0 comments

---

The Shaw’s supermarket on Whalley Avenue in New Haven, Connecticut is closing down. It’s one of 18 stores that are being sold off by Shaw’s owner, SuperValu.

Most of the Shaw’s stores are being bought up by three other New England grocery chains, including Stop & Shop, ShopRite and PriceRite. The Shaw’s in New Haven doesn’t have a buyer yet. Wal-Mart is listed by Supermarket News as the largest grocery chain in the world. In America, Wal-Mart’s market share is in the mid 20% range for dry groceries, dairy and frozen foods.

Supervalu is listed as number 15 on the worldwide grocers list. Supervalu describes itself as a “mix of owned, licensed, franchised and affiliated stores, (which) serves millions of families from coast-to-coast.” The retail banners that Supervalu operates include: Acme, Albertsons, Bigg’s Bristol Farms, Cub, Farm Fresh, Hornbackaer, Jewe-Osco, Shaw’s/Star Market, Shop ‘N Save, and Shoppers. The company also controls the discount grocery chain Save-A-Lot.

The Shaw’s lineage goes back to 1860, when George C. Shaw opened his first store in Portland, Maine. A few years later, another native New Englander, Maynard A. Davis, opened his first Public Markets in Brockton and New Bedford, Massachusetts. These two stores merged, and today the Shaw’s/Star Market chain has over 30,000 workers in the six New England states---soon to be five states. The 18 stores being shut down represent around 9% of the 194 stores under the Shaw’s banner.

Supervalu as a conglomerate controls roughly 4,300 retail outlets in the United States. “We bring our national scale and local hyper-relevance to thousands of consumers, helping to make us ‘America’s Neighborhood Grocer.’” But in Connecticut, Supervalu is leaving the neighborhood.

According to the Hartford Courant’s account of the Shaw’s meltdown this week, the company had a 15 year track record in Connecticut, but had come under increasing pressures from competitors like Wal-Mart and Whole Foods. Today Wal-Mart has only 5 superstores in Connecticut, and 28 discount stores. But in 1994, just as Shaw’s was preparing to enter Connecticut, the state had only 2 Wal-Mart discount stores, and no supercenters.

A spokesman for Supermarket News told the Hartford Courant that Shaw’s had failed to differentiate itself. “They’ve had an inconsistent identity with the shopper. In order for a conventional supermarket to stand out, they have to be special, whether that’s local flavor or product or service offerings that are unique.” At their point of highest penetration, Shaw’s had 26 stores in Connecticut, but over the years they shut down 8 stores. A spokesman for Supervalu told the Courant, “While these decisions are always difficult given the impact on associates and customers, they ultimately allow us to operate more efficiently and effectively within a highly competitive retail environment.” That’s of little consolation to the workers who are losing their jobs in the middle of this recession.

What you can do: Many of the former Shaw’s stores will be unionized under their new owners. Brian Petronella, a spokesman for the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) local 371, said 5 of the ShopRites will be represented by the UFCW. Local 371 will also represent the new Stop & Shop stores. The UFCW extended a hand to the Shaw’s workers who will work at ShopRite stores that are not unionized. “We will try to help those people get jobs at union locations,” Petronella told the Courant.

The demise of Shaw’s in Connecticut is just a continuation of the shift in market share towards the largest grocer in the world: Wal-Mart. In 2003, a study by Retail Forward, entitled “Wal-Mart Food: Big, and Getting Bigger,” pointed out that just ten or fifteen years ago, “Wal-Mart was barely on the food radar screen. Virtually overnight, the retailing behemoth has become the dominant grocer in America.” In 2003, Wal-Mart sales were bigger than the combined sales of the top ten U.S. supermarket retailers. “Wal-Mart has the proven ability to quickly blanket a market with its multi-format approach,” said Retail Forward, “to become a dominant---if not leading—market share player in rapid fashion, wreaking havoc for the incumbents.”

The latest incumbent is Shaw’s supermarkets. Seven years ago, Retail Forward predicted that “for every Wal-Mart supercenter that opens in the next five years, two supermarkets will close their doors. As a result, the supermarket industry is projected to lose 2,000 more stores over the next five years.” The consultant concluded that grocery stores can survive, but “the key is to be what Wal-Mart is not.” The analysts will say that Shaw’s failed to find a “distinct positioning strategy” that set them apart. But the fact is, the Connecticut market is saturated with grocery stores, and most of Wal-Mart’s stores still do not carry a full line of groceries--so the problem will get worse if Connecticut communities let Wal-Mart build more superstores.

Readers are urged to copy this article and send it to their local city or town officials with the following note: “When Wal-Mart files a proposal for a superstore in our town, please learn from the lesson of Shaw’s supermarkets, and understand that a Wal-Mart opening merely leads to to other stores closing. It does not happen overnight---but it happens---and when it does, people lose their jobs, and no added value comes to the local economy. It’s just an unproductive game of retail musical chairs, and shifting market share. Wal-Mart sales comes largely from other cash registers. If you understand that, then you behave differently when the superstore comes knocking on your door.”

0 comments

---

“Smart Choices” is a food labeling program backed by industry heavyweights like Kellogg, Con-Agra, and (of course) Walmart.  The idea behind it is obvious: if you flag “healthy” foods with a uniform labeling system, consumers can easily identify them and make better snap decisions. 

Unfortunately, the program’s health criteria are riddled with holes.  Many products are rewarded merely for limiting sugar, fat, and salt, allowing questionable items like fudgcicles, microwave popcorn, and Lunchables to qualify for the “healthy” label.

When it comes to evaluating breakfast cereals, Smart Choices really puts on the kid gloves. Basically, a cereal containing a single encouraged nutrient and up to 12 grams of added sugar per serving earns the coveted green ribbon of health.  This has allowed ridiculously unhealthy products like Froot Loops and marshmallow-laden Lucky Charms to sport the Smart Choices Label. 

There is no news as to how extensively Walmart plans to implement the program, but the company remains on the Smart Choices Roundtable.  We can only encourage Walmart to do the right thing by using its clout to make Smart Choices a little less… dumb.

For more, check out the New York Times article: For Your Health, Froot Loops

0 comments

---

At the request of the H-E-B Grocery Company, the National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus undertook a review of certain Wal-Mart advertising claims. More to the point, the grocery retailer challenged Wal-Mart’s claims of “unbeatable prices” in addition to its ability to save its customers on average $700 annually if they spend $100 a week at the supermarket on select grocery items.

Specifically, the challenger noted that Wal-Mart does not honor advertisements that require a purchase in order to receive the advertised price or free product, “Buy One/Get One Free” advertisements, double or triple coupons or percent off advertisements, “misprinted” advertised prices, Internet prices or price matches based on other methods of proof, including sales receipts.

The investigation turned up good news and bad news for Wal-Mart. First, the NAD did support the claim of “unbeatable prices,” primarily because it argued that no retailer could be expected to list all limitations in its advertisements. The NAD did, however, suggest Wal-Mart “modify its advertising to make its disclosures substantially more clear and conspicuous in its printed and broadcast advertising and on its in-store signage.”

As for the claim of being able to the save families $700 per year, well, that didn’t go so well.

NAD further recommended that Wal-Mart discontinue the “$700 annual savings” claim. NAD noted that the claim suggests that the consumer watching the ad could save, on average, more than $700 a year by shopping at Wal-Mart. The use of the phrase “on average” does not temper the overriding message that the viewer – wherever he or she is located – can expect to obtain these savings.

In a statement, Wal-Mart stood by its findings, saying they were supported by an in-depth Global Insight study. This isn’t the first time the National Advertising Division has recommended that Wal-Mart discontinue misleading advertising. And as for Global Insight, let’s hold off on calling them a bastion of flawless methodology. That group’s methods have come into question more than once by organizations including the Economic Policy Institute.

Walmart’s unbeatable prices claim scrutinized [Greensboro News & Record]

Read the rest of this story ...

0 comments

---

REPUBLICAN APPOINTEES BLOCKED FEC CHARGES AGAINST WAL-MART

• Republicans Block Election Complaint against Wal-Mart [AllGov]
  Republican appointees to the Federal Election Commission found nothing illegal in the actions by Wal-Mart during last year’s election when the giant retailer was accused of pushing its employees to vote against Barack Obama and other Democrats.

• FEC Dismisses Wal-Mart Complaints [CQpolitics]
  The Federal Election Commission deadlocked on whether Wal-Mart violated campaign finance laws during the 2008 campaign. Because of the tie vote, complaints against the retailer were dismissed, documents released Thursday show.
  

Read the rest of this story ...

0 comments

---

This week we’ve continued to hear from workers who are frustrated with their jobs at Wal-Mart. As always, we are amazed by the sheer quantity and variety that we get on a day-to-day basis. Regardless of what the mainstream media and Wal-Mart spokesmen say about the company, you can always come to this website to hear the real stories from the workers who write us.

The following comments - both from employees and non-employees - address expensive health care, wages, unions, food donations, doctor’s notes, and the lack of air conditioning—it was enough to make two workers quit this week.

A.M. from Indiana writes to us about wage discrimination and expensive health care:

In our store you only have a chance at a promotion if you kiss up to the managers. Moreover, the variance in the pay rates for the same job codes ranges about three dollars. Tell me how this is fair! Not to mention the health care issues, how can I afford daily meds for a chronic condition when my premiums are so high and my pay is so low? When I get to the pharmacy, I find that 80 percent of my prescriptions are not covered.

An anonymous worker from Pennsylvania describes an uncomfortable anti-union meeting:

I am disgusted with myself and the way in which my life has turned out since I have been employed with Wal-Mart for five years. I recently became a salaried manager because I needed the money. After four years at Wal-Mart, I had not yet worked my way up to what I had made at my previous job - a fast food franchise. You must understand, I never wanted to work for this company, but the truth is that when you are poor, you have no skills, and you have no college education, it is difficult to find a job that pays well. I expected to be poorly paid for a while. However, I had high expectation for myself and expected to move quickly through the management ranks.

Before starting with the company, I had read lots of anti-Wal-mart propaganda. I knew there were a ridiculously small number of women managers compared to males - especially when I factoring in how many more women work at Wal-Mart. I expected those challenges and I embraced them. Unfortunately, I overcame them without ever doing anything to ensure that no other deserving woman would be held back.

Read the rest of this story ...

16 comments

---

A federal judge in Nevada has halted a class action against Wal-Mart and dog food manufacturer Menu Foods before it even had a chance to begin. His ruling held that the need for individual factual inquiries made a class action untenable. This isn’t completely surprising - the lawsuit was filed based on deceptive trade practices and claimed Wal-Mart’s Ol’ Roy pet food products were misleading in their labeling in that they claimed to be made in the USA, when in fact many ingredients came from China. The Judge argued that this meant everyone in the class would have had to purchase the food based on the misleading labeling, something that would have to be determined on a case-by-case basis. You can read the entire court order here.

While the decision wasn’t surprising, the timing might have been:

The judge’s decision was unusual in that he denied class certification before any substantial discovery had been performed. Indeed, the court noted that so-called preemptive motions are generally disfavored, since “the shape and form of a class action evolves only through the process of discovery.” However, the court determined that the class was untenable as a matter of law, and “it would be a waste of the parties’ resources and judicial resources to conduct discovery on class certification.”

So, not only will the class action not move forward, but no discovery will be done unless individual cases are filed - which means many of the facts as to how we ended up with such a far-reaching pet food scare will remain a mystery until then.

The Ol’ Roy suit was originally filed in 2007 and eventually consolidated with a class action in New Jersey which alleged that tainted food distributed by Menu Foods and others led to the death of hundreds of pets. That action consisted of over 100 suits that grew out of the largest pet food recall in U.S. history, and settled in April of last year for $24 million. The Ol’ Roy suit, however, was severed from the Menu Foods action prior to the settlement.

Wal-Mart Cuts Class Off at the Pass in Pet Food Case [Law.com]

Read the rest of this story ...

15 comments

---

A push to get rid of wilted lettuce and rotten tomatoes is paying off for Wal-Mart, despite a grocery business that continues to score low in customer satisfaction. From Bloomberg:

Wal-Mart plans to advertise its produce in coming months to win over more customers after efforts to tidy displays, buy food locally and automate purchasing, executives said in interviews last month at the company’s headquarters in Bentonville, Arkansas. Groceries account for more than 40 percent of sales at Wal-Mart’s U.S. stores and have outpaced the growth of most other products in the past year.

Despite the fact that Wal-Mart has undoubtedly prospered during our country’s economic...ummm...struggles, the perception of the quality being sold there remains low. In fact, on the American Customer Satisfaction Index posted by the University of Michigan, Wal-Mart consistently ranks at the bottom.

Customer ratings on meat and produce have trailed the rest of the store, said Bill Simon, Wal-Mart’s chief operating officer for U.S. stores...In terms of customer satisfaction, Wal-Mart’s grocery business ranked worst in the fourth quarter compared with six major supermarket chains, according to the University of Michigan’s American Customer Satisfaction Index.

What this doesn’t bode well for is Wal-Mart maintaining its market share once the economy turns around. Indeed, Wal-Mart sits at a 68% satisfaction rate, 8 points behind the average supermarket score and over 4 points behind Wal-Mart’s own score from a year ago. If that continues, could an uptick in economic fortunes see shoppers returning to their old grocery shopping habits?

So, are we happy that Wal-Mart is trying to upgrade the quality of its produce? Or perhaps the better question to ask is, should we be concerned about the reasons why Wal-Mart needs to upgrade its produce in the first place? Couldn’t they have tried to avoid sub-standard produce right from the beginning? Beverly Crisp, a shopper interviewed by Bloomberg, was surprised on her most recent shopping trip that Wal-Mart’s grocery aisles weren’t “the mess” they had been previously - if that’s the general consensus among shoppers, Wal-Mart is going to need more than just new broccoli to fix its image.

Wal-Mart’s Push for Fresher Broccoli Boosts Revenue [Bloomberg]

Read the rest of this story ...

28 comments

---

Apparently, the highly-publicized annual Wal-Mart analyst’s meeting served a purpose other than announcing that Wal-Mart plans to: scale-down domestic expansion, improve existing stores, and embark on foreign conquest.  They also announced a new venture from Sam’s Club, slated to debut in Houston next year. It is a new club-format store, geared toward Hispanics, creatively titled: Más Club ("More Club” in Spanish. They could name every Sam’s this, no?).

The clubs will feature an expanded selection of Hispanic foods and products produced in Mexico and Latin America.  The Houston Chronicle reports that the Selig Center for Economic Growth at the University of Georgia, has estimated that the Hispanic population will account for 1.2 trillion dollars of spending power by 2012 - and Sam’s Club wants a piece of the action. 

The store looks to drape itself Hispanic culture, featuring a cafe that sells ‘fresh’ tortillas (sounds delicious) and branding itself in the red, green and white of Mexican flag. Doug McMillon, president and CEO of Sam’s Club is quoted in Reuters:

“Our objective is to create an additional shopping choice that provides currently unavailable value for families, restaurant owners, convenience stores and more...”

McMillon chose not to discuss Mas Club’s suppliers. Given that it will be carrying mostly Hispanic products, “Mas Club” might actually break a new Wal-Mart record for percentage of products not made in the U.S.  But Latin American suppliers beware. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. is notorious for bullying down their suppliers to sell products at a price they can barely afford (Vlasic, Levis). 

While the first store is to serve as a prototype, The Northwest Arkansas Morning News said McMillon is ”pumped” about the new chain, which will also feature gas stations…

36 comments

---

As many Americans struggle to keep their financial heads above water, Wal-Mart has repeatedly reported gains as customers hunt for the lowest prices on staple-items such as food.  If you are one of the many people choose where to shop, based solely on price, you’d have to notice the German grocer Aldi.  A story from Ocala.com (Ocala, Fla.) claims that Aldi has lower prices on many basic food-items than Wal-Mart.  From the article: 

“A gallon of Aldi milk goes for $2.79, but $3.48 at Wal-Mart; Crispy Rice cereal at Aldi is $1.59 for a 20-ounce box, but even the off-brand Crispy Rice at Wal-Mart is more, $2.16 for 18 ounces.” “The list goes on: Aldi hamburger buns go for 85 cents, $1.13 at Wal-Mart; 34.5 ounces of coffee is $4.49 at Aldi and $6.74 at Wal-Mart; bananas are 45 cents per pound at Aldi, 64 cents per pound at Wal-Mart.”

Aldi is a ‘bare-bones’ type of store, focusing on low-prices, not appearances.  They got their start in Germany in the 1970’s but have since spread to the U.S. and now operate around 800 retail locations, mainly in the eastern half of the U.S.  They sell off-brand generics, don’t typically use bags, and rarely accept payment other than cash.  But in times like these, more and more Americans care less about brand-identity and more about price. 

Last year, Wal-Mart sold their 85 stores in Germany to a German rival and top retailer, Metro AG, citing losses.  Now a German retailer is beating their prices on generic foods, on Wal-Mart’s own turf.  Look out Wal-Mart, here comes Aldi.

2 comments

---

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 reports of price gouging on the part of Wal-Mart. What’s truly abhorrent about these reports, however, is that they are being made by the very people affected most by the recent cavalcade of hurricanes to batter the Gulf coast. The Arkansas News Bureau and The Consumerist have more on these stories.

You’ll also find major news on the legal front. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has filed its second lawsuit against Wal-Mart in less than three weeks. The first involves the Americans with Disabilities Act in Illinois; the second involves age discrimination against a 67-year-old optician in Missouri. In addition to the EEOC lawsuits, Wal-Mart will now have to face another class action wage/hour lawsuit. Salvas v. Wal-Mart was originally certified as a class action back in 2004. Since then the case has gone back and forth through the Massachusetts court system, eventually being decertified and winding up in front of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on appeal. Well, the SJC released its opinion this week, ruling that the decertification was improper and that the lawsuit should be reinstated as a class action. A trial is possible, which could cost Wal-Mart hundreds of millions of dollars in unpaid wages and damages. The Boston Globe and Boston Herald have the story.

Also check out the Product and Food Safety Report, where you’ll find stories on BPA (and a class action lawsuit regarding the chemical that includes Wal-Mart), dangerous soccer goals and baby cribs sold at Wal-Mart, and a pet food recall involving Purina products sold at the retailer.

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 [September 24, 2008]

76 comments

---

Back in April, the Denver Post conducted a survey of grocery prices at Wal-Mart supercenters in several Denver neighborhoods. Over a number of weeks, the survey found Wal-Mart charged more for groceries at its stores in low-income neighborhoods than in higher income areas. As the article noted, “It’s not cheap being poor.”

A survey done recently in Florida corroborates those findings. WKMG in Central Florida went to several Wal-Mart stores in neighborhoods of varying income levels and found consistent price disparities at each. In each case, products were cheaper in higher income areas.

This trend points to a pricing scheme that takes advantage of lower income shoppers who can’t afford to drive to a competing store for groceries. Wal-Mart might claim to help people “Save Money” and “Live Better,” but there’s nothing charitable about taking advantage of consumers already struggling to get by. To those of you with multiple Wal-Marts in your area: have you noticed this trend?

Wal-Mart Price Discrepancies Investigated [WKMG-TV (Fla.)]

Apparent cost discrepancies at Central Florida Wal-Mart stores were investigated after the Problem Solvers received a tip from a viewer alleging different prices for the same items.

Read the rest of this story ...

5 comments

---

Several retailers including Wal-Mart have been named in a nationwide class action for their participation in selling polycarbonate plastic baby bottles and toddler training cups containing the controversial hormone BPA.

This whole BPA - or Bisphenol-A - controversy is not a good thing. BPA is a key compound used in polycarbonate plastics, which are clear and nearly shatter-proof (a good thing), and also possibly toxic and poisoning us and our children daily (apparently bad...very, very bad). These plastics are used to make a variety of common products including baby and water bottles, sports equipment, medical devices, lenses, CDs, and household electronics...a fact that, in the interest of full disclosure, actually made me check the bottom of my water bottle this morning to make sure I wasn’t slowly killing myself.

The lawsuit in question was filed in Georgia, and you can read the (very long) complaint here, in which defendants are accused of manufacturing and selling materials made with BPA despite knowledge of likely adverse affects. In addition to Wal-Mart, retailers such as CVS, Target, and Kroger have been named in the suit. Also named were manufacturers of the bottles themselves, including Evenflo, Gerber, and Playtex. The best part of this whole thing - not only have over a hundred studies been produced in the last decade warning of the adverse affects of BPA, but apparently in deeming the compound safe the FDA decided to rely on only two, both of which were produced by the American Plastics Council. So kudos to the FDA for that.

The lawsuit has been filed in the U.S District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. You can read the release on it below.

Nationwide Consumer Class Action Lawsuit Filed in Georgia Against Baby Bottle Manufacturers [MarketWatch]

Read the rest of this story ...

31 comments

---

Remember back in June, when the FDA warned consumers about eating certain kinds of tomatoes coming out of Mexico due to potential salmonella contamination? And then expanded that warning to include certain peppers as well?  All vendors of these products, including Wal-Mart were to halt the sale of such items.

Cheryl Grubbs is filing suit against Wal-Mart Stores, Inc, alleging that her husband, Brian Grubbs came close to death after eating several jalapeno peppers that were purchased at a Wal-Mart and tainted with salmonella in an article published today in LawyersandSettlements.com.

[An earlier version of this blog post mentioned that the FDA recall in question occured on June 25, 2008. This was incorrect: we apologize for the mistake.]

Tomato-Pepper Salmonella: Why the Grubbs are Suing Wal-Mart

Dolores, CO: “Truckloads of contaminated jalapenos were turned back at the border before we bought them at Wal-Mart,” says Cheryl Grubbs, “so why did Wal-Mart still have them in their store?” Her husband, Brian Grubbs, almost died from the tomato/pepper salmonella outbreak, and Cheryl is furious because his illness could have been avoided.

Read the rest of this story ...

48 comments

---

We’ll be extremely busy this weekend relaxing and celebrating the valiant efforts of American workers, so in the meantime - a brief round up of the week’s Wal-Mart blogs.

DEADLY BASSINETS SOLD AT WAL-MART

Wal-Mart Still Selling Dangerous Cribs [WakeUpWal-Mart.com Blog]

Wal-Mart has long been plagued with recalls of dangerous products, and it has often been implicated in taking too little action about such products. Now it seems Wal-Mart is still selling a dangerous crib that is responsible for two deaths.

CPSC uses new authority against defiant manufacturer of dangerous bassinets after another tragic death [U.S. PIRG blog]

Here is the story yesterday at Consumeraffairs.com. I hope Wal-Mart (mentioned in this story) and other retailers have stopped selling these products, since being notified of the imminent hazard warning. And I assure readers, if SFCA’s defense somehow prevails in court, that the Congress will be quick with a technical correction to the new law.

After the jump, Wal-Mart’s local food, more on the company’s mandatory meetings and the new Marketside stores.

Read the rest of this story ...

70 comments

---

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 ...

32 comments

---

There’s still way too many bloggers talking about last week’s Wall Street Journal story for us to give an accurate run down of all of them. But that’s not the only thing going on in the world of Wal-Mart this week: our Friday Blog Round-Up has the details.

WAL-MART RECOMMENDS LEAVING CARBON OFFSET DETAILS “VAGUE”
We caught a post earlier this week from Sustainable Industries, which mentioned that Wal-Mart has come out against defining carbon offset standards. Given the company’s desperate attempts to be seen as environmentally friendly, we found this a bit shocking, and we weren’t the only ones…

To Everything: Term, Term, Term [Grist]

In comments to the Federal Trade Commission earlier this year, Wal-Mart asked the agency not to define the terms “carbon offsets” or “renewable energy certificates” in order to keep the terms flexible and to retain their “less tangible nature.”

Carbon Offsets: To Define or Not to Define? [Green Tech Media]

Wal-Mart has attracted plenty of attention for its environmental initiatives, including more energy-efficient lighting – the chain surpassed a goal to sell 100 million compact fluorescent light bulbs in 2007 – less packaging and a goal of removing nonrenewable energy from all its products, although an Environmental Leader report released in May found that most consumers didn’t identify the company as socially responsible, in spite of its significant green marketing.

Why is Wal-Mart lobbying against carbon-offset guidelines? [Christian Science Monitor Bright Green Blog]

Wal-Mart has been taking many major steps go green in recent years. The mega-retailer has taken steps to assess the carbon footprint of some of its products, and it has become the largest buyer of organic cotton and of locally grown produce...So you can imagine my surprise when I came across Wal-Mart’s comment on the Federal Trade Commission’s attempts to standardize carbon offsets.

Walmart Against Setting of Carbon Offset Guidelines [Carbon Offsets Daily]

There seem to be loopholes in Walmart’s argument as well - it argues that the FTC should refrain from setting concrete offset guidelines as there is lack of “widespread consensus about the precise contours of what constitutes a carbon offset or a REC”. But isn’t that exactly what the FTC is looking to rectify?

My good deed for the day. [The Writing on the Wal]

The Christian Science Monitor has noticed that despite its vaunted green reputation Wal-Mart doesn’t want the government to formally define carbon offsets in order to facilitate pollution cap and trade programs. Confused? So is the guy who wrote the blog post...Therefore, he called Wal-Flack Central (aka the Wal-Mart Press Office) for clarification...Can you imagine what the Wal-Flack who took that call must have been thinking?

a) “At Wal-Mart, we are very concerned about…”
b) “At Wal-Mart, we do not comment on pending legislation…”
c) “Let me tell you about all our other wonderful environmental programs…”

After the jump, bad deals, jalapeno peppers and the Griswold family makes their mark on the American retail landscape.

Read the rest of this story ...

19 comments

---

Well, first it was the tomato that was the culprit. Then tomatoes were deemed clean, and safe to eat again. Then, in a twist of culinary fate, a new villain in the salmonella outbreak showed its face - a spicy little number possibly originating at a farm down in Mexico. The jalepeno pepper. And now the tiny pepper has turned its capsaicin-spewing fury on Wal-Mart.

Actually, the complaint at issue was filed on behalf of Delores, Colorado resident Brian Grubbs against Wal-Mart and an unknown supplier, referred to in the complaint as “John Doe”. According to the lawsuit, the Grubbs family purchased jalapeño peppers from the Wal-Mart Supercenter in Cortez, Colorado in late June. Grubbs and his family proceeded to eat them over the next week. According to the Rocky Mountain News:

Samples showed he was positive for salmonella Saintpaul, and later the jalapeño peppers back at his house that he hadn’t yet eaten also tested positive for that strain of salmonella, the suit said.

“Consumers believe that retailers like Wal-Mart know the quality and safety of products they sell,” Marler said. “Retailers benefit from that trust, and must be held accountable for the products they sell.”

Salmonella is, of course, no fun at all - Salmonellosis illnesses from the Saintpaul strain began showing up in Texas and New Mexico in late April, and in early June the CDC linked those illnesses to raw tomatoes and issued consumer warnings. Those warnings were, of course, completely wrong - the list of possible culprits was first widened before eventually being narrowed to raw jalapeno and serrano peppers.

On July 30, the FDA confirmed the presence of salmonella Saintpaul at a farm in Mexico, both in irrigation water and on produce. The investigation is continuing.

Man sickened by jalapeños files first salmonella lawsuit [Rocky Mountain News]

Read the rest of this story ...

10 comments

---

Food politics has become an increasingly important part of social responsibility and aided by bestselling books, blockbuster movies and celebrity endorsements, the movement is gaining ground. Wal-Mart, eager to improve its reputation among progressives, has tried to capitalize on the popularity of responsible eating...with varying degrees of success. The retailer first started selling organic produce - a program it later abandoned - and more recently has publicized its sourcing of local foods.

In his new book “The End of Food,” Paul Roberts points out Wal-Mart’s impact on our food supply goes far beyond these superficial initiatives. From the New York Times’ review:

Roberts isolates a number of culprits. Wal-Mart, for example, where America spends 21 cents of every food dollar and where some experts say we will soon be spending 50 cents of that dollar, continues to drive down retail prices to unsustainably low levels. One consequence is that food is becoming, once again, a commodity of “lesser quality and nutritional value.”

As the largest grocer in America, Wal-Mart is using its marketplace power to drive down the cost - and quality - of food. As a result, our food supply is degrading faster than you can say “in-store dining options.” And it’s not just Wal-Mart’s purchasing power that’s damaging our food supply: the retailer contributes heftily to the environmental damage, suburban sprawl and economic poverty that Roberts blames for the decline in food quality and food choices.

Wal-Mart is certainly not solely to blame for the world’s food problems, but the retailer’s business model simply doesn’t qualify as a sustainable solution to growing demand for fair food. For those committed to leveling the playing field of food politics, stick to the farmer’s market and your locally-owned grocer.

Nothing to Eat [New York Times]

12 comments

---

The local food movement has energetically spread across the United States in the last few years, spurring activist consumers to support local farms, shop at farmers markets and take pride in regional produce. The movement’s popularity hasn’t escaped the eyes of public relations executives - and Wal-Mart is eager to get in on the action.

Despite the fact that only a fraction of Wal-Mart’s produce is grown locally, the mammoth retailer has been quick to take credit for the small amount of local produce it DOES sell. BloggingStocks advises that this isn’t really important. According to the column, what Wal-Mart really needs is more P.R.

This has been a recurring theme in Wal-Mart’s environmental program. What small steps the retailer does make are inevitably blown all out of proportion by the company’s marketing department, making genuine analysis difficult. Wal-Mart’s publicity around local sourcing distracts from the fact that the retailer - the largest grocer in North America - sources the vast majority of its food from industrial producers. A vital part of “Buying Local” means not only supporting small farmers, but also supporting businesses that invest in the community, which Wal-Mart certainly fails to do. Want to support local farms and farmers markets? Go directly to the source. It’s better for the environment AND your community.

Wal-Mart stages marketing appearance to promote locally-grown produce [BloggingStocks]

Not too long ago, I wrote about Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and the entrance of the world’s largest retailer more heavily into locally-grown fresh produce. As a way of differentiating itself, Wal-Mart is really on the right track here. Partnering with local merchants near each community it serves could help repair the rift between small-town merchants and the retailing behemoth that has steadily grown for the last two decades.

Read the rest of this story ...

1 comments

---

SHAREHOLDERS MEETING: MORE SHOW, LESS SUBSTANCE
Carrie Underwood and Keith Urban are going to be performing in Bentonville next week! And some band we’ve never heard of called Lifehouse (and Taylor Swift)! WE’RE SO EXCITED ABOUT THE ENTERTAINMENT WE CAN’T EVEN REMEMBER WHY THE MEETING IS HAPPENING IN THE FIRST PLACE oh wait, yes we do.

Wal-Mart to Shareholders: Just Say No [The Iconoclasts]

Lay up groceries and rent some DVDs before the Wal-Mart shareholders descend on Fayetteville and occupy the city next week. The big annual meeting is scheduled for June 6 at the University of Arkansas, the corporate giant’s wholly-owned subsidiary. They are coming to be entertained and to vote against any shareholder proposals to reform policy or hold management responsible for their actions.

Wal-Mart’s habit of entertaining visitors rather than conducting actual business has everyone raising eyebrows:

Wal-Mart’s green efforts becoming a smokescreen? [BloggingStocks]

Next week’s annual shareholder’s meeting in Fayetteville should once again be more spectacle that business.Last year, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (NYSE: WMT) seemed to spend more money lining up speakers, having pieces of its global operations dance with flags and having a pep rally rather that digging into issues.This year, expect the same—as the retailer has already opposed all the shareholder proposals anyway, so it should be a nice, big party full of entertainment. Nothing else.

Wal-Mart’s emphasis on entertainment have activists decrying the retailer’s lack of commitment to the social issues on this year’s proxy. Pam’s House Blend states,

Call me less than flabbergasted, but Wal-Mart is opposed to a shareholder proposition to add gender identity and expression to their non-discrimination policy...this is the second major corporation we’ve tracked at Pam’s House Blend that has used their DiversityInc rating (Wal-Mart was no. 41 of top 50 company’s for diversity in 2007; Verizon was no 1 on the same list for 2008) as to why the corporation doesn’t feel a need to specifically add gender identity and expression language into their non-discrimination policies.

After the jump, Menu Foods settles with pet owners over melamine-tainted food, Wal-Mart’s environmental policy, classified ads and look out! There’s scorpions in the watermelons!

Read the rest of this story ...