethics training every year.
> My company has a major ethics problem; it's very true. OTOH, it's the folks in
> the corporate offices that have caused us to be on the national news
> periodically... not the folks who have to take the ethics classes. *We* are not
> the problem; *we* have never been the problem. But *we* are the ones who have
> to sit through that horsehit every year.
>
> And still I cringe every time I hear my company's name on TV. It's never good.
>
>
>
>
You wouldn't happen to work for Boeing would you? A couple of years
ago, every time they were mentioned on the news I knew to schedule
another hour for some sort of ethics presentation.
On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 14:52:28 -0700, Mark & Juanita
<[email protected]> wrote:
>>It seems that even if you're a long-standing employee, coloured people
>>just aren't trusted by Walmart.
>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_yorkshire/4529826.stm
> Where on earth did you get that conclusion from the article cited?
The rule is that all employers must be satisfied that their staff
(whites too) are entitled to work in the UK. An Asda-Walmart manager
decided that it was appropriate to read out the names of long-standing
Asian employees over the public PA and demand that they report to the
office with their passports. This is both humiliating and
discriminatory (the white employees were not singled out in this
manner).
On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 13:30:12 GMT, "Charles Self"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"George" <George@least> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Charles Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> "O D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> They took two weeks to determine the store mgr did not follow company
>>>> rules. So the dumped him.
>>
>>>> Company now says all mgrs will go to
>>>> CHARM school.
>>>
>>> Yeah, no discrimination. Charm school is probably just as good an idea as
>>> is the ethics training GWB is making his people take. Like you can teach
>>> dolts to be polite and 40-50-60 year olds to be ethical if their mommas
>>> ain't already done it.
>>>
>> Yep, much easier to sit back and say it's impossible. Too bad the neocoms
>> don't say the same thing about entitlement "safety nets" which become
>> hammocks.
>You worry so damned much about entitlements, where is it written that the
>bunch of crooks that each administration appoints should receive ethical
>training at my expense. If they want to charge it to you, fine. I don't want
>to pay for something they should already know.
>
... snip
>I don't recall saying it wasn't possible, nor do I recall writing about
>safety nets and hammocks. That's your personal aberration.
>
No, but you did use the totally unrelated topic of Walmart and courtesy
training to take a swipe at the current administration -- seems like your
own personal aberration there.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 20:14:11 -0500, [email protected] (O D) wrote:
>They took two weeks to determine the store mgr did not follow company
>rules. So the dumped him. The company also reports that no
>discrimination was found.
It seems that even if you're a long-standing employee, coloured people
just aren't trusted by Walmart.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_yorkshire/4529826.stm
(Asda is a large UK supermarket chain and was bought by Walmart a couple
of years ago)
George wrote:
> It's written in federal law that those who take federal dollars home take
> certain forms of training as a condition of employment. Among others,
> courtesy of pressure groups on the left not the current president, we have
> sensitivity training, and EEOT briefing, among others. Feel free to
> disparage them, and call for their elimination as ineffective.
No problem, then. Now I know why I have to attend ethics training every year.
My company has a major ethics problem; it's very true. OTOH, it's the folks in
the corporate offices that have caused us to be on the national news
periodically... not the folks who have to take the ethics classes. *We* are not
the problem; *we* have never been the problem. But *we* are the ones who have
to sit through that horsehit every year.
And still I cringe every time I hear my company's name on TV. It's never good.
--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
[email protected]
On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 20:39:20 +0000, Andy Dingley <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 20:14:11 -0500, [email protected] (O D) wrote:
>
>>They took two weeks to determine the store mgr did not follow company
>>rules. So the dumped him. The company also reports that no
>>discrimination was found.
>
>It seems that even if you're a long-standing employee, coloured people
>just aren't trusted by Walmart.
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_yorkshire/4529826.stm
>
>(Asda is a large UK supermarket chain and was bought by Walmart a couple
>of years ago)
Where on earth did you get that conclusion from the article cited? They
fired someone over allegedly racist remarks. The only handwringing is how
the company attempted to handle a requirement regarding how to comply with
immigration laws -- those laws and requirements weren't their doing.
Do people really think that somewhere Walmart (or other companies) have
this secret racist training/screening camp where employees go to be told
how to discriminate against minorities? That almost has to be the thought
process for this kind of reasoning to be applied to all company managers
across not only one country, but now the world.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
"Juergen Hannappel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Mark & Juanita <[email protected]> writes:
>
>
> [...]
>
>> Do people really think that somewhere Walmart (or other companies) have
>> this secret racist training/screening camp where employees go to be told
>> how to discriminate against minorities? That almost has to be the
>> thought
>
> Not only Walmart. It's standard practise:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4521244.stm
>
Not exactly what Mark meant, not even close, in fact. What you're seeing is
the result of inept training meant to produce the exact opposite results.
Such training that I've seen tends to be either too abrupt, as in the BITCH
for the day woman, or so warm and fuzzy it makes normal folks puke. Neither
does anything good, but the AIM is to do good, not create discrimination.
"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <[email protected]> writes:
[...]
> No problem, then. Now I know why I have to attend ethics training every year.
> My company has a major ethics problem; it's very true. OTOH, it's the folks in
> the corporate offices that have caused us to be on the national news
> periodically... not the folks who have to take the ethics classes. *We* are not
> the problem; *we* have never been the problem. But *we* are the ones who have
> to sit through that horsehit every year.
>
> And still I cringe every time I hear my company's name on TV. It's never good.
ANd because food is more important than morals you still increase that
companys shareholder value by working for them. In a slightly better
world the workers union would have to power to throw the quilty out of
their jobs fur unethical behaviour at the company steering wheel.
--
Dr. Juergen Hannappel http://lisa2.physik.uni-bonn.de/~hannappe
mailto:[email protected] Phone: +49 228 73 2447 FAX ... 7869
Physikalisches Institut der Uni Bonn Nussallee 12, D-53115 Bonn, Germany
CERN: Phone: +412276 76461 Fax: ..77930 Bat. 892-R-A13 CH-1211 Geneve 23
Mark & Juanita <[email protected]> writes:
[...]
> Do people really think that somewhere Walmart (or other companies) have
> this secret racist training/screening camp where employees go to be told
> how to discriminate against minorities? That almost has to be the thought
Not only Walmart. It's standard practise:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4521244.stm
--
Dr. Juergen Hannappel http://lisa2.physik.uni-bonn.de/~hannappe
mailto:[email protected] Phone: +49 228 73 2447 FAX ... 7869
Physikalisches Institut der Uni Bonn Nussallee 12, D-53115 Bonn, Germany
CERN: Phone: +412276 76461 Fax: ..77930 Bat. 892-R-A13 CH-1211 Geneve 23