proposes a show of solidarity with Wal-Mart, against the overweening arrogance of union organizers in their Quebec stores
. I can wholeheartedly agree.
Having worked at Wal-Mart in high school (our store cheer: "3134, Kanata offers so much more"), I know first-hand that the pay and conditions are not bad at all for a menial retail job. (Considering the effort and competence actually required to perform acceptably, if not spectacularly, the pay was quite good, in fact.) While it was clear I was never much more than a piece of meat to management, I was well-treated meat. If I'd stayed on part-time - and, really, besides the fact that living and attending university downtown makes working in a distant suburb unfeasible, I very well might have - I'd probably be up to something like $9.25 an hour or so by now, which is well above the minimum wage. Considering that benefits and automatic pay raises were more generous than the only unionized job I've had (and even more so for full-timers), I've never found unions' wild-eyed assaults on Wal-Mart to make much sense. Except, of course, as an ideological victory, in attempting to punish what stalwart socialists see as the most wicked of all capitalist evils. (Why, they make a profit, are widely popular, and have generally good labour relations, without
benefit of unionization! Damnable, I say!)
And so, I salute the anti-boycott of Wal-Mart. It's just too bad the closest one is an annoying half-hour bus ride away, or I'd actually be able to participate in such patronage on a more regular basis.