In recent weeks, reports in several news outlets including The New York Times, have wholeheartedly swallowed Wal-Mart's propaganda and declared that, thanks to minor changes in its miserly health plan that still fails to cover almost half of its employees, Wal-Mart is now a socially responsible company. Thankfully, a recent article from The Morning News, a major paper in Northwest Arkansas, debunks this myth by revealing an unpleasant fact about the Behemoth from Bentonville: Wal-Mart is currently the subject of over 80 class action lawsuits from its current and former employees. These cases include the landmark Dukes vs. Wal-Mart case, in which 1.6 million current and former female employees of Wal-Mart are suing for gender discrimination, and 76, that's right, 76 cases of employees suing for being forced to work off the clock.
Here's a summary of five of the biggest suits against Wal-Mart:
AT A GLANCE
Wal-Mart faces more than 80 lawsuits filed by current and former employees, most of whom allege the retailer required them to work off the clock. Five of the largest class-action lawsuits include:Betty Dukes v. Wal-Mart
Class size: 1.6 million female plaintiffs
Filed: 2001
Location: San Francisco, Calif.
Next action: Court to set briefing schedule on an appeal. Wal-Mart is seeking a rehearing on the class-action status
Potential financial impact: More than a billion dollars
Celia Hale v. Wal-Mart
Class size: 200,000 plaintiffs
Filed: 2002
Location: Jackson County, Mo.
Next action: Trial set for April 6
Potential financial impact: Unknown
Michelle Braun/Dolores Hummel v. Wal-Mart
Class size: 186,000 plaintiffs
Filed: 2002/2004, consolidated in 2006
Location: Philadelphia, Penn.
Next action: Wal-Mart to appeal, filed notice in December
Potential financial impact: $187.6 million
Andrea Savaglio v. Wal-Mart
Class size: 116,000 plaintiffs
Filed: 2001
Location: Alameda County, Calif.
Next action: Wal-Mart's appeal pending
Potential financial impact: $172 million
Nancy Braun v. Wal-Mart
Class size: 56,000 plaintiffs
Filed: 2003
Location: Hastings, Minn.
Next action: Judge to decide liability, back pay and willfulness by July 1
Potential financial Impact: Unknown
Sources: Wal-Mart Stores Inc. federal filings with U.S Securities & Exchange Commission, attorneys for respective plaintiffs.
Source: The Morning News
Posted by James - June 23, 2008 11:22 AM - In The News
You keep harping on the "only 1/2" theme but that level is as high as the average for big corporations -- and much higher than the average for retailers. Bad coverage is far, far superior to no coverage, but people make rational decisions, so no doubt many Wal-Mart workers have better options: Parents' insurance, a spouse's insurance, or medi-care (the first and last for younger and older workers).
For those WM workers who don't have other options, at least they can get some insurance at a low cost for themselves and their families almost immediately. Many retailers have a long wait, and many offer NO coverage for part-timers. And how about those Mom-and-Pop shops?
You are attacking WM at a relatively strong point, and sounding elitist to boot. You can say their health insurance sucks all you want, but people won't hear it the way you think. I have gold-plated insurance now, but in past jobs I've had problems with coverage and screwups, and seen the potential , due to paperwork errors, of how horrible being without insurance could be.
Posted by raybury - June 23, 2008 02:10 PM
Raybury,
Thank you for your comment.
You are absolutely right when you say that small firms are less likely to offer health insurance coverage than large ones. However, your claim that Wal-Mart's coverage rate of 50.2% is "as high as the average for big corporations" is simply false. In fact, large firms (those which employ more than 1,000 workers) cover, on average, 65% of their workers. If Wal-Mart, which employs nearly 1.4 million people, was to reach the average coverage rate, Wal-Mart would cover an additional 210,000 workers.
In addition, I disagree with your claim that health insurance is a relatively strong point for Wal-Mart. In fact, so few people sign up for Wal-Mart's coverage precisely because it's so miserly. An average full time Wal-Mart worker on Wal-Mart's cheapest plan would have to pay 20% of his or her income out-of-pocket before the health insurance provided any coverage at all. That's not just bad, that's immoral.
The least Wal-Mart could do is live up to the industry average. But shouldn't Wal-Mart, America's largest employer and a company with over $12 billion in profits last year, reward their workers who've made them so profitable by providing all of them with good health insurance?
Posted by James - June 24, 2008 11:29 AM
I work for one of the largest Industrial services companies in the world. My wife works for Walmart. Now I donot agree with everything Walmart does. To be truefull most of the time I don"t. But I must admit the Health coverage Is far better than what I have at my work and for about half the price. I had some problems with a hospital coding some bills wrong and Walmart bent over backwards to help me get it paid in a timely manner. Add to the fact that Walmarts health coverage has no lifetime limit on coverage. Transplant coverage at the best hospital in the world for next to nothing. Major cancer coverage for next to nothing and dissabilty and dental coverage for less than the average where I live in Illinois.My brother worked in a union coal mine and didnot have health coverage without a lifetime max. Now Walmart has pulled some good ones that should have got their backside in a sling. But if you are going to go after them do it for the right reasons like making workers work off the clock or not paying female workers the same as the men.
Posted by Greg Madden - August 4, 2008 11:46 PM
I am married to a Wal Mart-Sam'a Club associate. Recently, She was told that, due to a lawsuit from 2002, due to her part-time status, she can no longer work more than 28 hours per week.
I am looking for any information on that suit, the settlement agreement, and any other information available on this subject.
Thank You, sparky (name protected to protect wife's employment)
Posted by sparky1959 - August 30, 2008 08:55 PM
I have been fighting a wal-mart workers compensation claim for the past two years and they have recently decided to hire lawyers I am looking for other people who would like to maybe start a class action suit. I worked for Walmart Tire and Lube express department.
Posted by Sol McNally - October 15, 2008 11:22 PM
I was injured on the job at walmart and herniated two discs in my back. The doctors told me that ARCMI called and harrassed them daily so now the doctors are no longer seeing me and I can't get a doctor in the whole county to see me for my back When i contacted the texas insurance commission to complain they said walmart does not have to pay since I didn't get permission to change doctors. I didn't ask to change I had no choice. Walmart is the worst company to work for.
Posted by larise - February 12, 2009 09:15 PM