Labor Relations Problems in Nevada
What’s disgusting? Union busting. What’s outrageous? Poverty wages.
Wal-Mart breaks the law, gets punished, wins anyway [Las Vegas Sun]
Here is how Wal-Mart, at a cost of a couple of thousand dollars, illegally beat back an attempt to unionize its stores in Nevada:
Seven years ago, as Wal-Mart corporate executives proclaimed Nevada ground zero in an attempt to battle unionizing the giant retailer, three workers at Wal-Mart stores in Southern Nevada took the first steps toward organizing. Avis Hammond, Norine Sorensen and Diana Griego talked to fellow employees about the union and passed out fliers in front of stores, activities clearly allowed under federal labor laws.
Management stepped in. The three employees were told to stop. They were questioned, threatened and insulted, according to later findings by the government. Wal-Mart stripped one worker of his union fliers and denied another a promotion.
The union seeking to represent workers asked for help from the National Labor Relations Board, the federal agency charged with enforcing labor law. The workers wanted Wal-Mart to act within the law so they could continue to try to organize.
That was in 2000.
Last month - seven years, two months and seven days after the first charge was filed - the NLRB issued its ruling: Wal-Mart acted illegally.
The punishment: The retailer must pay lost wages to one of the employees, which apparently comes to a few thousand dollars. It also must post notices in its three stores disclosing its federal labor law violations.
The outcome: The union has long since given up trying to organize from within the stores. The three workers quit the company.
“The problem of delay has been with the NLRB ever since it was created in 1935,” said James Gross, a professor of labor policy and arbitration at Cornell University’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations. But even in an era of weak federal enforcement of labor laws, “seven years for a case involving three employees is unconscionable.”
The outcome in Las Vegas is not unusual in today’s labor climate. Federal enforcement of labor laws has grown weaker over the decades as business interests and their allies in Congress and the White House have beaten back serious attempts at reform.
Federal oversight has become “an outrageous system that’s almost entirely toothless,” said Gordon Lafer, a professor at the University of Oregon’s Labor Education and Research Center.
“For workers there is no sense of justice,” Lafer said. “For employers it’s a rational business decision to break the law. And it’s not just the rogue, outlying employers that do this.”
One major reason for the board’s dwindling power is the political partisanship that has riven the NLRB since the Reagan administration, said John C. Truesdale, a former field examiner for the agency. Truesdale went on to become executive secretary, board member and board chairman under Republican and Democratic administrations.
Before the 1980s, board members sympathetic to either labor or management usually worked together to find solutions, said Truesdale, now retired. But that changed under President Ronald Reagan.
Gross said Republican-appointed members now are inclined to interpret the National Labor Relations Act in ways that benefit business, deviating from the intent of the law, which is to promote collective bargaining as the policy of the U.S. government.
One consequence has been deadlocks over appointments as Democrats have fought for appointment of NLRB members who will enforce laws more aggressively. The five-member panel was filled only recently, after years of disputes between Democrats and Republicans over presidential appointments.
The national board’s effectiveness also has been curtailed by congressional and executive branch opponents who cut its budget. The NLRB “is so understaffed that cases can take years to be heard,” said Robert Reich, labor secretary during the Clinton administration. “And even when employers are finally found to have broken the law, the NLRB often gives them a slap on the wrist.”
As federal oversight weakened in the late 1970s , labor supported sweeping changes. They included requiring businesses to keep pro-union employees on the company payrolls while NLRB investigations went forward and awarding punitive damages to employees who were fired or discriminated against for union activities. The bill was filibustered by Republicans and never reached a vote.
Labor now has a new push under way. The Employee Free Choice Act would make it easier for workers to organize and would stiffen penalties for employers that break the law. It is the first serious effort to reform labor law in decades, said Gross, who wrote a three-volume history of the NLRB.
The unfair labor practices in the Las Vegas cases stem from incidents that occurred from June 2000 to May 2001, during an organizing campaign by the United Food and Commercial Workers.
The union embarked on a major campaign in 1998 to organize Wal-Mart nationwide, with Las Vegas at the core of its strategy. “It’s such a strong union town, we thought there would be more pressure from the community to let employees decide whether to be union,” said George Wiszynski, assistant general counsel to the union.
The campaign failed.
Organizers at five Wal-Mart stores outside Nevada did gather enough support for a secret-ballot election to determine union representation. The union won one of those elections - meat department workers in Jacksonville, Texas. Eleven days later, Wal-Mart announced that it was closing all meat-cutting operations nationwide.
The retailer went one step further when most workers at one of its stores in Quebec signed union cards signifying their support of the union. After months of stalled contract negotiations, the union petitioned the Quebec Ministry of Labor to appoint an arbitrator. One week later the company announced it was closing the store, attributing the decision to poor sales.
According to a report from the pro-labor group American Rights at Work, the United Food and Commercial Workers union filed 288 unfair labor practice charges against Wal-Mart from 1998 to 2003. Of those charges, at least 94 resulted in the NLRB filing formal complaints against the retailer, resulting in at least 11 rulings against the company and 12 settlements.
Among Wal-Mart’s violations were terminating employees for union activity, surveillance of union activity, interrogation of union supporters and unlawfully making promises to dissuade workers from organizing.
“It’s the same tactics, over and over again,” Wiszynski said. “And they were very effective tactics.”
The labor board found merit in each of the Nevada cases and filed a consolidated formal complaint against Wal-Mart in September 2001, referring the matter to an administrative law judge.
A year later, the judge issued his decision favoring the employees. Wal-Mart then began its legal moves, ultimately appealing the decision to the labor board itself.
The retailer exhausted its legal options in April 2003 - but the case sat with the board for four more years.
Asked this week about the delays, the NLRB defended its record, pointing out that most of the cases it receives from across the country are settled and never make it to the board. Some cases, particularly those that are litigated, take much longer.
NLRB spokeswoman Patricia Gilbert added: “We had quite a bit of turnover (of board members) at one point.”
David Parker, NLRB deputy executive secretary, said: “While this decision took far too long to issue, there were some complicating factors, both procedurally and substantively.”
Parker would not explain, however, why the case was delayed for four years. “You’re going to write what you’re going to write,” he told the Sun.
(According to NLRB data from 2005, the most recent year for which information is available, the median time the board takes to decide an unfair labor practice case is 659 days - about 22 months.)
Labor advocates and lawyers disputed the NLRB’s explanation. “This doesn’t involve any novel legal issues,” said Nancy Schiffer, associate general counsel for the AFL-CIO, which joined in the case. “There’s no excuse for why it took so long.”
Wal-Mart said it is satisfied with the outcome. “Dozens of allegations have been dismissed,” company spokesman John Simley said.
Wal-Mart intends to comply with the board’s order, he said. “Our primary obligation is posting notices,” Simley said. “We think this is the best resolution.”
The delays, however, forced the union to change tactics. It joined with the Service Employees International Union to launch another kind of campaign in early 2005 intended to shame the retailer publicly. The primary vehicle is a Web site, WakeUpWalMart.com, highlighting the retailer’s record on everything from wages and health care to labor law violations and illegal immigrant labor.
WakeUpWalMart is airing TV ads in 26 markets, including Las Vegas, highlighting the large number of Wal-Mart workers on the Medicaid rolls because the company’s health care plans include high premiums and deductibles. In Las Vegas, the union has picketed Wal-Mart daily since 2005.
All the bad press has had an effect. According to a report in Business Week, the consulting firm McKinsey & Co. found that negative publicity, driven in part by the unions, had driven down Wal-Mart sales 2 percent to 8 percent. The retailer recently announced plans to cut the number of stores it plans to open.
None of this brings comfort to Hammond, one of the three Las Vegas Wal-Mart workers discriminated against for union activity. (The union lost track of the former employees; the Sun found Hammond but not the other two Nevada workers.)
Hammond was a 10-year employee whose job was to greet customers at the door. He ran afoul of the company by distributing a union news release to fellow workers, a copy of which he gave to District Manager Chuck Salby.
“If you believe that, you’re not worthy of working at Wal-Mart,” Salby said, according to the NLRB findings. Salby tore up the news release and threw it in a trash can.
Hammond was disciplined for passing out the copies to other employees.
And so began the seven-year delay that effectively killed the attempt to organize.
“It’s almost a mockery,” said Fred Feinstein, former general counsel for the NLRB during the Clinton administration. “How does this in any way protect the right of workers to join a union? That right was extinguished seven years ago when Wal-Mart treated its workers illegally because of union support.
“Would any employee at that store now think they have a federally protected right to join a union?”
Hammond moved to Arkansas after leaving Wal-Mart. Reached there this week and asked to recount his Wal-Mart experience, he demurred.
“That was seven years ago,” he said. “Now I’m 83 years old. My memory is going.”
Posted by Alex Goldschmidt on Friday, September 14, 2007
Click Here for a Printer-Friendly Version
COMMENTS
Wow! What a spin job on this one. Why are so many facts left out of this story? Why did the door greeter (who conveniently has lost his memory) want a union to form? Was he mistreated? Was he a plant? Did the union pay him on the side? How about all of the illegal tactics used by the union? This is certainly not a case of “well-behaved union” versus “big bully Wal-Mart”....
Facts, please.....just the facts.
Michael D. in Connecticut
Friday, September 14 at 11:42 AM
Did the union pay him on the side?
It seems to me that Mr. Hammond “conveniently” losing his memory would favor Wal-Mart.
The rest of your so-called questions are a bunch of pap. Why don’t you contact the Las Vegas Sun for more ‘facts’?
“They (Wal-Mart) are promoting themselves to low-income people,” she says. “That’s who they lure. They don’t lure the rich.... They understand the economy of America. They know the haves and have-nots. They don’t put Wal-Mart in Piedmonts. They don’t put Wal-Mart in those high-end parts of the community. They plant themselves right in the middle of Poorville.” ~ Betty Dukes
Ken V in Texas
Friday, September 14 at 11:58 AM
Ken,
Care to address this?
Unfair Labor Practices by the UFCW as charged by the NLRB
Duty of Fair Representation: 1,170 Allegations Filed
Union Security Related: 175
Coercive Statements: 71
Threatening Statements: 66
Refusal to Furnish Information: 53
Actions Of Picketers: 19
Requiring Payments Other Than Dues: 18
Harassment: 17
Fees Excessive: 16
Violence/Assaults: 9
Nick in
Friday, September 14 at 04:55 PM
Doesn’t it make one wonder, why, with our wonderful Social Security System, that pays you back more than you put in, an 80+ year old man had to work as a greeter at Wal-Mart?
RDS in
Friday, September 14 at 07:14 PM
Doggone RDS, at times you are as bad as WMW in not getting the facts straight.
He was around 73 or so at the time and he might have just wanted something to do, and the greeter job is a good one for a lot of older retired people.
As to your reference to the SS system, one could read it both ways. Good or not so good!.
The Sage in
Friday, September 14 at 09:35 PM
Sage,
“He was around 73 or so at the time and he might have just wanted something to do, and the greeter job is a good one for a lot of older retired people.”
Think about it, if he just wanted something to do, why would he risk his job, to get a union in? Unless he was involved in keeping the job for awhile and needed the money, why would he care about the union? After all, he was already 8 years or so past the age of retirement and Social Security!! And, once you start receiveing Social Security, your benefit is cut, once you start making so much money, so he would not want his pay, to raise so much as to cut his benefits, now would he?
RDS in
Friday, September 14 at 10:55 PM
RDS
Jeez you should read your own posts.” if he just wanted something to do”. That would indicate that he is doing it just to pass the time, not for the money, and if that’s the case then why would he fear the loss of a greeter.
Or could it be that, that something that he wanted to do was to start a UNION? Could it be that he truly feels that this greeter job is inconsequential in the whole scheme of things? And then there’s this one (I know that this one is a foreign thought to you), perhaps he fills that starting a UNION would benefit his fellow workers and he feels so strongly about it that the risk of losing his job is worth it.
You know RDS sometimes the greater good for your fellow man is worth the risks and sacrifices that one makes of themselves. I know from your previous posts that this makes NO sense to you or your cohorts, but some people do things for NO more reward than knowing that they have helped others.
Big D in
Saturday, September 15 at 12:17 AM
“wonderful Social Security System, that pays you back more than you put in”
Try unloading this boatload of crap on your average 25 year old who’s paying for your retirement, RDS!
“...greater good for your fellow man… sacrifices that one makes of themselves.” ~Big D
No offense, Big D. Apparently you missed the jist in most of RDS’s and Nick’s posts. It’s every person for himelf or herself. “Greater good for your fellow man?” That’s much too “emotional” of a concept for people who think like RDS.
ScrewedbyWal-Mart in Anytown, America
Saturday, September 15 at 06:44 AM
It’s not surprising to me that senile old men are the ones trying to unionize Wal-Mart. Anybody who thinks unions are still beneficial to society in a retail environment has limited mental capacity.
Cory in
Saturday, September 15 at 08:15 AM
Big D,
“You know RDS sometimes the greater good for your fellow man is worth the risks and sacrifices that one makes of themselves. I know from your previous posts that this makes NO sense to you or your cohorts, but some people do things for NO more reward than knowing that they have helped others.”
Listen, I DO know what you are talking about, but you have to understand one thing, over the years, I have been stabbed in the back so many times, by the people I have tried to help, you would not believe it!! Therefore, a 73 year old man, should have seen much the same in his life and it makes me wonder why he would want to sacrifice for people who don’t care!! There is an old saying, “You can’t help someone who isn’t willing to help himself”, where was the support, by those ‘fellow workers he was trying to help’? I tried for 3 years to unionize a company and it felt real good to get an election vote to happen, but, it was like a ‘kick in the teeth’, every time it was voted DOWN!! Then, what was worse, was when people would come up to you and ask what they could do to solve some problem they had and you knew that they were one of the ones that voted NO!! I had to tell them, “Go ask your union steward, oh wait, we don’t have a union, do we?”, it is no way to “Fill your free time”, it is very draining and hard work, trying to get people to SEE what is ‘good’ for them!!
Believe me, if the Wal-Mart workers REALLY wanted a union, they would FIND a way to do it and not by handing out union literature in front of the store or voting NO in an election!!
Screwedby,
“Try unloading this boatload of crap on your average 25 year old who’s paying for your retirement, RDS!”
First, I didn’t set up the system, it wasn’t MY idea to make a 25 year old pay for a retired person!! But, I have to accept the fact that this IS the system, and I paid for many others, during MY 42 years working, so why shouldn’t I get mine, I earned it? The President tried to change this system to a pay your own way system (similar to a 401K) and Congress shot that down, to stay with this failing system, so blame them, NOT ME!! I also bet, when it is your time to retire, YOU will take yours too and won’t care that a 25 year old will be paying it!!
RDS in
Saturday, September 15 at 10:35 AM
“anybody who thinks that unions are still beneficiaqal to society in a retail has limited mental capacity”..........does that meanyou agree that unions are beneficial in OTHER .segments of society” corey,you got some splainin’ to do .
ddrb in
Saturday, September 15 at 10:47 AM
Big D,
“You know RDS sometimes the greater good for your fellow man is worth the risks and sacrifices that one makes of themselves.”
Let me ask you this, are not the Iraqi people, the Chinese, etc., YOUR fellow man? Are you NOT willing to sacrifice to help them gain the ‘freedom’ you enjoy?
Cory,
Welcome to the site, please keep posting, we like seeing new people come to the site!!
RDS in
Saturday, September 15 at 10:51 AM
RDS
If I tried to duplicate Social Security in the private sector, I would go to jail. It is a Ponzi scheme. But, apparently, it is permissible for government to steal 12.4% of my paycheck so that some senior can take a bus to Atlantic City and gamble. People should be responsible for their own retirement!
I once read a study that said the average 25-year old, earning the median US wage, would get something like $196,000 over the course of their retirement (assuming average life expectancy). Of course, they are dependent on government and the money cannot be left to their family but who cares? It’s guaranteed, right? WRONG. Congress could, tomorrow, cut off every dime of Social Security. Of course, it probably won’t happen because Congress is afraid to death of seniors. This is because Seniors are the wealthiest demographic and because they have the highest percentage of voters (more than 65%) of any demographic. If the 25-year old I mentioned above would put his retirement money into a personal account earning the 100-year average stock market return (6%), he would have about $1.08 million at retirement. He could blow it all, leave it to his kids, give it to charity, etc. and nobody could take it away from him.
Private accounts make sense for 3 reasons:
1. Your financial situation is your own responsibility.
2. You own your wealth and get a far better return.
3. It is socialism to steal from one group and give to another.
Why is it that anything in this country remotely requiring personal responsibility, choice, effort, hard work or intelligence is frowned upon? Could it be that the politicians are trying to dumb down the populace to the point where they do what they are told and allow their politicians to run their lives completely?
I think the people who run Social Security should be in jail. There are many reasons but the biggest is lying. They say that Social Security’s outlays will exceed its revenues starting in 2039. They say that Social Security will actually pay out more than it takes in starting in 2012 but that the Social Security “Trust Fund” will cover the difference between 2012 and 2039. THERE IS NO SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND!!!!!!!! All that exists is a stack of IOU’s to be redeemed by the US Government, which has stolen the annual surplus for 40 years to spend on other programs. These IOU’s have to be paid by the government, which gets every dime from taxpayers. Thus, taxpayers have paid in TRILLIONS of dollars they will never see and, in addition, they have to replace the money the government stole in order to keep Social Security afloat past 2012!
A reckoning is coming. Higher taxes, lower benefits, higher earnings thresholds, lower spending in other areas, recession, a lower standard of living and class and inter-generational conflict are just some of the things in our near future.
Nick in
Saturday, September 15 at 11:00 AM
i thought this was a thread about union activity.....Just thuinking..if each time a walmart or sams employee is hired they buy at least one share of stock-keep it,even if they quit or are fired-what could be the implications for organizing,or making a difference in policy making at the top??because they would be shareholders,wouldnt that provide gravitas to their collective interests-nick,corey have at it!
ddrb in
Saturday, September 15 at 11:46 AM
isnit it ironici (and troubleswome) that communist chinese walmarts demand and get unions-yet the same is not so here in the land of the free and the home of the brave?
ddrb in
Saturday, September 15 at 11:54 AM
have the seiu and ufcw ever considered buyning huge chunks of walmart stock-would this give an edge to organizing?i dont know a great deal about collective bargaining-anone out there with some input?
ddrb in
Saturday, September 15 at 12:25 PM
Screwedby
“No offense, Big D. Apparently you missed the jist in most of RDS’s and Nick’s posts. It’s every person for himelf or herself. “Greater good for your fellow man?” That’s much too “emotional” of a concept for people who think like RDS.”
No offense taken, but you “might” want to reread my post. I think that you’ll see that I had already addressed just that issue.
Big D in
Saturday, September 15 at 12:28 PM
This is What I’m Talking About, Big D
It’s every person for himself or herself. “Greater good for your fellow man?”
“why shouldn’t I get mine” ~RDS
It never takes RDS very long to show what he’s made of.
“A reckoning is coming. Higher taxes, lower benefits, higher earnings thresholds, lower spending in other areas, recession, a lower standard of living...” ~Nick
This is why it’s every American’s patriotic duty to:
1) Give George “W” as many $Billion dollars as he wants to keep “his dirty little war” going. Who needs the freak’in money here at home?
2) Shop at Wal-Mart
ScrewedbyWal-Mart in Anytown, America
Saturday, September 15 at 12:40 PM
You Sure Did, Big D
“I had already addressed just that issue.”
You did address that issue, Big D. But when it comes to RDS, it never hurts to repeat the message!
ScrewedbyWal-Mart in Anytown, America
Saturday, September 15 at 12:53 PM
Screwedby,
““why shouldn’t I get mine” ~RDS
It never takes RDS very long to show what he’s made of.”
So, are you saying that I somehow don’t deserve this? If you worked for a week, would you say, “Don’t give me my paycheck, because someone might think that it’s not for the greater good of my fellow mankind, so I’ll just sign it over to someone else”? I’ll just bet you would!!!!
You would have to be an idiot, to believe that it is good, to tell someone, “You work for 40+ years and we’ll take money from your paycheck and put that money towards your retirement” and then when the person is ready to retire, jump all over the person for wanting to collect the benefit he paid for!! It would be like paying for a life insurance policy and when you die, your spouse is told, “You can’t collect, because that would make you look ‘greedy’”!! Like I said, when you retire, you will be standing in the Social Security Office looking for YOURS too!! And, if you say you will bypass collecting from Social Security, I think everyone here, will know just what a FAKER you really are!!
You can get really ‘off the wall’, most of the time!!
RDS in
Saturday, September 15 at 06:32 PM
“it would be like paying for a life insurance policy and when you die,your spouse is told,"You can’t collect… WOW,for a momrent there,i thought you would finish the statemnt with-Because the beneficiary is.... ... Walmart!(Remember the “dead janitiors"policies issued by Hartford and AIG?)
ddrb in
Saturday, September 15 at 09:05 PM
Ken,
Care to address this?
No.
Nevada is the showcase for unionized service workers. The economy of Nevada is booming (with the exception of housing at the moment) and the people that keep it running are getting a fair share.
“If we don’t take steps to reconnect productivity growth and living standards, eventually the vast majority will feel little reason to support an economic system that’s failing to return a fair share of the growth they themselves are creating.” ~ Jared Bernstein
Ken V in Texas
Sunday, September 16 at 05:36 AM
“I was on the receiving end of another WalMart cop wannabe homicide for stealing a DVD player in Las Vegas. Ask me how.”
Jan M. Burstein of Leawood, Kan.
WalMart- We thought Stacy Driver would help make the point again four years later. Killing Americans over Chinese made crap, that’s the WalMart way.
WalMart- Our Loss Prevention team were acting according to law and no charges were filed. We killed a man over a DVD player. HE STOLE A DVD PLAYER!! A WALMART DVD PLAYER AT THAT!! Reasonable cause from a ‘love of money’ psychopath point of view in Bentonville policy/ethics belief structure to kill somebody. How can we arrange to have Tom Coughlin killed for the $500,000 he stole?
WalMart Worship Crowd- Insert Burstein “drug user” claims below for WalMart/Edelman “war room” image propaganda and best practices justification for another homicide back in 2001
SanDiegoView in Remembrance of another WalMart homicide
Sunday, September 16 at 08:49 AM
SDV,
“Our Loss Prevention team were acting according to law and no charges were filed. We killed a man over a DVD player. HE STOLE A DVD PLAYER!! A WALMART DVD PLAYER AT THAT!!”
This kind of thing, is why some of us have a hard time taking you seriously!! If the team was acting within the law, how can you claim they KILLED this man? People can die while in custody without being KILLED!! Did they shoot him, hang him, put him in an electric chair? People die in hospitals, does that mean that those people were KILLED? What about this, if this person had been working somewhere, instead of stealing, it could very well be, that none of this would have happened, so the guy put himself in this situation, so in a way, you could say that it was his fault that this happened!! And, you can’t use the ‘maybe he was poor and starving’ defense, you can’t eat a DVD player!!
RDS in
Monday, September 17 at 09:19 AM
If the team was acting within the law, how can you claim they KILLED this man?
For someone who tries to be so literal most of the time, RDS, you’re missing the distinction all together.
kill: to deprive of life in any manner; cause the death of; slay.
murder: the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law.
So you see, RDS, SDV is correct in his use of ‘kill’. You, on the other hand, would have been justified in your righteous indignation if he wrote ‘murder’, but he didn’t. So just calm down.
This statement is correct:
WalMart’s Loss Prevention team killed a man over a DVD player.
Ken V in Texas
Monday, September 17 at 10:06 AM
SDV,
There were also much grislier homicides that happened to innocent people at a couple of Target stores in the Kansas City, MO area, a few months ago.
You point being?????????????
Bill
Bill in
Monday, September 17 at 10:25 AM
SDV,
Tell you what—you guys can keep Stacey Driver as your “poster child” for whatever it is you are trying to represent.
As for me, I’ll stick with Leslie Ballew, Luke Nilges, and Kelsey Smith—unlike your guy, none of these three committed any crime, yet, they were killed…
Bill
Bill in
Monday, September 17 at 10:39 AM
RDS: the last two sentences of your 10:19 am entry today were a perfect profile of Tom Coughlin with minor exceptions-he WAS working somewhere while he was stealing, and in his case did eat some of his plunder! (I SAID ,delete the earlier references to killing!) !
ddrb in
Monday, September 17 at 03:47 PM
Ken V,
“So you see, RDS, SDV is correct in his use of ‘kill’.”
If you are correct, tell us it was, that those people DID, that caused in this persons death? If someone stops someone else and during that time, the person being detained dies of a heart attack, did the detainer ‘KILL’ them? In the case SDV described, what was the ACTUAL CAUSE of DEATH, listed on the coroner’s report? I’m sure that had these people went beyond normal procedure, they would have been held accountable for it!!
My point has always been, there is a difference between a person dying and being killed!!
RDS in
Monday, September 17 at 05:04 PM
RDS
One mark of TRUE INTELEGENCE is the ability to admit when you’re WRONG. I know that that thought is foreign to you (that you could be wrong about anything) but that only bolsters everyone’s opinion that you really are an IDIOT! I don’t know who coined the fraise but I think that in this instance it’s apropos; “It is better to remain salient and let people think you an IDIOT, than to open your mouth and remove ALL DOUBT!!!!!
Big D in
Monday, September 17 at 05:58 PM
You Make a Good Point, Big D
“One mark of TRUE INTELEGENCE is the ability to admit when you’re WRONG. ~Big D
Remember this?
“There is always the possibility that I am wrong and, unlike the Wal-Mart haters here, I am man enough to admit it when I am.”
Posted by Nick - June 19, 2006 04:25 PM
I’m still waiting for Nick to admit many of his assumptions were wrong in his “Great 13 Point Plan to Fix America’s Health Problems.”
ScrewedbyWal-Mart in Anytown, America
Monday, September 17 at 07:35 PM
The cause of death for both Stacy Driver and Jan Burstein were listed by county coroners as “homicide”.
The legal implications allow for a killing/death to be listed as a homicide without charges being brought. The local DA has the interest and expense in filing such a charge. WalMart/Bentonville got off the civil lawsuit hook for killing Stacy Driver by paying out $750,000 to the family.
WalMart- Badges! We don’t need no stinking badges!!
SanDiegoView in
Monday, September 17 at 08:07 PM
I’m still waiting for Nick to admit many of his assumptions were wrong in his “Great 13 Point Plan to Fix America’s Health Problems.”
ScrewedbyWal-Mart in Anytown, America
Monday, September 17 at 08:35 PM
Screwed,
Examination of Nick’s thoughts on health care issues or anything else is like doing an expensive MRI on a piece of baloney. He made for a nice justification and feature addition on the famous imbecile list. But then RDS proved that senility is a known trait causing WalMart worship. Maybe Nick has a health care plan for him. Probably involves a dumpster out back behind the WalMart ‘war room’ where they buried EllisW.
SanDiegoView in
Monday, September 17 at 08:25 PM
SDV
Insults are the last resort for people who lack an intelligent response. I picture you as the kid in the back of the class who did not understand the material being taught and, instead of asking for help, you acted too cool to be there.
Just a small insight from yours truly. I honestly had little interest in Psych while in college.
Another mark of “true intelligence” is not to make multiple spelling errors in a one paragraph post:
INTELEGENCE
fraise
salient
Is George Dubya posting here under an assumed name?
Nick in
Monday, September 17 at 08:31 PM
It would seem that things are starting to heat-up, here with the regulars and their two new lap dogs…
SDV - if “Nick’s thoughts on health care issues or anything else is like doing an expensive MRI on a piece of baloney”, then your thoughts must be like doing the same MRI on a POS.
Bill
Bill in
Monday, September 17 at 08:51 PM
Big D,
“...you really are an IDIOT! I don’t know who coined the fraise...”
Enough said, “fraisemeister"…
Bill
Bill in
Monday, September 17 at 08:55 PM
Nick in 9:31 pm: Before choosing to criticize someones grammar and spelling,an intelligent person WOULD MAKE CERTAIN THEY ARE ADDRESSING THE CORRRECT PERSON, THAT THEY ARE ATTEMPTING TO CORRECT! Big D made the errors,not SDV--theres a big difference between smart and smart ass,Nick!
ddrb in
Monday, September 17 at 09:29 PM
NICK:Can YOU spell “Hoisted upon his own petard?"(BTW, petard is French)
ddrb in
Monday, September 17 at 09:34 PM
“I’m still waiting for Nick to admit many of his assumptions were wrong in his “Great 13 Point Plan to Fix America’s Health Problems.”
ScrewedbyWal-Mart, don’t make us all laugh. You still have shown ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to show how ANY of his 13 points are wrong other than “who’s going to do that”. I think the foot belongs in your mouth with this one. We’re all still waiting for your assessment of the facts vs. the pure hot air you called a rethort of the ideas. Nick is right on and your responses are a joke!!!!
Mary in
Monday, September 17 at 10:08 PM
Big D,
“I don’t know who coined the fraise but I think that in this instance it’s apropos; “It is better to remain salient and let people think you an IDIOT, than to open your mouth and remove ALL DOUBT!!!!!”
I couldn’t find a definition for the word ‘fraise’ are you sure you didn’t mean phrase? And, the definition for the word ‘salient’, is “Standing out prominently,extending outward”, what does that mean in your context? Maybe it is you that should HEED your own advice and remain silent, to remove all doubt!! And, what is “TRUE INTELEGENCE”? Maybe you need to go back to school and take some spelling lessons!!
Somehow, you think that everytime someone dies, they were killed!! All I asked for, was some proof, that the people actually caused the deaths and how they did it!! I think an idiot, would be one that just accepts facts not in evidence as truth, just because they WANT to believe it!! And, besides that, you seem to want to defend criminals, by saying ‘for nothing more than they were stealing something’!!
SDV,
“But then RDS proved that senility is a known trait causing WalMart worship. Maybe Nick has a health care plan for him.”
Nick may not have a health care program for me, but Hillary sure does, whether I want one or not!! The plan I have right now, involves me paying for my own medical bills!!
Mary,
You should know by now, that one is wrong, if an anti Wal-Marter says he is, no proof is necessary!! Just saying “who’s going to do that”, is all the proof they need to tell others they are wrong, and in true liberal fashion, they have nothing to offer as a solution, except criticism of others offering solutions!! What is Screwedby’s plan?
RDS in
Tuesday, September 18 at 12:40 AM
Nobody else would defend me over my stupid “Great 13 Point Plan to Fix America’s Health Problems” so I dragged up fake “Mary” again. ScrewedbyWal-Mart shot holes in all my plan and I could not respond. So, here is “Mary” my transgender shadow troll reading all of the posts that deride me and defending me as a loyal keyboard alter ego. She is really the only one who understands me.
Nick in obviousland desperation
Tuesday, September 18 at 12:49 AM
Personally I’m waiting with bated breath for Mary to comment on this thread.
Ken V in Texas
Tuesday, September 18 at 04:45 AM
Ken V: Or maybe -BAITandSWITCHHITTER?
ddrb in
Tuesday, September 18 at 01:49 PM
Fake Nick
You are such a brilliant person! You have it all figured out!
WMW supporters who agree: GENIUS!
Wal-Mart Defenders who agree: TROLLS!
I can’t believe you are so insightful! How did you ever figure out this whole thing?
Nick in
Tuesday, September 18 at 05:41 PM
Respond to what Ken? I never even made a comment in that thread nor am I referenced unless you are talking about ScrewedbyWal-mart’s comments about wanting to a “troll wannabe”. And to that I say… ScrewedbyWal-Mart, you better starting looking in the mirror before accusing people of being “trolls” because you lead the band of unhappy, miserable, uninformed posters on this blog.
btw ScrewedbyWal-mart.... still waiting on ANY SUBSTANCE AT ALL concerning the 13 points...... still waiting.... been here for weeks now.... just looking for ANY insightful comments from you would be nice. Clinton and Obama at least have something to say sans any notion of how to solve the US’s health care issues other than throw money at it. But at least they said SOMETHING!
Mary in
Tuesday, September 18 at 07:07 PM
Respond to what Ken?
Have it your way, Mary. I never argue with a lady.
Ken V in Texas
Wednesday, September 19 at 06:01 AM
Oh… that’s right Ken. You just issue gender insults during your “drive by” comments on this blog. Hm.... are you as guilty of gender discrimination and sexist remarks that you find Walmart guilty of.....
mary in
Wednesday, September 19 at 08:26 AM
“Hm.... are you as guilty of gender discrimination and sexist remarks that you find Walmart guilty of.....
Now, people are starting to see into Ken’s “Maxim World"…
Bill
Bill in
Wednesday, September 19 at 08:34 AM
I did say :lady”, didn’t I?
Ken V in Texas
Wednesday, September 19 at 11:48 AM
P.S ...your “drive by” comments...
Huh?
You really did drink the Kool Aid, Mary. I’ll miss the banter but, OK, fine.
I apologise for saying:
Take those shoes off, Mary and get back in the kitchen where you belong! :o)
I take it back and I’m sorry that my attempt at humor, however lame it was, offended you. I will no longer direct comments to you.
While I’m in a ‘taking back’ mood, here’s another of my quotes I’d like to take back:
(Is it sexist of me to assume some of the more intelligent posters are women?:o).
Ken V in Texas
Thursday, September 20 at 04:04 AM
Don’t Be Too Hard on Mary, Ken
Maybe what we’re dealing with here, is one of those analogies we all remember from taking the Miller Analogies Test.
Mary’s problem is that she’s been worshiping in the shadow of Nick too long.
Nick and RDS : misogynists :: Mary : misandrists
ScrewedbyWal-Mart in Anytown, America
Thursday, September 20 at 06:37 AM
Ken… Ken… Ken… My how you miss MY attempt at satire. Personally I have never taken offense at your remarks. They certainly make me laugh. But I’m also not overly sensitive to remarks like that. Now for some other “hot under the collar” folks who live by the strick law of “we need to live in a politically correct world"… they may have an issue.
As for ScrewedbyWal-Mart.... a man hater I am far from and the only people I worship in this world are my family BAR NONE.
Mary in
Thursday, September 20 at 01:24 PM
Comment Policy
WalmartWatch.com reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to remove or refuse to post blog comments.