Wal-Mart Has Its Lawyers Working Overtime
Well, at least someone is getting paid.
Another day, another wage/hour class action is awarded judgment against Wal-Mart. This time it comes to us from Minnesota, where Dakota County District Court Judge Robert King Jr. ruled Monday that Wal-Mart broke Minnesota labor law more than two thousand million times over a six-year period by forcing employees to work without breaks and without full pay.
That is, in fact, not a typo. Two million times.
Judge King ruled that, in addition to penalties, Wal-Mart owes workers at least $6 million in back wages. In addition to penalties, you say? Ahhhhh, penalties...this is where it could get expensive for Wal-Mart, a company which, as the Northwest Arkansas Morning News reported last week, is already facing a whole plethora of legal woes. The violations at issue here carry a penalty of up to $1,000 each, which could be pretty pricey when you have two million of the darn things. According to Bloomberg’s math, which I am hardly in a position to disagree with, that puts the ceiling up around $2 billion. It probably won’t get that high, but it will be high, nonetheless...all I’m saying is, don’t be surprised if the next time you’re in Wal-Mart, a brand new copy of Guitar Hero costs...ummmmm...a million dollars?
A jury is expected to decide the amount of punitive damages and penalties in October, according to the judge’s order. And that could drive the amount Wal- Mart pays to hundreds of millions of dollars, said lawyer Frank Azar, whose Colorado firm was involved in the case and began fighting Wal-Mart in the 1990s.
Wal-Mart Faces $2 Billion Labor Law Trial, Judge Says [Bloomberg]
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. broke Minnesota labor laws, a state judge ruled, handing the world’s largest retailer its third-straight defeat in a wage-class action trial and the possibility a jury may order it to pay $2 billion.
The company required hourly employees to work off-the-clock during training and denied full rest or meal breaks in violation of state wage and hour laws, Hastings, Minnesota, District Judge Robert King Jr. held today following a non-jury trial. King ruled Wal-Mart broke labor laws more than 2 million times and ordered the company to give employees $6.5 million in back-pay.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Corey Himrod on Tuesday, July 01 | 26 comments | Permalink
Brookhaven, NY. Wal-Mart Supercenter Plan Stalled By Litigation
On March 20, 2008, Sprawl-Busters reported that homeowners in Rocky Point, Long Island, one of the 51 hamlets of Brookhaven, New York, have been fighting big box stores for 8 years. But a developer was trying to pull a bait and switch between a Lowe’s project---which got mired in litigation---and a Wal-Mart supercenter.
Brookhaven already has six Wal-Marts within 20 miles---but none of them are supercenters. Brookhaven has 323.5 square miles or area, and is the third largest Town in New York State. It’s located in Central Suffolk County, Long Island. Rocky Point is located on the northern edge of Brookhaven, on the banks of Long Island Sound East. The north and south shores of Brookhaven are tall timber areas, covered with oak and maple. The middle section is called the “Pine Barrens,” with stands of scrub oak and scrub pine---an important area for replenishing the town’s water supply. For years, this hamlet did battle against a Lowe’s Home Improvement store. A developer called Lerner-Heidenberg Properties, from New Jersey, tried to squeeze in a 169,000 s.f. Lowe’s on Route 25A on roughly 18 acres of land. For many years, the site was used as a drive-in movie theater, but it has been shut down for years, and represents one of the larger pieces of open land in Brookhaven. But instead of building a store, Lerner-Heidenberg ended up generating a lawsuit, which went all the way to the State Supreme Court.
Lerner-Heidenberg first proposed their Lowe’s project in 2000, but when the town rezoned the land, the developer filed a lawsuit in 2002, charging that Brookhaven had intentionally put off voting on the site plan so that the land could be rezoned. The State Supreme Court ruled that Brookhaven acted legally---but the developer pressed his case onward to the Appellate Court, and in February of 2007, that court ruled that there must be a trial in the case. This meant that Brookhaven had to spend a considerable amount of time and money just to defend its rezoning. Knowing this, Lerner-Heidenberg approached the town with a settlement idea: drop the 169,000 s.f. Lowe’s, and replace it with a 135,000 s.f. Wal-Mart. The developer promised that if the town accepted the Wal-Mart deal, he would drop their lawsuit.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Al Norman on Monday, June 30 | 0 comments | Permalink
ALL WAL-MART PROJECTS IN MAINE PUT ON HOLD
Maine Wal-Mart projects on hold [Republican Journal (Maine)]
Wal-Mart put Maine projects in the planning stage on hold while the company restructures and there may not be any action for the rest of the year, says a Lincoln town official.
Ruth Birtz, economic development director in Lincoln, said a company official in New York told her recently that Wal-Mart will fill a vacant job in the firm’s real estate office in Boston after restructuring is complete and the projects on hold will then be reevaluated.
Belfast has been trying to lure a Wal-Mart to the new big box zone on the city’s west side.
Bob Bahre, the man who bought the entire west side big box zone, plans to visit Belfast in a few weeks to see the land he bought sight-unseen, but nobody involved in Belfast development is sure of what to expect.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Joel Nezianya on Friday, June 27 | 0 comments | Permalink
Legal Blog: 1 Ignored Judge + 1 Arrogant Company = Family Court Fun!
Wal-Mart has, unsurprisingly, been the target of more lawsuits than one can count over the years. The company’s treatment of it workers and “save money at all costs” mentality has resulted in a flood of legal challenges ranging from single plaintiff suits to multi-million dollar class actions. Dukes v. Wal-Mart is of course one large example (the largest class action in American history, actually), as are the myriad wage/hour/overtime class actions the company faces.
Just as important as those large class actions, however, are the countless suits filed by individual plaintiffs – the tiny David trying to win justice over Wal-Mart’s Goliath. We at Wal-Mart Watch will be focusing on one of these stories each week, highlighting those cases that warrant further attention because of the light each sheds in its own way on how Wal-Mart does business.
Courtesy of one of our wonderful interns, Cass...an oldie but goodie! (the case, that is)
O’Neil v. Wal-Mart Corporation - Decision and Order
The scene: 2005, New York State, family court.
The plot: A family court judge order a young women to include her stepchild on her employee benefit plan. Part of her husband’s custody arrangement is providing medical benefits, and hey, what’s mine is yours, right? She tries. Wal-Mart refuses. Then the judge specifically decrees that Wal-Mart put this kid on the employee benefit plan as a dependent. Still, Wal-Mart ignores a court order, inviting the Department of Social Services to sue.
Two years later the civil court judge finally has enough of Wal-Mart’s shenanigans and orders them to follow the court order and put thedamndarn kid on the insurance plan.
Note: I’m amazed it took 2 years for the judge to snap. If there is one thing judges hate, it’s people ignoring court orders. Wal-Mart essentially walked into court and said, “We are going to waste your time and thousands of dollars all while completely dissing the expertise of your fellow judge. Please, please rule against us!” They could have been more disrespectful if they had literally destroyed the court order in front of said judge sometime during the trail.
Well said Cass! And bravo, Wal-Mart. You do always give us something to write about.
Posted by Corey Himrod on Thursday, June 26 | 23 comments | Permalink
REPORTS SHOWS WAL-MART COULD SQUASH DOWNTOWN BENNINGTON, VT
Report: New Wal-Mart could spell problems for downtown
The construction of a new Wal-Mart twice the size of the current one in town could spell disaster for some small, local retailers and their employees, according to an economic impact study done to secure a state environmental permit for the project.
112,000 square feet
Jonathan Levy, with BLS Bennington, LLC., won town permits in January 2006 to more than double the size of the Wal-Mart in the Monument Plaza on Northside Drive to 112,000 square feet.
The study, completed by Kavet, Rockler & Associates, was done on behalf of Levy and the Vermont Natural Resources Council, which is opposing construction of the new store. The VNRC represents Citizens for a Greater Bennington, which is opposed to the store at the local level.
According to the study, the first year of a new store could create a gain of up to 75 jobs. Construction costs would total about $16 million, and sales in the store are expected to more than double the current store and total about $48 million.
But the higher sales will take its toll on existing retailers.
“Most of the expanded store’s growth will come at the expense of existing stores in the served market area,” the report reads.
And although first-year employment gains will have a net growth of 75 positions, the study found that a larger Wal-Mart would have a negative long-term impact on employment in the area.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Joel Nezianya on Thursday, June 26 | 0 comments | Permalink
WAL-MART FACING AN UPHILL BATTLE IN TONAWANDA, NY
WAL-MART: Pleading their case [Tonawanda News (N.Y.)]
What is the economic impact of having a Wal-Mart or not?
That’s what one member of a group in favor of bringing the retail giant here asked members of the North Tonawanda Common Council Tuesday.
For all the boisterous public input Wal-Mart plans have generated in the past, Tuesday’s workshop was notably subdued, except for applause by some of the 12 attendees there in support of the group.
A police officer stood in the corner, assigned to the council chambers on a night the topic of a proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter was to be discussed.
North Tonawanda resident Tammy Godyn, founder of the pro-Wal-Mart citizen’s group Lumber City Liaisons, thanked members of the North Tonawanda Common Council and others involved in the proposal’s environmental impact study for their “meticulous work,” in bringing that months-long phase of planning to a conclusion early this month.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Joel Nezianya on Wednesday, June 25 | 0 comments | Permalink
WAL-MART DEBATE RAGING IN GREECE, NY
Greece Wal-Mart still being debated by residents [Greece Post (N.Y.)]
Despite being approved almost a year ago, talk about Wal-Mart coming to Northgate Plaza still draws a crowd.
More than 100 people came out Tuesday — some in favor, some not — to talk to company officials about the project, which is currently stalled in court.
The company got approval in September to build a 146,000-square-foot supercenter at the aging Dewey Avenue plaza. Work will take about eight to 10 months, according to Philip Serghini, a spokesman with the company.
But it hasn’t started yet and Serghini said he doesn’t know when it will. A group of citizens against the project — Residents Against Wal-Mart, or RAW — sued the town over its decision. The court ruled in the town’s favor, but RAW members are appealing.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Joel Nezianya on Wednesday, June 25 | 0 comments | Permalink
TRAFFIC CONCERNS IN GLOVERSVILLE, NY
Wal-Mart traffic plan concerns neighbors [Daily Gazette (N.Y.)]
Traffic issues were the main concern expressed Monday by the few who spoke at the public hearing on the draft environmental impact statement for the proposed Gloversville Wal-Mart Supercenter.
Civil engineer Nick Wood of Penny Lane in Johnstown challenged many of the study methods and traffic flow conclusions reached by Wal-Mart consultants. After a long presentation going over the traffic study point by point, Wood promised to file a detailed written report on his findings.
The public hearing was scheduled midway through a 45-day public comment period on the draft documents. Written comments may be filed through July 18 at the Fulton County Planning Department.
Public comments and those from the project’s lead agency, the Gloversville Planning Board, may have to be addressed by Wal-Mart consultants before the board accepts a final environmental impact statement.
While proponents of the 187,000 square foot store — including landowner James Curtin — urged the Planning Board to expedite approval of the draft document, others contend there remain serious concerns about traffic congestion in the new road configuration and runoff into a nearby trout stream.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Joel Nezianya on Tuesday, June 24 | 1 comments | Permalink
View Wal-Mart Watch's videos on YouTube