Legal Blog: Is Wal-Mart stealing money meant to help low-income women and their children?
Wal-Mart has, unsurprisingly, been the target of more lawsuits than one can count over the years. The company’s treatment of its 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.
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.
Deborah Metcalf v. Wal-Mart Stores East
In the process of scouring the country searching for egregious examples of Wal-Mart malfeasance, we came across this interesting little case filed earlier this year in Oklahoma. On its surface, it’s a retaliatory discharge case – however, the plaintiff here, Deborah Metcalf, was fired for blowing the whistle on what should be considered some pretty repulsive conduct.
Among the many programs funded by the United States Government, we’re going to focus on one in particular – the federal WIC program. WIC stands for Women, Infants, and Children, and is a special supplemental nutrition program funded by grants by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and administered in Oklahoma by the OK State Department of Health. Basically, WIC provides food and education to low-income women, infants and children deemed eligible for the program. The program’s website tagline delivers the following:
The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children - better known as the WIC Program - serves to safeguard the health of low-income women, infants, & children up to age 5 who are at nutritional risk by providing nutritious foods to supplement diets, information on healthy eating, and referrals to health care.
Deborah Metcalf, at the time of her firing, was an employee working at the Wal-Mart Pharmacy located within store #47 in Sallisaw, Oklahoma. In 2001, the Sallisaw Wal-Mart became a participant in the WIC program. Before we go any further, perhaps a little more information is needed on how the WIC program works:
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Corey Himrod on Wednesday, August 20 | 58 comments | Permalink
Friday Blog Round-Up: Jet Set Edition
WORKERS’ RIGHTS DEFENDANTS ASK FEC TO INVESTIGATE WAL-MART
Anyone who reads our blog regularly has undoubtedly already seen this article. Here are some reactions to it from the blogosphere.
Tell the FEC to Investigate Wal-Mart for Electioneering [ZP Heller on the Huffington Post]
Wal-Mart must be forced to set a better example regarding labor practices. And here’s our chance to make them by signing American Rights at Work’s petition. If Wal-Mart broke the law by threatening and scaring employees about which candidates to vote for this November, compel the FEC to hold the company accountable.
Unions strike back at Wal-Mart [BloggingStocks]
Why is Wal-Mart set to pick a fight with the Democrats? Don’t the folks in Bentonville read the political tea leaves? Odds are pretty good that the country will go Blue in a big way. Maybe the company is worried that the good times reflected in today’s results won’t last.
Wal-Mart: Political Bully [Alternet]
For years, Wal-Mart has been plagued by bad press. Now it has to fend off a Wall Street Journal report that it’s been politically bullying its employees. ANP headed over to a Wal-Mart in Virginia to ask shoppers what they think.
Wal-Mart busted on video for lying to employees about their rights [The G Spot]
It’s unclear whether Wal-Mart will face any legal consequences for the lies they told. But the Journal article notes that action has been taken on another front: labor groups have filed a complaint against Wal-Mart with the Federal Elections Commission. They’re asking the commission to investigate whether the meetings Wal-Mart organized around the country warning thousands of employees about the consequences of electing a Democratic president violated the law (you can find the complaint here). Will the F.E.C. take action? It seems like there’s a decent shot they might.
After the jump, life as a Wal-Mart pharmacist, Sam’s Club’s dubious green claims and design wonks hold their own Wal-Mart redesign contest.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Alex Goldschmidt on Friday, August 15 | 5 comments | Permalink
Legal Blog: Racial Discrimination in Georgian Wal-Mart
Wal-Mart has, unsurprisingly, been the target of more lawsuits than one can count over the years. The company’s treatment of its 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.
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.
Another Wal-Mart employee recently filed a racial discrimination and retaliation complaint against Wal-Mart in the Northern District of Georgia…
Raquel Sagastume lives in Riverdale, Georgia. Originally, Ms. Sagastume hails from Honduras. She was hired at Wal-Mart as a Sales Associate in March of 2001. After her successful job performance, Ms. Sagastume was promoted to Assistant Store Manager and made approximately $46,000.00 a year.
In 2006, Ms. Sagastume was transferred to a store located in Lovejoy, Georgia. Upon arriving at the new location and without her approval, Ms. Sagastume’s salary was immediately reduced to $38,000.00 a year. No indication was ever given to Ms. Sagastume that her performance on the job was anything less than stellar.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Christina Clark on Friday, August 15 | 4 comments | Permalink
Wal-Mart’s World In A Paris Hilton Presidency
Paris Hilton: hotel heiress...reality TV star...President?
Despite having not yet announced her campaign, Hilton was recently placed in a John McCain ad (along with Britney Spears) alongside Senator Barack Obama, most likely in an attempt to make her appear ultra-liberal and quite unpresidential. (Some would argue the advertisement was really an attempt to make Obama look like a self-important celebrity, but I doubt the McCain camp would go there.)
Anyway, Hilton, shown here on what is no doubt an excruciatingly important call with a foreign dignitary (and looking fabulous in a Diane von Furstenberg dress), has fought back, announcing her candidacy and her intent to run against a certain ”wrinkly white-haired guy.” And with that, we can be left to ponder what would become of us under President Hilton, as Sean Leviashvili at TheStreet.com has:
ECONOMIC POLICY:
What about universal healthcare? And what about universal shopping sprees? According to a recent CNN poll, 48% of Americans are most concerned about the economy and the troubled job market. And with big name-companies such as Wal-Mart missing their earnings expectations recently, the U.S. might need someone who actually knows what Wal-Mart sells. Paris once asked what Wal-Mart (WMT) was on national TV ("What’s Wal-Mart? Do they sell, like wall stuff?"), let’s hope she’s done some research.
Research schmesearch...I hope once she’s President, Hilton will finally find her way to Wal-Mart to fill all of her wall-related needs.
Potential Policies if Paris Hilton Becomes President [TheStreet.com]
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Corey Himrod on Friday, August 08 | 20 comments | Permalink
Legal Blog: Pregnant Woman Denied Water
Wal-Mart has, unsurprisingly, been the target of more lawsuits than one can count over the years. The company’s treatment of its 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.
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.
On August 5, 2008, a Kansas resident, Heather Wiseman, filed a complaint against Wal-Mart claiming discrimination based on her pregnancy and resulting medical condition, as well as a claim for violating the Family Medical Leave Act when they terminated her employment.
Heather was hired to work at Wal-Mart on October 31, 2006. In May of 2007, Heather found out she was pregnant and informed Wal-Mart of her condition. Throughout her pregnancy Heather began getting urinary tract and bladder infections. As a result, Heather was instructed by her doctor to drink lots of water and carry a water bottle with her when she was at work.
It had been Wal-Mart’s policy to allow employees to carry water with them at all times. Soon after Heather began carrying her water, Wal-Mart began prohibiting this behavior… for everyone except cashiers. Heather’s infections continued during this time as she was unable to consume enough water merely through the use of Wal-Mart’s water fountains. Working as a sales floor associate Heather asked the assistant manager for an exception due to her pregnancy-related condition. As requested, Heather submitted a doctor’s note listing her condition and prescribing the use of a water bottle while on duty.
Wal-Mart then denied her request stating that it was “insufficient.”
Heather provided a second note, as well as, sat down in a meeting with her department and store manager. At the meeting the store manager contacted Heather’s doctor and discussed her need for the water bottle. Problem solved?… No.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Christina Clark on Wednesday, August 06 | 44 comments | Permalink
Legal Blog: Discrimination Victim Ignored in Wal-Mart Store
Wal-Mart has, unsurprisingly, been the target of more lawsuits than one can count over the years. The company’s treatment of its 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.
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.
Recently, the Philadelphia Chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) released a story about a Pennsylvanian woman, Tanveer Walli, who filed a civil rights complaint in Federal Court on July 10, 2008 naming Wal-Mart as a defendant. Ms. Walli alleges discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of her religion, as well as intimidation and coercion under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Ms. Walli says she was refused service at the Wal-Mart store McDonald’s location because of her headscarf (or hijab).
According to the suit, the plaintiff entered an Allentown McDonald’s in August of last year and was verbally accosted and refused service by the restaurant manager. The plaintiff says her pleas for equal treatment were treated with laughter as other patrons were served. She then allegedly sought the assistance of a Wal-Mart manager, who instead of helping, asked her to leave the store.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Christina Clark on Tuesday, July 29 | 0 comments | Permalink
Legal Blog: Wal-Mart Slow to Act on Same-Sex Harassment
Wal-Mart has, unsurprisingly, been the target of more lawsuits than one can count over the years. The company’s treatment of its 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.
Mrs. Magen Davidson-Nadwodny of Baltimore, Maryland never expected she would be yet another victim of sexual harassment at her local Wal-Mart. She was hired on in the Women’s Jewelry Department, in October of 2005. Mrs. Davidson, who was working to support her family and disabled parents, alleges that she was subjected to repeated and continued sexual harassment by her female co-worker. Additionally, she claims that Wal-Mart not only knew about the behavior and did not stop it, but Wal-mart had previously transferred another employee to the shoe department for the same problem.
Mrs. Davidson filed a 49 page complaint on September 26, 2007 in the Circuit Court of Maryland for Baltimore County. She is suing Wal-Mart for Battery, Sexual Harassment / Hostile Work Environment, Harassment, Breach of Implied Employment Contract, Intentional Misrepresentation, Intentional/Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress, Defamation, Invasion of Privacy – Placing a Person in a False Light, Negligent Hiring or Retention, Respondeat Superior, and Retaliation.
(What the heck does Respondeat Superior mean? …basically an employer is responsible for the actions of its employee under the law).
As early as November of the same year Mrs. Davidson was hired, she reports experiencing sexual advances and harassment from her co-worker, an Assistant Department Manager for Jewelry.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Christina Clark on Friday, July 25 | 1 comments | Permalink
Obama, McCain, Sure…But Real Debate At NAACP Was About Wal-Mart
This article originally appeared on the Huffington Post.
Civil Rights Group Gives Wal-Mart A C+
More than 1,300 delegates to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) Convention were warmed up by Barak Obama and John McCain speeches---but the real heat in Cincinnati came during a debate over Wal-Mart.
During 5 days of conventioneering, the delegates took up 45 resolutions---one of the most contentious being the business practices of the World’s Largest Retailer.
On the Convention floor, NAACP Resolution #14 read:
“Oppose Wal-mart and Other Retailers Unfair Labor Practices Resolved: That the NAACP will challenge Wal-Mart and other retailers to overcome any of their practices that are inconsistent with the highest standards of Labor and Civil Rights, to ensure equal opportunity and equal pay for Women, people of color and other minorities, and work with local communities to effectively address Wal-Mart’s and other retailers negative impact on issues like the environment and local businesses, and establish a ‘Buy American’ program that annually increases the percentage of ‘Made in America’ goods purchased by Wal-Mart and Other retailers to help protect American Jobs.”
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Al Norman on Monday, July 21 | 26 comments | Permalink
View Wal-Mart Watch's videos on YouTube
