From Bloomberg: Wal-Mart Stores Inc. closed its first unionized outlet in North America today, a week earlier than planned, eliminating almost 200 jobs in Jonquiere, Quebec.

Wal-Mart’s 2005 Annual Report is out! You can find it here. While most such reports are dry prose designed for number-crunchers, the Wal-Mart annual report is filled with fascinating company propaganda. Take the gratuitous interview with Rob Walton on pp. 14-15, for example. Like most of Wal-Mart’s company propaganda, it can be easily debunked.

But rather than save this Herculean task entirely for myself, the folks at Wake-Up Wal-Mart and I have put together a little contest. Pick a line from the Wal-Mart Annual Report and note the page number. Then rebut, criticize, fisk or respond in any way in the comments below. The best responses, as picked by Wake-Up Wal-Mart, will become guest posts on the United Food and Commercial Workers’ Wake-Up Wal-Mart blog. (Sorry, no cash prizes as they are using all their money to battle Goliath.) If you’re shy, you can send your entries directly to bbush[at]wakeupwalmart[dot]com.

My entry is below the fold:

On page 6 of their report, the company writes:

“Next year, we project we will create more than 120,000 jobs worldwide, and there’s a very good chance that those who slip into a vest will be with us for a lifetime.”

Sounds ominous, doesn’t it? It’s certainly ominous if you’re a member of any of the many groups of workers who are currently suing Wal-Mart. On pp. 45-46, the company summarizes litigation which “if decided adversely to or settled by the company, may result in liability material to the company’s financial condition or results of operations.” [Go to the links I’ve added below for additional information.]:

First, there’s a series of cases about forced overtime.

Second, there’s the gender discrimination class action suit, Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Everything you need to know about that suit is here.

Then there’s the “dead peasants” life insurance cases.

Then there’s a class action suit called Mauldin v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc. This is by female employees seeking the addition of prescription contraception to the employee health plan.

Liza Featherstone has the details:

...a suit filed in Georgia by Lisa Smith Mauldin, a Wal-Mart customer service manager and a 22-year-old divorced mother of two, charges the company with sex discrimination because its health plan does not cover prescription contraceptives (it does cover other prescription drugs, but as the complaint spells out in painstaking legalese, only women get pregnant). Mauldin works thirty-two hours a week and makes $12.14 an hour, so the $30 monthly cost of the Pill is a significant burden for her (and certainly a prohibitive one for many fellow employees, who earn significantly lower wages). In September Mauldin's suit was certified as a class action, demanding reimbursement for all female Wal-Mart employees who have been paying for birth control out of pocket since March 2001, and demanding that Wal-Mart's insurance cover FDA-approved prescription contraceptives in the future.

Then there’s an EEOC case out of Kentucky by female employees who requested transfers. They claim the “company based hiring decisions on gender in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act as amended.”

Read this and the idea that “those who slip into a vest will be with [Wal-Mart] for a lifetime” sounds more like a prison sentence.

JR

My name is Daniel Papasian, and I'm a college student who launched a parody website that made fun of the Wal-Mart Foundation.

I targeted the Foundation's website because I thought that it was appropriate to challenge the idea that Wal-Mart is a big benevolent corporation. They do serious damage wherever they go, and when they work to undo a very small portion of it, they pretend it's charity and we should be grateful to them. I think that idea really insults our intelligence, so I made a parody site that was more honest about the way Wal-Mart operates.

Wal-Mart has tried to shut me down, and the result has been a lot of attention to the case and the site. My hope for the future is that a lot of this attention can get focused on Wal-Mart and the things that Wal-Mart and other large corporations do to the communities they operate in. My site took a couple days of work to launch. The real effort is still to come- and it'll start by convincing people that Wal-Mart is dangerous to communities and working people everywhere.

Statement by Bill McDonough, Executive Vice President, UFCW

Wal-Mart demonstrated its true colors with its firing of Jared Bowen who blew the whistle on the company’s “union project.” That Mr. Bowen has asked the U.S. Attorney for protection as a federal whistleblower demonstrates the fear Wal-Mart instills in employees who use what the company calls the "Open Door" policy-and employees call the "Out the Door" policy. Treating workers fairly and with respect is not a choice-it’s the right thing to do.

Time after time, on issues of child labor, gender equality, protecting a workers’ democratic right to organize, and now, defending a worker’s right to report wrongdoing, Wal-Mart has chosen the wrong path. It’s time for Wal-Mart to wake up and do the right thing.

An article about the whistleblower case is located here.

The Kansas Postal Workers Union passed a resolution supporting the "Love Your Mom, not Wal-Mart" campaign.

The delegates signed a large card with the pledge on it. The presidents of the Kansas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska Postal Workers Unions, as well as Cliff Guffey, Executive Vice President of the American Postal Workers Union, also signed the pledge.

The resolution, as well as some photos, are below the fold.

Photos courtesy of Christine Pruitt, the 2003-2005 KPWU state president and current Vice President for the Wichita Area Local (APWU 735):

Signing the card is C.J. "Cliff" Guffey, Vice President American Postal Workers Union. To his left is William J. Kaczor Jr., Director Health Plan.

Left to right, Marcia Standy (incoming) Kansas Postal Workers Union President; Jeff Deitrich, President Nebraska Postal Workers Union, Paula Jones, President Oklahoma Postal Workers Union.

Here is the resolution that was passed:

Whereas, Wal-Mart is the largest private employer in the world with over $10 billion in profits. Yet, Wal-Mart lowers our wages, ships our jobs overseas, and shifts their health care costs onto American taxpayers. We believe it's time for Wal-Mart to Wake Up and

Whereas, the Wake-Up Wal-Mart campaign is a grassroots campaign, initiated by the United Food and Commercial Workers with the goal of changing Wal-Mart by building local coalitions at every Wal-Mart in America and

Whereas, Wake-Up Wal-Mart launched a “Love Mom, Not Wal-Mart” campaign and

Whereas Mother’s Day is all about honoring our Moms. Unfortunately, Wal-Mart’s idea of honor and respect for women includes unequal wages, fewer promotions, and inadequate health care.

And, whereas Wal-Mart is currently involved in a gender discrimination lawsuit affecting more than 1.5 million women. The case is the largest class action lawsuit in U.S. history. The suit documents Wal-Mart’s systematic discrimination against women for lower pay and unequal promotion.

And whereas, Women earn from 5% - 10% less than men at Wal-Mart for the same work. This equates to nearly 40 cents less per hour for female hourly workers or nearly $5,000 less per year for female managers.

And whereas, Despite making up 72% of Wal-Mart’s hourly workforce, women only account for 33% of managers and only 15% of store managers.

Therefore be it resolved that the Kansas Postal Workers Union endorses the “Love Mom, Not Wal-Mart” campaign and therefore be it further resolved we join in the following pledge:

As a symbol of love and respect for my Mom, and all women across America, we pledge not to shop or buy any gifts for Mother’s Day at Wal-Mart.

Wal-Mart’s company-wide policy of discriminating against so many hard-working women is terribly wrong. We stand with all of the 1.5 million Wal-Mart women who are part of the largest gender discrimination lawsuit in U.S. history.

In our America, Wal-Mart should do better than pay women and mothers less than men for equal work.

In our America, Wal-Mart should do better than disrespect all women and mothers by providing them with poor pay, poor health care, and poor working conditions.

As the largest employer of women in America, Wal-Mart has a responsibility to do the right thing!

We can easily say that our mothers deserves better than Wal-Mart.

Until Wal-Mart changes for the better, I have one thing to say:

“Love Mom...Not Wal-Mart.”

From today's Arkansas Democrat Gazette:

A coalition of Wal-Mart critics alleged Tuesday that the retailer treats women employees as secondclass citizens and urged Americans to buy their Mother’s Day gifts somewhere else. "When it comes to treatment of its women employees, Wal-Mart’s low prices come at a cost," said Rep. Rosa De Lauro, D-Conn.

Rep. George Miller of California, a fervent Wal-Mart critic, said, "None of us here wants to see Wal-Mart fail as a company. On the contrary, what we want to see is Wal-Mart succeed responsibly — with employees who are fairly compensated, without accelerating the flow of U.S. jobs overseas, and with a respect for the law and workers."

Added beauty-queen Sapp, "They have intelligent, passionate women who want to succeed ... but what they’re saying is [that the women] are not good enough, smart enough or worthy to demand that wage."

Today, on Capitol Hill, five distinguished Members of Congress – Rep. Rosa DeLauro, Rep. George Miller, Rep. Linda Sanchez, Rep. Hilda Solis, and Rep. Jan Schakowsky – joined with Linda Chavez-Thompson, Executive Vice-President of the AFL-CIO, a plaintiff in the Wal-Mart gender discrimination lawsuit, and former Miss America Carolyn Sapp to pledge their support for the “Love Mom, Not Wal-Mart” campaign.

All attendees signed the "Mother of all Mother's Day Cards," and we got some pictures. The card will be deilvered to Lee Scott, CEO of Wal-Mart, with the names of all "Love Mom, Not Wal-Mart" pledge signers. Add your name by signing the pledge today.

Click on any of the following thumbnails for a larger image.

To read more about the event, check out this news article.

The other day, Brendan blogged about UFCW International President Joe Hansen’s piece in USA Today. That piece brought forward a letter from Dan Downey of Atlanta which might stand as the quintessential Wal-Mart defense. Indeed, Wal-Mart likes Mr. Downey’s letter so much it has put it up on its web site.

Since Mr. Downey has expressed the basic defense of Wal-Mart in such a short and clear manner, I’d like to post some of Mr. Downey’s letter and examine the basic problems with these arguments.

"Mr. Hansen bemoans the fact that an associate makes $17,114 per year. If an employee wants more money or better benefits, they can go find a better job. Oh, they can’t? Then Wal-Mart is paying the market determined wage. It would be contrary to their fiduciary responsibilities to their stockholders to pay more."

Just because Wal-Mart can pay associates $17k a year doesn’t mean they should pay associates 17k a year. Mr. Downey, like so many businesses in America today, seems to be arguing that the market makes its own morality. If it does, why shouldn’t we abolish the minimum wage? Why don’t we bring back child labor? After all, if the little tykes want to start their entrepreneurial careers early, who are we to stop them?

"Mr. Hansen also complains that Wal-Mart costs the taxpayer $2.5 billion in public assistance. I wonder how much money Wal-Mart saves that same taxpayer each year by virtue of their buying power which results in their low prices? Based on sales of $285 billion, if people save about 10% by shopping at Wal-Mart, the savings could be upwards of $30 billion. Not a bad return on our investment."

I, for one, question whether Wal-Mart’s prices are all that low. But conceding that point for a moment, the problem with this argument is that the alleged low prices at Wal-Mart only benefit Wal-Mart shoppers. If we choose not to shop at Wal-Mart for whatever reason, then our tax dollars might as well be going in a hole in the ground for all the good they do us.

"If Wal-Mart breaks the law, by all means, fine them, prosecute them if necessary. But public companies are not welfare institutions. No one is forcing people to work there or shop there."

Unfortunately Mr. Downey, when Wal-Mart breaks immigration law or child labor law the Bush administration lets them off with a slap on the wrist. You say nobody is forced to work at Wal-Mart, yet Wal-Mart touts its job-creating capacity at every turn in order to justify the handouts it receives from local governments nationwide. Doesn’t the public have the right to decide what kinds of jobs its tax dollars are funding?

And the idea that nobody is forced to shop there would be a joke to people in rural communities across Texas, Oklahoma or any other states that have had Wal-Mart in their midst for 15 or 20 years now, because for them Wal-Mart is the only game in town. That’s if they're lucky and their old store hasn’t been replaced by a supercenter 50 miles away.

Unfortunately, Wal-Mart edited out the most telling part of Mr. Downey’s defense. [I have the paper copy, but have been unable to find the whole letter for free on line, so I guess you’ll have to trust me on this one.] Downey wrote:

"Wal-Mart has two responsibilities:

• It must maximize its return for shareholders.
• It must apply with all applicable laws."

Notice this says nothing about Wal-Mart’s workers, customers or the communities in which the company decides to locate. Wal-Mart’s decision to drop these lines demonstrates that the company won’t admit what its defenders already know.

JR

From an AP article that just hit the wires:

"A federal grand jury is reviewing allegations of misspending within Wal-Mart Stores Inc., an investigation the world's largest retailer spurred when it handed over internal documents to the Justice Department, a company spokesman said.

Wal-Mart spokesman Marty Heires told The Associated Press on Friday that the company is limited in what it can say about the inquiry because the probe is being handled by a grand jury."

"Accusations that Coughlin engaged in spending to combat union organization prompted the United Food and Commercial Workers Union to file claims of unfair labor practices. The complaint, citing a report in The Wall Street Journal, alleged Coughlin used expense account reimbursements to make secret payments to union members willing to identify pro-union Wal-Mart workers."

Dennis Miller's quote about the Vatican yesterday morning on CNN:

"The Vatican is a lot like Wal-Mart. They like to hire people late in life so they don't have to pay their benefits."

And a wonderful cartoon from Carol Simpson:

Since we launched WakeUpWalMart.com, I have received dozens and dozens of emails from people who are working, either on their own or with community groups, churches, or other organizations, to keep Wal-Mart out of their town.

I've decided to devote a new section of the website to these groups, which I have begun to build. But I need your help. If you are involved in an effort to keep Wal-Mart out of your town, tell me (and all of us) about it in the comments section. Even if you are not directly involved, if you know of any such groups in your area, ask them to speak out here, or tell us what you know about them.

Feel free to include links to news articles, websites of community groups, personal stories, and anything else you feel like sharing. We want to add your story!

Looking forward to reading about what you are doing,

Brendan

The following was sent to our 45,000 supporters today:

Dear Friend,

We are launching our “Love Mom, Not Wal-Mart” campaign and we are inviting you to join.

Mother’s Day is all about honoring our Moms. Unfortunately, Wal-Mart’s idea of honor and respect for women includes unequal wages, fewer promotions, and inadequate health care.

As a special treat, we are going to send Lee Scott, Wal-Mart’s CEO, the “Mother of all Mother’s Day Cards.” With your help, Lee Scott will receive what may be the largest Mother’s Day card in America – maybe in history. Add your name to that card by signing the “Love Mom, Not Wal-Mart” pledge now:

Sign the Pledge

Together, we can send Wal-Mart a message that it’s about time to Wake-Up and do the right thing. No woman worker, or Mom, deserves to be treated so poorly.

We need you – and your friends and family – to sign the ”Love Mom, Not Wal-Mart” pledge to not buy any gifts for Mother’s Day at Wal-Mart.

http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/mom/pledge.html

On our Mother’s Day web site, you can also send Mother’s Day e-cards, download Women & Wal-Mart fact sheets and flyers, and purchase discounted flowers. Sign the pledge now and view our Mother’s Day Specials.

http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/mom/pledge.html

Just think about what women at Wal-Mart - the largest employer of women in the United States with over 700,000 female employees – face every day:

• Gender Discrimination: Wal-Mart is currently involved in a gender discrimination lawsuit affecting more than 1.5 million women. The case is the largest class action lawsuit in U.S. history. The suit documents Wal-Mart’s systematic discrimination against women for lower pay and unequal promotion.
• Lower pay: Women earn from 5% - 10% less than men at Wal-Mart for the same work. This equates to nearly 40 cents less per hour for female hourly workers or nearly $5,000 less per year for female managers.
• Fewer Promotions: Despite making up 72% of Wal-Mart’s hourly workforce, women only account for 33% of managers and only 15% of store managers.

http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/mom/pledge.html

The “Love Mom, Not Wal-Mart” campaign is our first step towards our goal of changing Wal-Mart by building local coalitions at every Wal-Mart in America.

Thank you for all that you have done and all that you will do to make this campaign a success. And remember to honor your Mom this Mother’s Day by shopping at a store that honors her too.

Paul Blank
Wake-Up Wal-Mart Campaign

As reported in several papers recently, Clear Channel has rejected a billboard design submitted by Local 342 of the United Food and Commercial Workers that the union planned to hang near the Staten Island Ferry terminal in Saint George.

Here is the rejected billboard design:

Did anyone catch Real Time with Bill Maher on Friday? Check out this clip (Windows Media File).

The Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) recently put out a report titled "Wal-Mart's Pay Gap," detailing how Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott's Compensation is 871 times as high as U.S. Wal-Mart Workers, and 50,000 times as much as Chinese Workers.

To read the full report click here.

In today's Tallahassee Democrat, FL State Rep. Susan Bucher has a nice analysis of Wal-Mart's costs to taxpayers. Among the more important quotes are these:

"It might be tempting to dismiss this issue as a larger one of corporate welfare, or to argue that we're singling out Wal-Mart unfairly. But facts are facts: Wal-Mart does not just shift health-care costs onto taxpayers, it does so at a level well beyond that of any other employer."

"That is, the retail behemoth deliberately cuts corners on employee health care, forcing a disproportionate number of its employees into state programs in order to receive health care for themselves and their families."

"Finally, his response is entirely disingenuous. [Wal-Mart CEO Lee] Scott acts as though public programs are a better deal for workers, when really they're simply a better deal for Wal-Mart. It's not that Wal-Mart can't afford to do better. It's that Wal-Mart chooses not to."

With such high costs to taxpayers, isn't it time for Wal-Mart to wake up?

Link to full article here.

In USA Today on Monday, UFCW International Union President Joe Hansen had the opportunity to respond to an opinion piece, titled "Wal-Mart foes go one too far." His response, titled "More villain than victim," follows:

As America's largest company, with more than $285 billion in sales and more than $10 billion in profits, Wal-Mart has a responsibility to set the standard for customers, workers, families and communities. America's largest employer — with nearly 1.3 million workers — must reflect America's values.

Wal-Mart is not the victim of globalization, lower wages and lack of health insurance. More accurately, Wal-Mart's business practices created many of these problems in America today. Look at the record.

A company that reflects America's values doesn't pay below poverty-level wages to its workers. At 34 hours per week (full-time at Wal-Mart), the average Wal-Mart associate makes $17,114 per year, well below the poverty level for a family of four.

A company that reflects America's values doesn't have 660,000 of its employees without company-provided health insurance, forcing workers to seek taxpayer-funded public assistance. In fact, in 11 of the 12 states that have disclosed employers who have employees on Medicaid, Wal-Mart tops the list. In Georgia, for example, a state survey found more than 10,000 Wal-Mart employees on Medicaid — 14 times the next highest employer.

A company that reflects America's values doesn't ask taxpayers to subsidize its $10 billion in profits. A U.S. congressional study found that Wal-Mart costs you, the American taxpayer, up to $2.5 billion in public assistance. One newspaper editorial titled it, "Wal-Mart Welfare."

A company that reflects America's values doesn't put profits before its people, morality and the law. In the past few months, Wal-Mart agreed to pay a record fine for exploiting illegal immigrants and settled extensive child labor violations. It still faces the largest gender discrimination lawsuit, 1.6 million women, in U.S. history for unfair pay and unequal promotion.

Wal-Mart is not creating jobs in our communities. Wal-Mart's business practices simply exchange decent jobs with health benefits for lower-paying jobs and taxpayer-subsidized health care. The truth is Wal-Mart is forcing good-paying American jobs overseas. Wal-Mart is creating an America of lower wages, no health care and lack of retirement security.

We think it's time for Wal-Mart to wake up.

Yes, it is time for Wal-Mart to Wake Up. What is going on in your community to make Wal-Mart Wake Up?

Lately, Wal-Mart has run into trouble trying to build its fourth and fifth supercenters in the Winston-Salem, North Carolina area. In order to get more support from the community, one of their spokespeople talked to a reporter from the Winston-Salem Journal. According to this Winston-Salem Journal story from April 10th:

"[Wal-Mart spokesman Glen] Wilkins said that prices on local grocery items drop about 15 percent to 20 percent when a Wal-Mart supercenter opens.

"In some places it's higher than that," he said. "So not only do we move in and offer quality goods, great customer service, but we also create a great competitive atmosphere where the customer is the one who wins as well," he said.

The two paragraphs before this read:

"When [Wilkins] asks critics to name the small supermarkets that they say Wal-Mart is putting out of business, they typically mention supermarkets such as Kroger and Publix," he said.

"The last time I checked, they're not a small mom-and-pop company," he said.

So let me get this straight.

1. Wal-Mart moves into a market and their competitors drop their prices to match Wal-Mart.


2. Their competitors go out of business because they can’t match Wal-Mart’s prices.

To make matters worse, as the Journal reports:

"Several local shoppers said they typically find a larger assortment of products at such supermarkets as Harris Teeter and Lowes than they can find at Wal-Mart."

Fewer places to shop; fewer things to shop for once you’re there. Shopping at Wal-Mart just isn’t worth it in the long run.

JR

I am the Production Manager of a sheltered workshop for persons with disabilities located in Southeastern Ohio. We are located in a small rural county with the highest unemployment rate (17%) in Ohio. As you can imagine, it is sometimes a challenge to keep our folks working when a large portion of the local community is already unemployed.

For the past several years, we have been fortunate to have a contract with an Ohio company packaging craft gems (these are small glass "marbles" flat on one side, that you see in flower vases, used in crafts, etc.). The company in turn sold these packaged gems to Wal-Mart and has been doing so for about 10 years. It has been a good contract for us, and has kept our people with disabilities employed for the last few years. At full production we were packaging 20,000 bags per week with an accuracy of 99.8%

In 2004, Wal-Mart gradually switched from purchasing the craft gems from the Ohio Company we package for, to a firm importing Chinese craft gems. As of January 1st, 2005, one entire line of gems we packaged has gone to China. This move put 8 persons with disabilities out of work and rendered useless the $30,000 worth of packaging equipment which our non-profit had invested in to service this contract.

The company who manufactures the gems has already received word that Wal-Mart is looking for a lower priced source for the remainder of the gems they still produce for Wal-Mart. Wal-mart currently marks up the glass gems 300% from the price they pay to the Ohio/American owned firm they get them from, but apparently this is not enough of a profit margin. The firm that imports Chinese craft gems has offered Wal-Mart a price of a few cents cheaper per bag than the bag we currently package for the American Company. This American-owned Company we package for in turn offered the same deal, even though it would mean that the company would lose money on the product.

They did this to try to keep their own people (and ours) working long enough to try to develop other outlets for their product. Wal-Mart declined that offer and on March 3rd, I received notice that we were to stop production immediately, and send all materials back. The result is that 40 out of the 50 people with disabilities at our workshop now have no work. The Ohio Company who produces the craft gems has had to shut down one of their 2 plants that manufactures the gems and has gone from 60 or 70 people running 14 kilns to 4 people running one kiln.

The last time I spoke to the co-owner of the company, he told me that he thought he would be completely out of business by the end of the year. Our local community has sent over 200 letters to Wal-Mart's Corporate Offices, informing them of the consequences of this move to persons with disabilities and asking them to reconsider this decision. There has been absolutely no response from Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart apparently does not care for anything except their own corporate greed.

Scott Roberts,
Production Manager
Mary Hammond Center
McConnelsville, Ohio

When I first went into a Wal-Mart, they were an up and coming regional chain centered around their Arkansas base. They had just broken into food retailing and had ambitious expansion plans. Coming originally from the East Coast, I had never been any place like it before. I decided to follow the chain and learn more about it. And everything I learned about it disturbed me.

If you’ve bothered to scratch the surface of Wal-Mart’s world, you’ve undoubtedly heard of the chain’s well-documented dark side. First it was the sweatshops making goods with Kathi Lee Gifford’s name for exclusive sale at Wal-Mart. Then it was their contribution to ugly suburban sprawl. Now critics have brought up the starvation wages and poor health care that Wal-Mart offers their employees. Others have explained how Wal-Mart encourages outsourcing jobs overseas. Indeed, sometimes it seems that Wal-Mart is nothing but dark side.

As a way to be of service to the online community, I decided to turn my diary at Daily Kos over to Wal-Mart exclusively. My hope was to offer a complete, evolving picture of just how Wal-Mart really is related in some way to all the most import domestic issues of the day.

When the people at Wake-Up Wal-Mart contacted me, I offered them my services for their blog too. I am honored that they accepted. Therefore, you can expect to see my analysis of the Wal-Mart situation pop up here from time to time. Already, my association with Wake-Up Wal-Mart has brought material on Wal-Mart to my attention that I might not otherwise have seen. For example, in the article that Brendan posted Monday, Arkansas Business Journalist Don Elkins explained Wal-Mart’s defense of itself in a nutshell. To me, this says it all about why Wal-Mart matters in today’s political world:

"Scott took pains to explain that we live in a "New World" with a new paradigm where competition and efficiency rule. But, do those "values" as Scott described them exclude humane or even preferential treatment for American workers?"

Indeed, if competition and efficiency rule, where does that leave Wal-Mart’s workers? Paying a living wage and offering adequate health care coverage is inefficient and non-competitive, yet Wal-Mart likes to claim it does both. Respecting federal and state statutes with regard to wages and hours is incredibly inefficient. Does this mean that in this “New World,” Wal-Mart doesn’t have to obey the law. Does Wal-Mart think that its customers couldn’t care less about how its employees are treated?

And Elkins’ point about preferential treatment for American workers is also a good one. Why does Wal-Mart do so much business with Chinese sub-contractors? Why does it actually aid its suppliers when they want to move to China? Does this “New World” make national boarders obsolete? If so, why is Wal-Mart simultaneously so obsessed with wrapping itself in the American flag?

The ultimate problem that Wal-Mart faces going forward is that they are not prepared to answer the obvious questions that its business practices raise.

JR

The following letter was sent from The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union to the National Labor Relations Board yesterday.

To read the AP article discussing the charges leveled in this letter and the accompanying Unfair Labor Practice Charge that accompanied this letter, click here.

Arthur F. Rosenfeld, General Counsel
National Labor Relations Board
1099 14th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20570

Dear Mr. Rosenfeld:

Enclosed is an Unfair Labor Practice Charge the UFCW is filing against Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., today with Region 28 of the NLRB.

As you can see, the charge complains that Wal-Mart, acting through officers, employees and agents, including those at the highest levels of management, systematically denied workers their democratic right to exercise a choice for union representation. Wal-Mart’s actions seemingly involved the criminal misappropriation of company funds to create an illegal anti-union slush fund. The fund was used to bribe workers for information on other workers who desired a voice in their workplace and then to influence them to abandon their desire to exercise their rights for that voice. The Union first learned of these facts from the attached Wall Street Journal article of April 8, 2005, which describes in detail the illegal scheme. As you undoubtedly know, the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Arkansas is conducting a criminal investigation of Wal-Mart based on the same facts.

I am writing to urge that the National Labor Relations Board investigate this charge expeditiously and thoroughly. We request that the Board begin by seeking the evidence the U.S. Attorney possesses and by using the NLRB’s subpoena power to obtain all relevant information from Wal-Mart, particularly the documents that are in the possession of Wal-Mart according to former Wal-Mart Vice Chairman Thomas Coughlin and which, according to Coughlin, substantiate the alleged scheme.

The Union suspects that Wal-Mart spread bribes in stores whose workers were actively organizing but abruptly abandoned their activity from 2000 through 2005 in any or all of the following 13 states, including Texas, Nevada, Arizona, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Florida, California, South Carolina, Ohio, Iowa, Michigan and Colorado. Your Office is aware of almost all of these campaigns because it investigated and litigated — or settled — Unfair Labor Practices Wal-Mart committed in almost every one of these stores.

Wal-Mart’s violations were widespread and extend to the most senior levels of management. Worse they effectively caused workers to forfeit their democratic rights to collectively bargain a better life for themselves and their families. These violations warrant priority handling and processing by the Board, and should compel the Board to seek an equally effective and company-wide remedy.

Wal-Mart’s actions in bribing workers to thwart the efforts of their fellow workers to exercise their rights under the National Labor Relations Act constitute the most serious violations of the Act. Combined with the hundreds of other Unfair Labor Practices your Office has prosecuted Wal-Mart for, these recently uncovered unlawful acts reveal this company for what it is - a company that knows no limits in its campaign to trample on the fundamental rights of employees. It is the UFCW’s expectation and hope that the Board will deal with Wal-Mart accordingly and without interference.

Sincerely,

Edward P. Wendel
General Counsel

Last week, Brian Lehrer moderated a debate which will be airing on CSPAN sometime soon - between The Nation and The Economist - titled "What's Good for Wal-Mart is Good for America?" Jonathan Tasini, who participated in the debate, has written his thoughts on it here.

The debate itself is available online right now if you can't wait for it to be aired on television. You can find the 2-part video here.

Share your thoughts on the debate here. What do you think? Is Wal-Mart good for America?

From an article in today's NYT by Steven Greenhouse:

"Beginning in the mid-1990's, pay increases for most workers slowly but steadily outpaced the rate of inflation, improving the living standards for nearly all Americans. But an unexpected reversal last year in those gains has set off a vigorous debate among economists over whether the decline is just a temporary dip or portends a deeper shift that may cause the pay of average Americans to lag for years to come.

Labor unions' declining bargaining power has given corporations a stronger hand to hold down wages, he argued, but more recent trends, including the emergence of Wal-Mart Stores as a central force in the economy, now play crucial roles, too.

Laurie Piazza, a Safeway cashier in Santa Clara, Calif., said she reluctantly voted to approve a pay freeze in the first two years of her union's three-year contract because Safeway insisted that it needed to hold down costs to compete with Wal-Mart. Her take-home pay will fall $20 a week because the contract reduces the premium for working on Sundays to 33 percent of regular pay, from 50 percent."

Has the stifling of wages affected you or someone you know?

The AFL-CIO just released its annual survey of CEO pay, http://www.paywatch.org, and here is what they had to say about Wal-Mart:

"At Wal-Mart, for example, President and CEO H. Lee Scott raked in nearly $23 million in total compensation in 2004. Most of that compensation was in the form of fixed price stock options and time-vesting restricted stock. At the company's annual meeting in June, shareholders will be asked to vote on a proposal urging the Board of Directors to grant Wal-Mart executives performance shares instead of stock options or restricted stock."

Just think about how many Wal-Mart workers' children could get healthcare with Scott's $23 million. Any guesses?

Don Elkins -- veteran journalist and broadcaster, and current main anchor and managing editor of KNWA Northwest Arkansas News -- attended Wal-Mart's media conference last week and has some choice words about his experience, which he posted on Democratic Underground:

"One also has to ask about the "poor little me" attitude coming from Wal-Mart during these sessions. If that was intended to improve the company's image, it didn't work. Regardless of what Scott says about wages, and regardless of what Wal-Mart USA President Mike Duke told reporters about his company's dedication to making Wal-Mart a better place to work for its employees, critics have made viable complaints about wages."

"In many states, Wal-Mart continues to sit at the top of lists of companies with employees on public assistance. The company argues those numbers skew the truth -- it employs so many people, that the percentage figure of those on public assistance means the company has relatively fewer employees on the dole. That does not, however, reduce those overall numbers, or the overall dollar total of payments for assistance picked up by taxpayers."

Link to the complete article:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/05/04/09_wal-mart.html

We are still developing online tools for you to use to help change Wal-Mart, and I thought I should ask you -- the people who will be using these tools -- for some help.

If you can think of any tools that you would like to use, or better ways of using the tools we already have, please let me know here. If you have any really detailed ideas and would rather share via email, you can send them to info@wakeupwalmart.com.

Be creative, and let us know what you need to make a difference!

Thanks,

Brendan

Commenting to my last post, Union Jack spoke about the need to expose more of the "tainted tactics" that Wal-Mart uses to manipulate the American people. He’s right. Here are a couple more:

1. "There is reason to believe that Wal-Mart affects public assistance utilization not only through its compensation policies, but also by actively encouraging employees to participate in such programs. For example, the PBS television program Now with Bill Moyers reported that Wal-Mart provides all new employees with a 1-800 number to call to determine benefits eligibility."

- From "Hidden Costs of Wal-Mart Jobs" (Dube and Jacobs, UC Berkeley)

2. Wal-Mart has issued "A Manager's Toolbox to Remaining Union Free," which provides managers with lists of warning signs that workers might be organizing, including "frequent meetings at associates' homes" and "associates who are never seen together start talking or associating with each other." The "Toolbox" gives managers a hotline to call so that company specialists can respond rapidly and head off any attempt by employees to organize.

Food and Commercial Workers Calls on Wal-Mart to Publicly Release Documents on Alleged Illegal Slush Fund Dedicated to Denying Workers Union Representation

Washington DC — Today's Wall Street Journal revealed that former Wal-Mart Board member and Vice Chairman Thomas M. Coughlin, the #2 person at the company, alleges that he operated an illegal anti-union slush fund as part of a company program to suppress the democratic freedom of workers to make a choice for a union voice at work.

The UFCW calls on the company to publicize all documents connected with the U.S. attorney's criminal probe of the Coughlin case.

Wal-Mart has already been found guilty of illegally spying, bribing with promotions, firing and intimidating workers. According to the Wall Street Journal, these revelations, if true, mean that Wal-Mart's anti-worker, anti-union program "would represent a criminal offense under the federal Taft-Hartly Act," —a federal felony to pay employees to persuade coworkers to abandon support for union representation.

The Journal also reported that Coughlin "is expected to use the 'union project' as part of his defense to the charges about mismanagement of funds."

"We are deeply disturbed by these allegations of Wal-Mart's anti-union activity," stated UFCW Executive Vice President and Director of Organizing Bill McDonough. "These are serious criminal offenses and cast Wal-Mart's systematic anti-worker activities on a much more sinister level. Wal-Mart should not try and cover up its activities but should do the right thing and make all of the documents public immediately."

From the Wall Street Journal:

"The tale involves another mystery: the "union project." Mr. Coughlin told several Wal-Mart employees that the money was actually being used for antiunion activities, including paying union staffers to tell him of pro-union workers in stores, according to people familiar with the matter. The fake invoices, Mr. Coughlin told these people, were simply a roundabout way of compensating him for out-of-pocket expenses in his antiunion campaign."

CNN Money also covers the story:

http://money.cnn.com/2005/04/08/news/fortune500/walmart.reut/

According to a study done by Good Jobs First, Wal-Mart tops the list in 12 of 13 states where there is data for the number of employees it has on public assistance for health care.

That means YOU -- the American taxpayer -- are paying for Wal-Mart's health care costs. The estimated total amount of federal assistance for which Wal-Mart employees were eligible in 2004 was $2.5 billion. Does it seem fair that we are picking up the tab for a company with $10 billion in profits?

Lee Scott, Wal-Mart CEO, was quoted yesterday by the St. Louis Post Dispatch as saying "There are government assistance programs out there that are so lucrative it's hard to be competitive, and it's expensive to be competitive."

Nan Orrock, GA State Legislator responded with: "It should be an embarrassment to Wal-Mart that our tax-payer funded Medicaid programs compete with their dismal health care. Our programs are intended for our state's poor and underserved as a safety net, not as a better alternative to the largest corporation with more than $10 billion in profit."

Luckily, several states are considering addressing abuse of tax payers' money. In Maryland, for example, the State Senate passed a bill yesterday requiring corporations to spend at least 8 percent of their payroll on health care benefits for its employees or put the difference into Maryland's Medicaid fund.

It is an absolute outrage that Wal-Mart shifts costs onto taxpayers as a strategy to save money.

The Waltons, Wal-Mart's founding family and America's richest family, have been throwing millions of dollars - $3.2 million to be exact - toward political efforts to help make the estate tax permanent. Just think, the richest family in America wants tax cuts to make themselves even richer.

According to the USA Today, "The Waltons have joined a coterie of wealthy families trying to save fortunes through permanent repeal of the estate tax...The election of President Bush and more conservatives to Congress gave momentum to the long-fought effort."

You've gotta be kidding me. First the Walton's gave money to get a dividend tax cut from their Republican friends (they pocketed $51 million in the deal) and now they want more!

Read the full article here.

Today, we—African-American and Latino community leaders from Inglewood, California—challenged Wal-Mart’s CEO Lee Scott. We called on Mr. Scott to commit to actions, not empty words.

As elected officials, church and community leaders, business owners, and residents, we had this to say to Mr. Scott in our open letter to Wal-Mart:

As you know, the voters of Inglewood rejected Wal-Mart’s initiative by a two-to-one margin. We rejected it because your company acted with disrespect for the basic rights of our community. And we rejected it because the people of Inglewood –- like people across America -- have serious concerns about Wal-Mart’s impact on communities.

We are concerned about the impact of poverty wages and inadequate health care on the quality of life of Inglewood families.

We are concerned about maintaining business opportunities for small businesses and Wal-Mart’s track record of driving locally owned and minority businesses out of business.

We are concerned about the unmitigated negative impacts, including increased crime, traffic, noise, and pollution, which result from the development of Wal-Mart projects.

We challenge you to work with communities to address these concerns and agree to mitigate the negative impacts that have resulted from the development of Wal-Mart stores throughout the country.

In the past 12 months, Wal-Mart has spent tens of millions of dollars on a public relations campaign that has attempted to project a positive image of Wal-Mart’s relationship with communities.

We believe that it’s time for Wal-Mart to focus less on image and more on substance.

We believe that the hundreds of millions of dollars your company is investing in public relations would be far better spent on addressing the problems that have damaged America’s communities.

In the coming weeks, Wal-Mart is expected to announce new plans to build a store in Inglewood, on land that your company quietly purchased after last year’s election.

Inglewood needs development, but it must be development that makes our community stronger, not weaker.

Therefore we propose that your company negotiate and sign a Community Benefits Agreement that will make the project work for the people of Inglewood.

This legally binding agreement will protect the rights of our community. It will guarantee living wage jobs, affordable family health care, fair pension benefits, job training and advancement, freedom from retaliation and basic rights on the job. It will also protect the interests of small businesses, and ensure that your project does not increase crime, traffic, noise and pollution in our city.

Many private developers, including some of the largest in the world, have signed Community Benefits Agreements with similar provisions.

Inglewood deserves nothing less.

The people of Inglewood want what every community in America wants: good jobs with affordable health care and fair pension benefits, a diverse mix of small and large businesses with quality products and services, safe neighborhoods and a clean environment.

Mr. Scott, you’ve admitted publicly that Wal-Mart made a mistake in Inglewood. Now you have an opportunity to correct that mistake by showing the people of Inglewood – and the American public – that Wal-Mart is truly committed to strong, healthy communities.

We challenge you to commit yourself through actions, not words.

We are waiting to hear back from Mr. Scott.

Danny Feingold
Communications Director
Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy

As you may know, Wal-Mart is running a two day media event in Bentonville, Ark., home of their corporate headquarters, both today and tomorrow. The event is part of Wal-Mart's new PR push aimed at duping Americans into thinking that the company has our best interest in mind, rather than just the bottom line.

Recently it was brought to light that Wal-Mart is the sole sponsor of the ABC Good Morning America segment called "Only in America." The irony there is obvious, and would almost be humorous if not for all of the Americans affected by the shipping of jobs overseas – all in the name of the bottom line. Join over 15,000 Americans by signing a petition calling on ABC to drop Wal-Mart as the sole sponsor of "Only in America"

My question is this: does Wal-Mart really think that high priced consultants, advertising gimmicks, and media retreats are going to make Americans forget that Wal-Mart has let America down by lowering wages, forcing good paying American jobs overseas, and cutting costs with total disregard for the values that have made this nation great? And furthermore, are we going to let Wal-Mart get away with these tactics? Together, we can hold Wal-Mart accountable.

Hey everyone. We are up and running! For all of us here at the Wake-Up Wal-Mart campaign, welcome to our blog. This blog is your place to discuss why we need to wake up Wal-Mart, share breaking news, post calls to action and get updates on why Wal-Mart needs to change.

I want to make one thing very clear from the get-go: this campaign is your campaign. Only you can change Wal-Mart. So, please, give us feedback, advice, express your opinion, share your stories and ask any questions that you have. We will work hard to get answers to you as quickly as we can.

In the next few weeks, we will be rolling out exciting new tools to help you change Wal-Mart. So, be sure to check back often.

Thanks,
Brendan