Comment on Ok boomer
YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.world 5 weeks agoJust curious, I have no idea what the real number is, what do you think it is?
Comment on Ok boomer
YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.world 5 weeks agoJust curious, I have no idea what the real number is, what do you think it is?
dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 5 weeks ago
I have no clue. I guess you can look at the profit margin for a supermarket (Walmart is around 2%, I just checked), then figure out the average full food shop spend, and finally see what the average hourly wage is for a worker and how long it would take to ring up a full shop.
Although, this also highlights why they can’t give OP 25% off as their margin isn’t anywhere near this figure. I guess we should also factor in handouts that companies like Walmart get from the government to subsidise their staff etc.
YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Apparently they spend about 7.67% of their operating budget on labor. Just in case anyone was wondering. Source.
wolfpack86@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
I would wager that a significant piece of that is centered around the logistics and distribution element. Cashiers are probably rounding errors.
dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 5 weeks ago
Thanks for posting this.
Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
From reading a few reports, after looking this up, it seems walmart spend about 7% of it’s revenue on hiring, and about 32% on payroll. The other costs towards labor seem to vary greatly from source to source, depending on exactly what they take into consideration as a labor expense. So it is somewhere between 39% and 60% of the revenue.
YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
So that other person was probably being super condescending for no reason? That’s kind of the impression I got when they said they had no idea the actual number.
Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
maybe? don’t know, wouldn’t be surprised if they just actually didn’t know, and made an assumption based on some information they had. Also wouldn’t be surprised if they were being condescending. meh