In actuality Walmart seems to be slowly realizing that its employment practices lead to high turnover, and the cost of training new employees is actually costing it money. There's something to be said for a decent wage and benefits if you're talking about retention. If you could pay one 17 year who you trained to clean the bathrooms and sweep the floor, and he stayed at the job for more than a few months, wouldn't that ultimately be cheaper than having to train a new person with some frequency, even if the training isn't overly complex?
No. Because once that 17 year old (or anyone) is there for more than a few months, they generally get paid benefits like vacation / PTO, healthcare, and (back then) pension or savings plans, which gets expensive for the store really quick. I worked in KMart during my high school years for a tiny bit above minimum wage ($5.25 / hour) -- full time during the summer and part time during high school. Because of this, I was never eligible for the benefits that the year-round full-timers were. The store kept a number of us in rotation because a) our group had relatively high turnover and b) they could scale up / down easily as needed (i.e., seasonal peaks like Christmas) -- but the real reason is that it cut down on their benefits costs and increased their profitability, even back then. The low cost to retrain a new high school kid to perform an easy job like folding clothes or stocking the shelves is waaaay cheaper than paying full benefits, in perpetuity, to a long term FTE.
Yup. This is just CYA bullshit
Don't you mean, "This is just CIA bullshit"?
</ gets popcorn ready>
The bogosity meter just pegged.