0 comments

---

According to Bloomberg, Wal-Mart has won preliminary court approval to pay as much as $85 million to settle 30 wage/hour lawsuits. The lawsuits claimed the company didn’t pay employees for all hours worked, forcing them to miss breaks and forgo overtime pay.

Late last year, Wal-Mart announced that it would settle 63 wage and hour class action lawsuits that have been pending against the company for several years. There were just under 80 such suits pending against Wal-Mart at the time, so it represented a pretty large legal housecleaning. This $85 million settlement covers just under half those cases as part of the larger agreement made back in December, which could cost the company up to $640 million before all is said and done.

Following the initial settlement, we noted that what these cases revealed through evidence and employee testimony was a “corporate culture” and systematic approach geared towards cutting labor costs, by dictating managers hire below the “preferred” staffing levels and rewarding managers for keeping labor costs down. Steven Greenhouse on TPM has pointed out that while store management is ultimately responsible for setting schedules, pressure often comes from the top:

Robert Eckert, a former assistant store manager at several Wal-Marts in California, said: “They tell you that working off the clock is against the law, is not allowed by Wal-Mart, and then they tell you to get the job done. But they didn’t give you the budget to get the job done. It is clearly understood that if you don’t make payroll, it’s a serious issue and you can lose your job over it.”

For more information on wage theft in general, you should check out Kim Bobo’s “Wage Theft in America: Why Millions of Working Americans Are Not Getting Paid - And What We Can Do About It.”

As for the $85 settlement, a Federal Judge in granting temporary approval called the wage theft agreement “fair, reasonable, and adequate.” Merely adequate for the workers, perhaps, but no doubt a “steal” for Wal-Mart.

Read the rest of this story ...

12 comments

---

The Nassau County District Attorney might think that money is better than criminal charges, but Jdimytai Damour’s Father doesn’t agree. Yesterday he and his lawyer slammed Wal-Mart and the local D.A. for allowing the company to buy its way out of the Black Friday tragedy.

“It’s like if they were driving a car and they hit someone, killed him and then just walked away,” said Ogera Charles, the father of Jdimytai Damour, 34, of Jamaica, Queens, who was killed in the melee in Valley Stream.

Apparently the deal not only allows Wal-Mart to abdicate responsibility, but it prevented Damour’s family from seeing any of the criminal findings against Wal-Mart at all. The family is currently suing Wal-Mart for additional damages.

The Nassau DC has allowed Wal-Mart do here what has done with dozens of other settled lawsuits: cough up money without ever having to admit that it was wrong.

We’re happy that the family is receiving some money from Wal-Mart—but they deserve so much more.

Wal-Mart victim’s father critical of DA’s deal [Newsday]:

The father of a Wal-Mart worker who was trampled to death in a stampede of shoppers during a post- Thanksgiving Day sale expressed his frustration Thursday at a deal between the Nassau district attorney and the megastore.

Read the rest of this story ...

17 comments

---

Wage theft. The illegal practice is rampant at restaurants, nail salons, car washes, nursing homes and farms, according to federal labor department surveys. Large corporations including Wal-Mart, Starbucks, Dunkin’ Donuts, Target, McDonald’s and Burger King have faced lawsuits over allegations of wage theft.

Wal-Mart is of course a prime example. While the seemingly endless list of wage/hour suits against the retailer is systematically shrinking as Wal-Mart settles case after case - wrapped up and tied neatly with a bow - the spectre of the hundreds of millions the company had to pay out in settlements will hang over the company for the near future. And according to Kim Bobo, author of a newly published book, “Wage Theft in America,” wage theft is a national epidemic.

“Greed is nothing new, but what’s changed is that we don’t have adequate enforcement to deter and penalize wage theft,” she said. There are fewer than 750 federal investigators currently policing fair wages for 130 million workers nationwide, compared to 700 investigators for 15 million workers in 1941.

According to Bobo, wage theft is pretty common. Having read file after file from Wal-Mart cases, I could have told you that, but it’s surprising just how far the practice reaches. Some companies will do anything to make a profit - especially in this economy - even if it means siphoning money away from their own workers, many of which fear for their jobs and have few resources with which to protect themselves.

As many as 10 million American workers have suffered wage theft, forfeiting an estimated $40 billion to $50 billion annually in wages rightfully owed to them by employers who steal tips, pay less than minimum wage, refuse to pay overtime, classify full-time employees as temporary independent contractors and take illegal deductions.

Help wanted: Long hours, no pay [Albany Times Union]

Read the rest of this story ...

13 comments

---

Wal-Mart is trying to clear out its legal closet by buying off scores of “old” lawsuits brought by its own workers that have been sitting on the racks for years. This week, a judge in Colleton County, South Carolina approved a Wal-Mart settlement in a $49 million class action lawsuit---one of as many as 76 similar wage and hour class action lawsuits filed across America against the nation’s largest private employer.

Wal-Mart has the largest selection of lawsuits of any retailer in American history. The South Carolina case, known as Carter v. Wal-Mart, was originally filed roughly six years ago. In a prepared statement approved by Wal-Mart, the lawyers representing the plaintiffs said, “We are pleased with the preliminary approval of the settlement by the Court. We hope that Wal-Mart’s industry-leading compliance model will set an example for the retail industry.” As part of the settlement, Wal-Mart agreed to continue to maintain electronic systems, surveys, and notices that will protect the rights of workers. “This lawsuit was filed years ago and the allegations are not representative of the company we are today,” a Wal-Mart spokesperson said in a press released dated February 18, 2009. “Our policy is to pay associates for every hour worked and to make rest and meal breaks available. This is a commitment we make to the more than 1.4 million associates who choose to work for Wal-Mart and serve our customers and members every day. We have worked hard to have the right communication, processes, and systems in place to help ensure we live up to this commitment.”

Read the rest of this story ...

78 comments

---

Nationally, 15% of truck drivers are African-American. At Wal-Mart? Not so much. Not too long ago, it was determined that African-Americans comprised only 4-6% of Wal-Mart’s fleet, which employs 10,000 truck drivers. A discrimination class action was filed, and in May of 2007, a district court judge ruled that Wal-Mart’s hiring policies created a common group of potential plaintiffs (African -American truckers who either were not hired or were deterred from applying for Wal-Mart positions). A class action was born. Now, that case is no more.

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. of Bentonville announced Friday it will pay $17.5 million to settle a class-action lawsuit alleging the retailer discriminated against African-American truck drivers.

The federal suit accuses Wal-Mart of discriminating against black over-the-road truck drivers in the company’s private fleet. The settlement includes an agreement by Wal-Mart to provide priority job placements to 23 suit plaintiffs, direct notice of all future job openings to interested plaintiffs, establish benchmark hiring goals so that the racial composition of future hires is proportionate to the composition of applicants, hire a diversity recruiter, and enhance its recruitment efforts and advertising targeted to blacks.

You can read Wal-Mart’s statement here. Read more about Wal-Mart discrimination here. We’ll have more info as it comes available.

12 comments

---

On August 7, 2007, Charleston County Circuit Court Judge Perry M. Buckner III ruled Wal-Mart would have to face a class of more than 100,000 South Carolina employees claiming wage and hour violations - the workers filed suit in 2001 claiming Wal-Mart forced them to work through breaks and off the clock. Complaints of understaffing were front and center, as workers were forced to skip breaks, work before shifts or stay after clocking out to pick up the slack.

The case is Carter v. Wal-Mart and is part of a long list of wage and hour lawsuits, the resolution of which have seemingly been priority #1 with Wal-Mart’s legal team. Carter is one of 63 long active cases that were pending against Wal-Mart until two months ago, when the company announced it had agreed with attorneys for plaintiffs on a settlement agreement. South Carolina workers will get $49 million as part of the Carter settlement, which was approved by Judge Buckner on Tuesday and formally announced this morning.

The settlement will conclude more than six years of litigation concerning Wal-Mart’s employment practices in South Carolina. Wal-Mart in the settlement agreed to maintain electronic systems, surveys and notices to protect workers’ rights. “We are pleased with the preliminary approval of the settlement by the Court. We hope that Wal-Mart’s industry leading compliance model will set an example for the retail industry,” said plaintiff’s attorney Brad Hutto of Williams & Williams in Orangeburg, S.C.

The settlement reached back in December could, as a whole, cost the company up to $640 million before all is said and done.

Wal-Mart Paying $49 Million To Settle South Carolina Wage & Hour Lawsuit [Northwest Arkansas Morning News]

Read the rest of this story ...

44 comments

---

A settlement in a Minnesota wage and hour class action has moved a step closer to reality, gaining court approval that would allow Wal-Mart to pay over $54 million to close the lawsuit Braun v. Wal-Mart. The settlement includes not only back pay to employees, but also a payment to the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry believed to be the largest payment of its kind in Minnesota history.

From Bloomberg, via the Minneapolis Star Tribune:

The Minnesota hourly workers said Wal-Mart forced them to work off-the-clock in training and denied full rest or meal breaks in violation of state wage-and-hour laws. In the first phase of the case, Dakota County District Judge Robert King Jr. ruled July 1, following a nonjury trial, that Wal-Mart broke labor laws more than 2 million times and ordered the retailer to give employees $6.5 million in back pay.

Wal-Mart will pay $14 million of the $54 million settlement to the State of Minnesota - the Minn. Dept. of Labor was a plaintiff in the case, and the payment covers Wal-Mart’s violations of Minnesota wage and hour laws.

As for the settlement, this one was reached before a certain other settlement agreement was reached by Wal-Mart. Between the $54 million here, the $33 million payed out to the DOL, $400+ million in previous judgments and settlements, and the $350-$640 million that will be paid out as part of Wal-Mart’s most recent multi-litigation settlement, these wage cases could end up costing the company over $1 billion.

Minnesota to get $14 million from Wal-Mart settlement [Bloomberg, via Minneapolis Star Tribune]

Read the rest of this story ...

2 comments

---

On December 23, 2008, Wal-Mart announced that it would settle 63 wage and hour class action lawsuits that have been pending against the company for several years. That number represents approximately 86% of the 73 wage/hour and overtime class actions currently pending against Wal-Mart.

What these cases have revealed through evidence and employee testimony is a “corporate culture” and systematic approach geared towards cutting labor costs, by dictating managers hire below the “preferred” staffing levels and rewarding managers for keeping labor costs down. It has been suggested that Wal-Mart’s motivation for settling these lawsuits is not simply to avoid costly defeats in the courtroom, but to tie up issues that might be used by supporters to argue for passage of the Employee Free Choice Act.

Thousands of employees have sued Wal-Mart for unpaid overtime and unfair break practices, so-called “wage and hour” suits. Download our fact sheets to learn more about these suits, and the most recent settlement.

Wal-Mart Wage and Hour Settlement (PDF)

Wal-Mart Wage and Hour Litigation Stipulation Regarding Stay of Proceedings (PDF)

Wal-Mart’s Wage and Hour Violations (PDF)

1 comments

---

Something about oil not meeting viscosity levels? The report doesn’t pack a ton of information, however, it appears that Wal-Mart has been selling low-quality gear oil in violation of California law. You can check out the whole article below...In total, Wal-Mart has agreed to pay over $350,000 in civil penalties and attorney fees.

DA settles consumer protection lawsuit [Vacaville Reporter]

The Solano County District Attorney’s Office joined with DA’s in Napa, Monterey, Shasta and Sonoma counties to settle a consumer protection action against Wal-Mart and Warren Oil.

According to District Attorney Dave Paulson, the complaint alleged Wal-Mart and Warren Oil—the manufacturer of Wal-Mart SuperTech Gear Oil—sold gear oil that did not meet advertised viscosity levels, a violation of California law.

“Wal-Mart and Warren cooperated with prosecutors during the investigation and agreed to undertake additional testing procedures in order to comply with law,” Paulson announced Monday.

Some 5,000 bottles of the non-compliant gear oil were sold in California.

Read the rest of this story ...

16 comments

---

Come holiday season, what do you get the company that seemingly has everything? How about a settlement to its seemingly endless chain of wage and overtime suits.

We ring in the new year with this news, that Wal-Mart has chosen to settle a massive number of wage/hour and overtime class actions. The terms of the settlement could eventually cost Wal-Mart up to $640 million to settle 63 of the nearly 80 such lawsuits out there. So why, after years of fighting these suits tooth and nail (winning some while others have ended in rather large judgments against the company), has Wal-Mart finally decided to settle? At least one law professor quoted in the Wall Street Journal has an idea:

Paul M. Secunda, an associate professor at Marquette University Law School, suggested Wal-Mart wanted to settle the lawsuits not just to avoid potentially more costly defeats in the courtroom, but to resolve issues that might be used to argue for passage of the Employee Free Choice Act. The legislation, expected to be considered by Congress next year, is fiercely opposed by Wal-Mart because the company worries it will make it easier for workers to unionize. Secunda said: “This is part of their overall strategy to get their labor house in order, and compared to what unionization might cost them, I think they probably realized it was a small price to pay.”

A small price to pay indeed. Wal-Mart has prevailed in getting class actions such as these decertified more times than the company has lost, though when it has and Wal-Mart has gone to trial, the judgments in just a handful of cases have totalled over $300 million. Settling 63 for just over $10 million each might not be so bad, especially if it earns the company some good street cred. Could a settlement in Dukes v. Wal-Mart be next??

Wal-Mart and Plaintiffs’ Counsel Announce Settlement of Most Wage and Hour Class Action Lawsuits Against the Company [Press Release via MarketWatch]

Read the rest of this story ...

116 comments

---

California Attorney General Jerry Brown - a former California Governor, CA Secretary of State, Mayor of Oakland, and President of the Patrick Stewart fan club - announced a settlement with Wal-Mart today in which the retailer was fined $1.4 million and ordered to implement a “get it free” program for California consumers. This after an investigation found that the store overcharged for numerous items at checkout.

Actually, the investigation and settlement announcement was a joint venture with San Diego County District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, who has a much shorter but waaaaayyyyy more interesting Wikipedia entry than AG Brown. In fact, Dumanis, a Republican, is the first openly gay or lesbian District Attorney in the county, and the first Jewish woman to hold the post. Fancy that.

Anyway, back to the story we’re here to tell. Apparently, Investigators conducting random price-checking across the state found that 164 Wal-Mart Stores in 30 counties had made scanning errors. On average, customers who were overcharged paid an extra $8.40 at checkout.

Christine Gasparac, a spokeswoman for Brown, said state investigators concluded that “these were systemic problems,” not just run-of-the-mill mistakes.

“Systemic problems” might sounds bad to some, but one person’s systemic problems are another person’s financial opportunity. As the LA Times blog puts it - if Wal-Mart’s price scanners are wrong, you can make a quick $3. So the moral to this story - and every blog post I write today will have a moral - is to shop at Wal-Mart, cross your fingers that their registers go insane, and then collect a cool handful of George Washingtons.

Wal-Mart now promises to give back $3 to customers any time a pricing mistake is discovered. If the mispriced item sells for less than $3, you get it free. The refund program begins immediately and will last for four years, but it’s up to shoppers to spot any disparity between what a product is listed for on the shelf and what’s rung up by the price scanner.

The company was also ordered to pay $1.2 million in penalties; $190,621 to reimburse costs to numerous state agencies and prosecutors’ offices; and $50,000 to a consumer-protection prosecution trust fund.

Wal-Mart to pay $3 if price-scanning errors occur [Sacramento Bee]

Read the rest of this story ...

103 comments

---

Is this the end of the Tom Coughlin vs. Wal-Mart legal saga?

Whether Wal-Mart wanted it publicly known or not, its terms of settlement with Tom Coughlin have been posted online. Tom Coughlin was was convicted of embezzling money from the company, but was still fighting to receive his $17 million benefits package. Jury selection was to begin today for the trial, which looked to possibly drag on and bring the company a barrage of unwanted press.

$6.75 Million in retirement benefits, even though you stole from the company - that ain’t bad. We can think of a lot of Wal-Mart employees who deserve it more.