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. Recently, we also reported on Wal-Mart’s poor treatment of its disabled workforce.
Wal-Mart Watch will be focusing on these individual stories, highlighting cases that warrant further attention because of the insight each gives in its own way on how Wal-Mart feels about its employees.
John Lennex v. Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P.
John Lennex was hired by Wal-Mart on September 7, 2004, as a Bicycle Assembler. You take your kid into Wal-Mart, buy him the latest Huffy bicycle (now conveniently made overseas, since Wal-Mart forced the bike manufacturer to go broke), and John Lennex will put it together for you. Or he would have, had he not been fired.
Lennex has coronary artery disease. He requires a defibrillator to regulate his heart beat, and is limited in his life activities. He is recognized as have a life-limiting disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. And when he was hired, his managers were well aware of his condition.
When he was hired, bicycle assemblers were also allowed a certain comfort in their job – that is, they were actually allowed to sit on a stool while they built their bikes. When he received a new department manager in 2005, however, this changed. His new supervisor, Tye Wilson, told the employees to say bye-bye to stools or chairs. Despite knowing of Lennex’s disability and the fact that stools were readily available, AND that Lennex had performed his job admirably to that point, Wilson refused a request by Lennex for a reasonable accommodation that would let him continue to sit.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Corey Himrod | Permalink
There are two important economic discussions going on right now in America, and too rarely are they tied together as they should be.
Not a day goes by without talk in the media of the ‘Wal-Mart Economy’ and Wal-Mart’s role in a recession. Similarly, with the proposed auto bailout being debated on Capitol Hill, we’ve heard endlessly about the supposed failures of GM, Ford and Chrysler to adjust and adapt.
Everyone tends to agree that more Americans are now forced to shop at Wal-Mart - whether they love or whether they hate it. Likewise, the talking heads know that the Big Three are suffering - whether or not they need to be bailed out, or are getting what they deserve.
But the two aren’t separate stories.
A couple of columns by the Washington Post Writers Group over the past two days have done a great job of laying out the differences between Bentonville and Detroit – and what that has meant for the American economy.
Warren A. Brown writes mostly about cars. A lot of his column defends Detroit’s efforts to make greener cars, but more importantly (for this blog post at least) - he draws a more realistic picture of what’s been happening in America:
“Here is where newspaper columnists—Thomas L. Friedman of The New York Times comes to mind—routinely dismiss the idea of federal aid to an ailing Detroit, suggesting that the city and its automobile industry be consigned to the scrap heap of history, having failed dismally in their core mission to design and develop the kinds of cars and trucks Americans really want.
It is sophist nonsense, of course, the kind of tale spun by people who haven’t bothered to check the numbers, and who have paid even less regard to the history of their supposed knowledge.
The truth, all things considered, is that Detroit has done reasonably well. The American Three—General Motors, Ford and Chrysler—still hold an estimated 47 percent of a home market that is wide open to competition from car companies all over the world. Until July of 2007, domestic automobile manufacturers historically held more than a 50-percent U.S.-market share. But in a country where consumers have made Wal-Mart the retail king—that’s Wal-Mart, one of America’s biggest importers of foreign goods—that was bound to change.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Eric Bull | Permalink
A Missouri City (Texas) woman convicted of a sex crime is out to prove that she has rights after being fired from her job at Wal-Mart.
Rebecca Vlasek, she of the inspiring mug shot, has filed suit claiming discrimination against our little Wal-Mart. Why you ask? Well, I’ll tell you.
Picture it: Brenham, Texas...1999. A sultry high school teacher pleads guilty to felony sexual assault of a minor. The charge: having a relationship with a 14-year-old female student. The result: 10 years on probation and the thrill of getting to register as an official pervert within the state of Texas. You can check out her rap sheet here and here.
So why is Vlasek complaining now? Well Wal-Mart, it turns out, discovered some time ago that it has quite a few sexual offenders working within its friendly confines. And, as it also turns out, every so often one of these offenders decides to, how shall we say, engage in some recidivism? Like this, and this...AND this........AANNNND this.
The result is that Wal-Mart, since adopting a new criminal background check policy, has fired approximately 800 employees who are registered sex offenders. Vlasek (pictured more recently), however, isn’t complaining about those that were fired...no, she’s complaining about the 25 or more (male, she claims) employee offenders Wal-Mart ISN’T firing. That’s right - according to her complaint, Vlasek is alleging that she has received disparate treatment because of her gender. We’ll see whether the court buys the arguments that Vlasek was fired not just because she “had relations” with a 14-year-old girl but because she is a woman...AND that Wal-Mart retained those other 25 or so offenders specifically because they’re men, and not for some other reason.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Corey Himrod | Permalink
AS A FORMER EMPLOYEE OF WAL-MART, I was aware that my store had a “loss-prevention team” - which basically consisted of two obvious plain-clothed, unarmed “security officers” that walked around the store watching people shop, trying to catch shop-lifters. These guys were likely moonlighting at Wal-Mart on their days off from bouncer-duty at the bar. Nevertheless, occasionally they would catch someone stealing, and that’s where it all gets fuzzy. Let me make it perfectly clear, these guys ARE NOT law enforcement officials so the level of actual ‘enforcement’ they were legally allowed to use always seemed unclear. From what I understood, they were not allowed to physically intervene in a theft situation, just ‘escort’ them to the back, and call the police. They were not allowed to slam you face-first onto the ground.
Apparently a loss-prevention officer for a Wal-Mart in Spartanburg, S.C. never got that memo. WYFF-TV in South Carolina reports that a video-survellience camera captured footage of loss prevention officer, Joseph Gregorie bear-hug a 58-year-old woman, he suspected of shop-lifting, and slam her face-first into the ground. Talk about your all-time, total losses of composure. The woman sustained minor facial injuries and was taken to an area hospital. Wal-Mart was vague when talking to WSNA-TV in South Carolina about their loss-prevention protocol:
“...the spokesperson said their employees do follow certain ‘asset protection’ protocols, but she said she could not go into details about those protocols because of this investigation.”
UPDATE: if you didn’t already see it, check out the comment below from loyal reader Rob. He reports seeing a similar situation at a store where he worked.
Wal-Mart Employee Charged With Assaulting Shopper [WSNA-TV (S.C.)]
A Wal-Mart employee faces charges after police say he slammed a woman suspected of shoplifting face-first into the ground.
It happened late Tuesday night at the Dorman Centre Wal-Mart in Spartanburg. According to police reports, Joseph Gregorie, the store’s loss prevention officer, saw a 58-year old Greer woman concealing items in a bag. Gregorie says when he confronted her, the woman dropped the bag and tried to run away. The woman, Deborah Blackwell, tells police that Gregorie “bear hugged” her and slammed her face-first into the ground. She suffered a large contusion on her left eye and an injured hand and had to be taken to the hospital by ambulance. Gregorie told police that he grabbed Blackwell and she lost her balance and they both fell. But after reviewing surveillance video, the investigating officer said it shows Gregorie “throwing her to the ground”. He took the evidence to a judge who signed arrest warrants for both Gregorie and Blackwell.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Luke West | Permalink
We’ve been talking all week about the looming fight between Wal-Mart and the Obama Administration over labor reforms which might force Wal-Mart to treat its employees a little more fairly and give workers a little more say in the terms of their employment.
But we shouldn’t look at this as just a fight between Lee Scott and Barack Obama. There are 1.4 million Americans in the middle of this fight as well.
How has Wal-Mart been responding to the state of its workforce? Last week, Lee Scott was quoted talking non-specifically about his company’s response to the EFCA threat:
“We’re going to run this business,” Scott said. “Our associates are going to be productive. We’re going to reach out. We’re going to have relationships with our associates. We’re going to care about them and we’re going to serve our customers.”
("We’re going to care about them”?....that’s the best you can do, Lee? Anyone else think that sounds eerily like he’s admitting that he’s not caring about them now?)
But regardless, over the next year Wal-Mart execs will continue to tell us that all Wal-Mart employees are happy and productive and that all 1.4 million U.S. “associates” are one big warm fuzzy family. Unfortunately, that’s not the case. We know because every day we hear otherwise from Wal-Mart employees. Here’s a few more stories we’ve received lately.
Read these and more - in their entirety - on walmartspeakout.com:
“Why do you work overtime when you know that they will not pay you?”
“I have posted here a number of times before and I am always amazed that I have new bullets for my anti-Wal-Mart weaponry. No, my store doesn’t miss a beat when it comes to denying overtime pay.”
“Benefits” is a Loose Term to Wal-Mart
“When I was hired at Wal-Mart about 7 months ago, I was told by the hiring manager that Wal-Mart has the best benefits and I would receive then after 3 months. I believed him, but was in for a very rude awakening.”
Deaf Employee’s Request: Ignored
“I tried to apply for a promotion and they required me to do an interview over the phone, which was difficult considering there was no accommodation made for my disability.”
Posted by Media Team | Permalink
The Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board (SLRB) has agreed to hear a complaint by the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW Canada) accusing Wal-Mart of engaging in unfair labor practices as defined by Saskatchewan law. What’s more, the SLRB has ruled that Wal-Mart’s actions outside the province of Saskatchewan can be taken into account in assessing whether it is engaging in unfair labor actions within the province.
This means that the SLRB can take into account the example of Jonquiere, Quebec, when ruling on UFCW Canada’s complaint. It was in that small town, just over 100 miles north of Quebec City, that Wal-Mart announced it was going to shut its doors after workers voted to make the Jonquiere store the first unionized Wal-Mart in North America. The closure put 190 employees out of work, served as a warning for workers at other Wal-Mart stores who may have considered unionization against the company’s wishes.
Board chair James Seibel said the board was not required to determine whether Wal-Mart had acted illegally in Quebec to consider whether its actions “intimidated employees in Saskatchewan” from exercising their right under the province’s Trade Union Act to “organize and be represented by a bargaining agent of their choosing.”
“The fact that the actions of Wal-Mart upon which the allegations are based were committed outside the geographic confines of Saskatchewan does not mean that they cannot constitute (a) violation of the restriction on intimidation of its employees in the province,” Seibel ruled.
As the UFCW Canada complaint moves forward in Saskatchewan, it will be interesting to see if Wal-Mart’s actions in Quebec play a significant role - the company’s labor issues have yet to fade away there. According to the National Union of Public and General Employees:
The ruling is the latest in a series of setbacks for Wal-Mart in Canada. The company recently shut down a second operation in Quebec – a tire and lube shop in Gatineau – after failing to stop a union contract from being imposed there. Meanwhile, a Supreme Court of Canada case arising from the Jonquiere closure is scheduled to be heard within months.
We’ll keep you posted.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Corey Himrod | Permalink
Reader W.D. sent us a note over the weekend, with an interesting strategy to help struggling Wal-Mart employees: give them a tip.
It’s not a cure-all to the Wal-Mart problem, but it’s an interesting idea - and it would certainly shame any manager who knew it was happening. It’s great to have readers who are so keenly aware of the Wal-Mart dilemma to think of things like this:
“I shop at Wal-Mart. I never believed a boycott would be effective in changing their grotesque management system. I always believed a boycott would only hurt workers and cause more pain. After years of struggling within when I stepped into the front doors of Wal-Mart an idea suddenly hit me on how I could directly help employees while shopping for products I probably didn’t need. This idea I had would directly help some employees but the action of the idea would hopefully shame management. I decided I would implement it when checking out. I got to the register, the lady working at the check out stand was an older woman around sixty years of age, very friendly. When she finally gave me the total $68.38, I handed her my credit card. She ran the card through, and I decided to put my idea into action. When I finished signing my receipt, I reached into my pocket and handed her a $10.00 bill. She asked me what that was for, I responded that it was her tip. She said they don’t accept tips. I asked her if she believed the customer was always right? She said “yes” and I responded “well, I know you don’t get paid a fair wage for what you do, so I want to give you a tip”. She didn’t know what to say, I just said “please take it”. The lady behind me was laughing and said “take the tip cause I am going to tip too” and then she said “awesome”. The lady finally took my tip and said God Bless you. I told her if management gives her any problem, give the tip to them and tell them to disperse it and that I demanded you take it. I was concerned she would get in trouble for taking it.
So far I have tipped five times when visiting a Wal-Mart. I tip based on the restaurant scale, 20% on the dollar amount. During the last five times, I have had one manager ask me what I was doing. I told him why I was tipping, he just stared at me and smiled.
Start tipping your check out clerk. If not money, buy them a wal-mart gift card. Let’s shame management into action.
Just doing my part.”
What do you think?
Posted by Eric Bull | Permalink
Several stories over the past two days have outlined the oncoming fight between Wal-Mart and the Obama administration over labor reforms, primarily over the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) - but also health care reform and a slew of other potential legislation.
This is no suprise for anyone. Wal-Mart isn’t stupid, it read the writing on the wall and has been preparing for a democratic win and a push for labor reform for a while. It’s been donating more money to politicians (including democrats) to curry favor, as well as funding major anti-EFCA initiatives (not to mention explicitly telling its employees to vote for John McCain.)
Other big business - retailers especially - will be play major roles in the fight, but no American Business’s model is more threatened by labor reform right now than Wal-Mart - which looks to be ground zero in the upcoming battle with the new administration.
A labor attorney quoted in Reuters sums it well:
“You’ll see an all-out battle at Wal-Mart” by labor, said attorney Richard Hankins, who leads the labor and employment practice at the law firm of Kilpatrick Stockton.
Jonathan Birchall at FT tells about the Obama administration could hit Wal-Mart on health care as well:
On healthcare, Mr Obama’s platform included setting a minimum contribution level for businesses to their employees’ healthcare plans - an approach that has been opposed at state level by big non-unionised retailers, including Wal-Mart...The retailer, with more than 1.3m staff, has said it wants to work on healthcare reform with a new administration.
And if Wal-Mart hadn’t already made it clear enough how much it refuses to change or pay its workers a dime more, check out the gall on Lee Scott - quoted by the Associated Press at the recent analysts’ meeting:
“It’ll be generations in the impact it [EFCA] has on this country. And it won’t be positive. I guarantee you that. It will not be positive. But for Wal-Mart, in the short term, and in the longer term on a relative basis with our peers, we’re going to run this business,” Scott said. He continued, ”We like driving the car and we’re not going to give the steering wheel to anybody but us.”
Will the next four years see better wages and benefits for Wal-Mart’s 1.4 million employees? Will it loosen Wal-Mart’s grip on the steering wheel? We look forward to finding out - and blogging about it.
Posted by Eric Bull | Permalink
Starting now, Wal-Mart Watch will be periodically updating you on some of the new comments submitted to our Employee Speak-Out site. These comments are sent in from visitors to our site who are former or current employees of Wal-Mart and its sister companies, who have been victims of the systematic abuse and discrimination that Wal-Mart is known for inflicting upon its employees. Remember that if you have a story to tell about working at Wal-Mart, we encourage you to tell us about it - we’ll put it up on the web and let your voice be heard.
As we look forward to the next 4 years, we hope that this website will be among the many tools that Wal-Mart workers use to help change Wal-Mart and their lives for the better.
Workplace stress leads to tragedy for pregnant worker:
“I was a manager in the housewares department. I just got my separation notice from them for not returning to work from my leave of absence. There is a reason I didn’t return; I feel they are responsible for the death of my baby.”
Anonymous on Age-Based Termination:
“Wal Mart is systematically targeting anyone over 40 years of age for firings through systematically assigning the heaviest, most back breaking jobs to that class of people in the facility. Managers are encouraged to pressure senior employees into quitting and firing to ensure that young strong backs are maintained in the facility.”
I attended a meeting that was conducted by a market manager. We were not told to not vote for Obama
Posted by Luke West | Permalink
Hey, Wal-Mart? Do you feel the winds blowing today? Ah, yes, the winds of change. Indeed, that key demographic of Wal-Mart women across the country surely voted their pocketbooks and their consciences - and helped the electorate hand a decisive victory to Senator Barack Obama.
You can bet the Walton family and CEO Lee Scott weren’t doing a victory dance last night when the election was called for Obama. Oh, sure the company’s pr and gov relations guy, Leslie Dach has tried really, really, really, really hard recently (especially as things were looking really promising for Obama) to convince everyone that Wal-Mart was “non-partisan” – even going so far as to air infomercials for both candidates in the company’s stores. But, those “non-partisan” activities, like so many things Wal-Mart does are mere distractions from what the company was really up to.
In August, the Wall Street Journal exposed Wal-Mart’s mandatory meetings to attempt to instruct its employees to vote against Democrats and Senator Obama – oh, sure they nuanced the message in some settings, but the point was clear. And, the company implemented a plan at the beginning of 2008 to train all of its managers how to fight the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) should Obama be elected. During the presidential campaign, we saw anti-EFCA ads (and anti-Obama – walking the legal line in various forms) from several different organizations - including (but, not limited to): the Workforce Fairness Institute; Center for Union Facts; The Center for Consumer Freedom and of course, the Employment Policies Institute. Since these groups don’t disclose all of their contributors, it’s hard to prove that Wal-Mart gave them money, but we have a pretty good idea that Wal-Mart invested a nice chunk of change in their efforts. Maybe someone should ask Wal-Mart.
For the past eight years, Wal-Mart has had a free pass to trample workers’ rights - in part due to the ineffectiveness of the NLRB – and in part due to a system that has favored employers. The company’s business model of paying appallingly low wages, offering catastrophic, unaffordable health care plans, forcing employees to forgo overtime pay, manipulating employees’ schedules as punishment for standing up to the company, discriminating against employees and a host of other issues – evident from a multitude of lawsuits - and from the mouths of employees themselves - is finally in jeopardy.
Yep, change is coming. With an Obama presidency and the Democratic gains in Congress, average Americans – including Wal-Mart workers - will once more have a say and stand a chance of getting a fair shake. Wal-Mart knows it – and fears it.
Expect to see the company increase its lobbying expenditures in the next few months and ramp up its efforts to mislead its employees about EFCA – which by the way, could finally give its employees the ability to stand up to the company. And, expect to see even worse treatment of employees to send a clear message to them about who is still in charge (and Wal-Mart just doesn’t ever seem to learn on this front).
Posted by Media Team | Permalink
If you happened to catch Democratic Presidential Candidate, Senator Obama’s infomercial last night, you saw a retired couple who couldn’t afford to pay for their medications so the 72-year old husband had to take a job at Wal-Mart. Instead of enjoying their retirement and what should be their “golden years,” this man like many others in these tough economic times had little choice but to join the forces of low-paid Wal-Mart workers. Go in any Wal-Mart and you’ll see many folks just like him – folks working as Wal-Mart sales associates, greeters and stockers.
But, with Wal-Mart’s average hourly wage of around $10 – not the starting wage, which is much lower - this family and others like them are struggling. An average full-time employee earns about $19,200 a year – that’s living in poverty for a family of four. And, what about those medications and doctor bills? You can bet this family is still paying them out of pocket – with Wal-Mart’s lousy health care plans and waiting periods.
Part-time workers have to wait a year before they are eligible for health care plans while full-timers still have a six-month wait. And even for eligible employees, the decent plans are too expensive to afford on a meager hourly wage. Most end up with high deductibles and very little coverage, which is why only about half of Wal-Mart’s employees are even covered under the company health care plan.
As Senator Obama pointed out, this couple’s situation is not an isolated one. But, the sad thing is that so many of these folks who find themselves working at Wal-Mart in these desperate times, find themselves subject to bad treatment, low wages and poor health care plans. The stories we hear from employees every day show a disturbing pattern of Wal-Mart’s willingness to take advantage of these hard-working employees - who are just trying to support their families and make ends meet. All you have to do is read a few of them to understand working at Wal-Mart isn’t always a good option.
We hope that the mention of Wal-Mart in this political infomercial puts the company on notice. People are paying attention: it’s time for a change, Wal-Mart.
Posted by Media Team | Permalink
We blogged about this yesterday, what with the double taxation in Connecticut and the various state officials telling Wal-Mart to stop. Well, the Hartford Courant obtained a copy of CT AG Blumenthal’s letter to Wal-Mart, and here it is. A sampling:
Please review with your Connecticut stores whether they are complying with Connecticut law, and report back to me your findings. If they are not complying, please report to me how you intend to refund customers for sales tax erroneously charged, and how you intend to ensure that your store and employees comply with Connecticut law in the future.
I return, yet again, to my favorite quote from yesterday‘s article:
[Wal-Mart] spokesman Dan Fogelman said Monday evening that although he has no idea what Connecticut state tax law is, his company is following it.
Dan and Wal-Mart better do their homework…
Connecticut Attorney General letter to Wal-Mart
Posted by Corey Himrod | Permalink
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.
Wal-Mart Watch will be focusing on these individual stories, highlighting those cases that warrant further attention because of the light each sheds in its own way on how Wal-Mart does business.
Maria Sutherland v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. [Filed September 10, 2008; Case ongoing]
Sutherland was hired in the deli department at in Indiana Wal-Mart in 1999. In 2006, she was approached by a co-worker, Arturo Aguas, at 9am. He informed her that she had boxes in the cooler that needed to be retrieved. When she went to the cooler, what she found was Aguas waiting for her with a present and card – the card was inappropriate, indicating that Aguas wanted to “spend many years loving” Sutherland. He then grabbed Sutherland and tried to kiss her, and blocked the exit when she tried to leave. He also attempted to reach underneath her skirt and shirt. When Sutherland was finally able to push him off, she was so upset that she left work early. It was the first time in 7 years that she had done so.
The next morning she reported the incident, turned in romantic notes from Aguas, and stated she did not want to work with him again. Despite that, she was directed back to work with Aguas and told to act as if nothing had happened while an investigation was conducted.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Corey Himrod | Permalink
Oct28
New Wal-Mart Watch Video
Wal-Mart Watch’s new video, “Wal-Mart saves money, the Walton family lives better,” shows the real life implications of Wal-Mart’s low-wage business model. While the average full-time hourly Wal-Mart worker makes $19,200 a year, the Walton family’s net worth rose to over $100 billion during the past year.
As average American families have conversations around their kitchen tables just like the Wal-Mart employee and his family in this video, the Walton family doesn’t have a care in the world. Because the Walton family and Wal-Mart choose to pay low wages to the company’s workers, families across the country - just like this one - are struggling to stay in their homes, pay their bills, pay their medical expenses and take care of their families.
So, while Wal-Mart saves money on the backs of its employees, the Walton family lives better – much better. It’s no wonder that Wal-Mart is so opposed to any tool such as the Employee Free Choice Act, which could actually make it easier for employees to stand up to Wal-Mart and demand better wages and benefits. No, Wal-Mart executives and the Walton family want to keep on living better themselves - and it’s just too bad for the 1.4 million U.S. employees.
Check out the new video, and let us know what you think.
Posted by Media Team | Permalink
Oct27
Meet Jane Doe
Wal-Mart Watch is releasing a new video today to accompany our new report, “Reasonable Accommodation – Denied,” which exposes Wal-Mart’s deliberate pattern of discrimination against employees with disabilities.
After working at Wal-Mart for nine years with a reasonable accommodation for her disability, Wal-Mart suddenly denied Jane’s accommodation. They required her to take a leave of absence and have yet to reinstate her. She has been essentially fired. This is her story.
Posted by Eric Bull | Permalink
Check out this week’s issue of the Wal-Mart Watch Weekly Update for Elected Officials – a compilation of Wal-Mart news from across the country and beyond.
This week’s issue begins with news of Wal-Mart’s closing of a Quebec Tire and Lube Express, just two months after workers there won a precedent-setting collective bargaining agreement. The move has been wildly denounced, although Wal-Mart officials maintain that Wal-Mart is not anti-union. Following up on that, BloggingStocks.com asks whether it’s wise that the retailer would rather see an operation shut down entirely than have employees with any kind of power.
In addition, the Hartford Courant has been following an issue in Connecticut - it seems the CT Consumer Protection Department will review Wal-Mart’s double tax policy to see if it violates state tax law. And on the International side, read more about Wal-Mart’s new green store in Beijing, China, and how the retailer is claiming it will toughen standards on its Chinese suppliers.
And finally, check out our “Stateside” and “Wal-Mart International” sections to find out what’s going on with Wal-Mart around the country and across the globe.
Wal-Mart Watch Weekly Update for Elected Officials [October 22, 2008]
Posted by Corey Himrod | Permalink
Well, my faithful blog readers, after two years of working on Wal-Mart issues and more than a year as the main editor of this blog, our Friday Blog Round-Up today will be my last post. I hope you all continue reading, commenting and working to challenge Wal-Mart’s business practices. Enjoy the writing of my Wal-Mart Watch colleagues and try to keep the infighting to a minimum. As for now - on to the week’s blogs!
BLOGGERS WEIGH IN ON “EMPLOYEES SPEAK OUT”
Real Voices, Some More Wild Stuff [Working Life]
Wal-Mart Watch has set up a website where you can actually hear and read about the actual workers who have to put up with the oppressive behavior of The Beast. This is part of the picture: the Great Robbery that we have all endured for a number of decades--wages not going up (even though productivity goes up), no health care, no pensions--plays out, day-to-day, in those aisles at Wal-Mart.
The voice of the workers (Part 1) [Writing on the Wal]
What you get there is a look behind Walmart’s PR curtain to see what employees are really thinking, but too afraid to tell their supervisors since they don’t have a union to protect them. Indeed, let’s start this series there, in the category that Wal-Mart Watch calls corporate culture.
After the jump, union-busting in Canada, bottle water, Nike’s suit against the Bentonville behemoth and Sarah Palin.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Alex Goldschmidt | Permalink
Great News! Wal-Mart Watch’s new website - walmartspeakout.com - has a had a great first day! We’ve had a ton of visitors on our first day, and even better - new stories from Wal-Mart employees are rolling in. You can bet that we’ll be formatting them and loading ‘em up, so make sure to keep reading the site.
Below are two unbelievable stories we received this morning:
I tripped over the box and went down to the hard cemment floor. I screamed and management came running. I was told to go to the office, so I started hobbling to the office to fill out the paper work. The assistant and support manager were their and after the paper work was filled out they asked me if I wanted to see a doctor and I replied yes. Then they told me I had to see my family doctor. I replied on a Friday night. Saturday morning and they replied yes. My clinic is not open and they me that I have 24 hours to see my family doctor. I was told to go back to work. The store was closed and we are locked in the store at night. I was forced to work for 8 hours when my shift was over I left and said I am going to the ER. The assistance manager just shruged her shoulders. When I was done in the ER I had to go back to the store to give them the papers. The store manager asked me how many days was I going to be off work. and I replied 2 because I don’t work the other days. He replied oh ok. He never asked if I was ok or anything. The following Wed. when I returned back to work the Harassing started by management.That Friday I was cut from full time to part time (I have it on tape). I ended up to going in for surgery and now I must use a wheelchair to get around and I haven’t been back to work.
This one, if true, is terrifying:
I worked for a transportation company that was under contract to WalMart in Canada. When Walmart was closing its Quebec store due to the union issue it requested us to quote on sending in a trailer to the closing store to load 26 pallets of inventory and then deliver 1pallet to each of 26 stores in western canada.This expensive request was to send a message to each store that this skid came from a store that organized a union and now it is closed . Expensive message but you get what their purpose was.
Posted by Eric Bull | Permalink
Check out this week’s issue of the Wal-Mart Watch Weekly Update for Elected Officials – a compilation of Wal-Mart news from across the country and beyond.
This week’s issue centers on a new website launched by Wal-Mart Watch which details the retailer’s political contributions, positions on specific legislation, and spending on lobbyists and industry trade groups. The website, Walton Influence, also includes similar information on the Walton family and the family’s related enterprises.
In addition, you’ll read about a number of legal issues, the most important of which could be affecting the health of millions of Americans. Bloomberg News and the San Francisco Chronicle, among others, are reporting on how tests of several of the best-selling brands of bottled water (including Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club private label brands) have been found to contain mixtures of at least 38 different pollutants, including bacteria, fertilizer, and industrial chemicals. These findings could result in a lawsuit against the retail giant.
And finally, check out our “Stateside” and “Wal-Mart International” sections to find out what’s going on with Wal-Mart around the country and across the globe. You’ll read about how Maryland’s closing of certain corporate tax loopholes has resulted in millions of dollars in increased state funds, and why employees in Illinois are protesting Wal-Mart’s electioneering activities.
Wal-Mart Watch Weekly Update for Elected Officials [October 16, 2008]
Posted by Corey Himrod | Permalink
Today marks the debut of a new project from Wal-Mart Watch: Wal-Mart Employees Speak-Out. The new website is a chance for Wal-Mart’s employees and former employees to talk about how the retailer’s low wage, poor benefits business model impacts their lives. The site features user-submitted material in the form of comments, stories, and video testimonies. Check it out at: http://walmartspeakout.com.
Wal-Mart workers often face retaliation for speaking out about the many problems at the company. This website is a chance for them to speak out – anonymously, in many cases – without fear of being fired or demoted. The project comes at a time when working Americans are suffering more than ever, but while Wal-Mart reaps record profits as the largest corporation in the world.
Are you a former or current employee of Wal-Mart that has a story to share? Click here to SPEAK OUT! All entries will be kept anonymous unless authorized. Speaking out helps others fight the unfair treatment Wal-Mart is infamous for. Help transform Wal-Mart into the kind of workplace it claims to be, and speak out against unfair policies at the company.
Posted by Media Team | Permalink
View Wal-Mart Watch's videos on YouTube