Poetic Justice. Amidst all the hype about Wal-Mart's "sustainability" efforts, the company is being fined by the state of Maine for destroying wetlands in Ellsworth. See the quote below, from WCSH Portland.

ELLSWORTH (NEWS CENTER) -- The Maine Department of Environmental Protection is fining the developer of a new Wal-Mart store in Ellsworth.

According to published reports, the fine comes after the MDEP discovered developers had destroyed a couple small wetlands while clearing land.

MDEP officials found out about three weeks ago. They say there was miscommunication between the land clearing contractor and the general contractor.

"The code officer called me and said that they had cleared the wetlands and I went to the project manager, Robin Clukey, and asked her to do a compliance inspection and she did and she found they had in fact cleared the wetlands," said Jon Cullen from the Maine DEP.

MDEP officials say the developers will need to restore the wetlands and will be fined. They're not sure how big the fine will be.

From this morning's Roll Call:

Critics: Wal-Mart Flip-Flopped

By Tory Newmyer

Last October, Wal-Mart chief executive Lee Scott made waves by urging Congress to consider raising the federal minimum wage - something many retailers had long opposed.

He noted that the store's own customers are "struggling to get by," then added that "while it is unusual for us to take a public position on a public policy issue of this kind, we simply believe it is time for Congress to take a responsible look at the minimum wage and other legislation that may help working families."

The declaration came as part of a broader push by the low-cost retailer to put a friendlier face on its often troubled corporate image.

But now, with both chambers of Congress mulling hikes to the federal pay standard, Wal-Mart's critics are charging that the company has abandoned Scott's pledge to support a higher wage. They say that after reaping good public relations from Scott's statement last fall, Wal-Mart has cynically dumped the issue, even as major trade groups it belongs to, primarily the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Retail Industry Leaders Association, help lead the fight against a higher minimum wage.

"They did this for PR reasons, and then the true colors come out when the talk no longer meets up with that action. In this case, it's pretty obvious," said Chris Kofinis, spokesman for Wake Up Wal-Mart, a group that's critical of the company's practices.

Wal-Mart officials acknowledge, and several Congressional aides confirm, that the retail giant is sitting out the debate on the minimum wage increase. But the company disputes the notion that the move amounts to an about-face from the position Scott represented last fall.

Instead, Lee Culpepper, the company's top lobbyist in Washington, D.C., said the chief executive's statement was misinterpreted. Scott was not calling for Congress to raise the minimum wage, Culpepper said - he simply was asking lawmakers to consider the issue.

"We haven't said anything more or less," Culpepper said on Tuesday. "I think what he said was clear. He said Congress should take a look at it. If reporters want to report differently from that, I can't speak to that."

Wake Up Wal-Mart, a group primarily funded by labor groups, last week challenged the company to endorse raising the minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour, after plans put forward by Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), and then to lobby in support of the change.

With any such outcome facing long odds, the company's detractors are trying to tell the story of what they call Wal-Mart's "Potomac two-step" on Capitol Hill.

"We want to hold Lee Scott to his word," said Nu Wexler, spokesman for Wal-Mart Watch, another labor-funded group targeting the company.

Tom Kiley, a spokesman for House Education and the Workforce ranking member Miller, said Democrats are disappointed with Wal-Mart's absence from the debate.

"At the time [of Scott's statement], we welcomed that," he said. "Since then, we haven't heard from them at all. That's unfortunate, obviously."

Statement by Paul Blank, campaign director for WakeUpWalMart.com, on the new poll released by Wal-Mart backed right-wing front group

“Frustrated by their worst holiday season in five years and a faltering public image, Wal-Mart has now resorted to releasing a biased poll by their own personal right-wing attack group.

The fact is Wal-Mart is the single biggest destructive force for working families in America. Wal-Mart's race-to-the-bottom business model threatens working families by lowering wages, lowering health care and shipping U.S. jobs overseas.

Wal-Mart's claim of adding 100,000 new jobs to the economy is completely false. In fact, general merchandise industry employment (the category which Wal-Mart is in) has actually fallen by 1,000 jobs over the last three years from 2,628,000 to 2,627,000.

The only way to protect America's working families is to change Wal-Mart's destructive business practices.

Wal-Mart is responsible for the loss of many of the manufacturing jobs it now so disgustingly cites. The American people will not be deceived and Wal-Mart will pay a high moral price for trying to hide behind the very job losses they helped to create.

At the end of the day, the American people deserve better than Wal-Mart's embarrassing and desperate spin that is bought and paid for. The American people expect more from Wal-Mart when real people, real jobs, and real health care for workers and families is at stake.

The fact is both the recent Wal-Mart Zogby Poll and Pew poll show Wal-Mart's public image is in severe decline. The first national survey of public attitudes and opinions about Wal-Mart by Zogby International found American adults hold an increasingly negative view of Wal-Mart. The poll found 38 percent, or nearly 4 in 10 Americans, hold an unfavorable opinion of Wal-Mart, and 46 percent of Americans believe Wal-Mart’s public image is worse than it was 1 year ago.

The poll also found that 56 percent of American adults agreed with the statement - "Wal-Mart was bad for America. It may provide low prices, but these prices come with a high moral and economic cost." In contrast, only 39 percent of American adults agreed with the opposing statement - "I believe Wal-Mart is good for America. It provides low prices and saves consumers money every day."

In the Pew poll, American adults were also clearly aware of the negative effects Wal-Mart’s business practices are having on its workers and the community. In fact, in an open-ended question, adults were 5 times more likely to say something negative about Wal-Mart the company than to say something positive about Wal-Mart as a company - the chief negatives cited by adults was Wal-Mart’s mistreatment of its workers.

Pew also found that Wal-Mart's overall favorabilities were among the lowest among all corporations surveyed. In fact, Wal-Mart’s favorables rank among the lowest one-third, and are only higher than Pfizer, Exxon/Mobil, and Halliburton.

Given Wal-Mart's poor performance during the holiday season, Wal-Mart should realize that a faltering public image has a real cost and that the American people expect better from Wal-Mart.

The truth is Wal-Mart is choosing to ignore the millions of Americans who are waking up to the fact that Wal-Mart must change for the better. It is this fundamental truth that explains why Wal-Mart sales lagged this holiday season; it is why more than 163,000 Americans have joined our campaign to change Wal-Mart; and it is why Wal-Mart's public image will continue its steep decline.

Our sincere hope for the New Year is for Wal-Mart and Lee Scott to realize now is the time for real positive change not more right-wing, baseless attacks.

From FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting):

It was just part of a PR offensive that included big-money charitable donations (dutifully reported) and an April invitation to reporters to its Bentonville, Ark. headquarters for a “media day.” The session was described as a “feisty response to critics” (New York Times, 4/6/05) and a chance for Wal-Mart to “defend” itself and “dispel myths” (Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 4/6/05). Journalists were reportedly enjoined “to clear their minds of previous articles about the company and ‘start with a clean slate’” (AP, 4/6/05).

But the media image of a beleaguered corporation at last responding to a “horde of critics” (Minneapolis Star Tribune, 4/6/05) raises at least one question: Just how tough has media scrutiny of Wal-Mart really been? “You’ve heard the firestorm of criticism about the company, about wages, benefits, union-busting, about locking employees in, about making them work overtime without paying them for it,” ABC’s Charlie Gibson said in introducing a Good Morning America interview with CEO Lee Scott (1/13/05). But how much have most people really heard about these issues?

There has without question been some hard-hitting investigative reporting on Wal-Mart’s controversial business practices, including a 2003 Los Angeles Times series (11/23–25/03) that nabbed a Pulitzer Prize, and a probing report on PBS’s Frontline (11/16/04).

More typical, however, are accounts like Time’s “Wal-Mart Nation” (6/27/05). Focusing on Wal-Mart’s Chinese enterprises, the article has an undeniably cheerleading theme: Wal-Mart is staging a “revolution” in China, in part by “spreading a management style that many of its young Chinese employees find liberating.”

Time introduced “quintessential Wal-Mart guy” Joe Hatfield (“I was blessed to work for Sam Walton”) and followed his tour through a Shenzhen Wal-Mart, where, he enthused, “We’re bringing people a great shopping experience!” “Chinese customers,” Time added helpfully, “seem to agree.”

As in many articles, what criticisms were included Time allowed Wal-Mart to trump. What about complaints that the industry giant’s use of cheap overseas labor undercuts U.S. workers? Time left unchallenged Hatfield’s response that “if you stop stuff from [abroad] coming into the U.S., it would mean $180 blue jeans. Is that what Americans want?” Time didn’t point out that it’s easy to find U.S.-made jeans for less than $30.

From The Associated Press:

Senior Wal-Mart executives knew cleaning contractors were hiring illegal immigrants, many who were housed in crowded conditions, and sometimes slept in the backs of stores, according to a federal agency's affidavit.

The affidavit, unsealed last week, was part of an investigation of Wal-Mart by federal immigration officials that led to the 2003 raid on 60 Wal-Mart stores in 21 states, and the arrests of 245 illegal workers. The retailer agreed to pay $11 million in March to settle the case, but says top executives neither encouraged nor knew of the practice.

To read the rest of this story, click here.

WakeUpWalMart.com issued the following response to Wal-Mart’s CEO Lee Scott’s announcement today that Wal-Mart would work to tighten standards at its overseas suppliers:

“Unfortunately, Wal-Mart’s exploitation of workers is not limited to its use of sweatshop labor overseas. Our campaign is building a sea of public pressure to force Wal-Mart to end its race-to-the-bottom business model.

For too long, the American people have paid the price as Wal-Mart has relied on sweatshop labor to produce its cheap products. We will continue to work hard to get Wal-Mart to change its outrageous practices of exploiting sweatshop labor and failing to meet international labor standards. But, sweatshop labor is only the beginning of the long list of problems that Wal-Mart must address.

We welcome the opportunity to have a dialogue with Wal-Mart about how it can improve working conditions both here and abroad, but we know that actions speak louder than word. We hope Wal-Mart will accept our ‘Six Demands for Change’ and work with us to form a partnership for change.

Over the next several months, our campaign will continue to highlight the disastrous effect Wal-Mart is having on communities, families and our country. We hope Wal-Mart won’t respond with rhetoric and vague small steps, but will take bold action to change their greedy, arrogant ways.”

According to The Macomb Journal, October is safety month at Wal-Mart, which means that the Wal-Mart in Macon (and likely other Wal-Mart's across the country) will host events designed to "improve the overall safety in your home as well as your health."

This is a good time for Wal-Mart to also address the safety and health care of their workers by providing comprehensive, affordable health care for all employees, so they can care for their families and no longer be forced to rely on taxpayer-funded public health care.

This is another great opportunity for Wal-Mart to work with us to improve the lives of so many Americans who face an economic and health care crisis every day, everywhere in America. We believe now is the time for Wal-Mart to address the serious issues facing its 1.3 million workers, their families, our communities, and our country by agreeing to our "six demands for change."

Add your name to our six demands for change today:

http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/feature/benton/

Via Jonathan Rees:

Look on the Wal-Mart web site now and you can see a press release congratulating themselves for winning an award from the National Arbor Day Foundation:

Wal-Mart took home the coveted Award of Excellence for the National Arbor Day Building With Trees Program last night at the Arbor Day Foundation's Building for Greener Communities National Conference in Nebraska City, Nebraska....

The St. Petersburg Times tells you the whole story:

[R]ecords show many of the transplanted trees died in what critics say is an example of the problems with the nation's approach to protecting wetlands...

Transplanting the trees into man-made wetlands was crucial to Wal-Mart getting state and federal approval to build the store five years ago. The store had to offset the loss of natural wetlands by creating new ones that mimic the original.

But man-made wetlands, known as mitigation, often fail.

Sydney Bacchus, a hydrogeologist who examined the site in January with the St. Petersburg Times , scoffed at Wal-Mart's award.

"An award-winner? It depends on what for. If it's for the most absurd suggestion of mitigation, then yes, it would be an award-winner," Bacchus said.

So how did Wal-Mart win the award? First:

National Arbor Day Foundation Vice President Dan Lambe said the contest judges took Wal-Mart's word for its success rate.

The second reason Wal-Mart won the award, as the Times explains:

Wal-Mart was the only entry.

Thanks to Jonathan for his analysis of another attempt by Wal-Mart to improve their public image through a dishonest PR spin strategy.

From Consumer Reports comes the truth about Wal-Mart's purported low prices:

When you're shopping at a small, independent appliance shop, you probably expect great service.

"The quality of our service and the quality of our people on the floor is really what sells this store," said Jim Vinci, who owns an appliance store.

But what about selection… or competitive prices? Consumer Reports' Bob Markovich said more than 6,000 readers weighed in as part of a major survey.

"We asked people about their experiences shopping for appliances at big chains, like Wal-Mart, Target, and Best Buy, as well as at small independent stores," Markovich said.

Consumer Reports asked about service and quality, as well as price and selection. It turns out big chains don't always mean big bargains.

When it comes to small appliances, Wal-Mart touts low prices, but survey results show, overall, it's no less expensive than other stores.

"Readers also said good help was hard to find at Wal-Mart, and selection—pretty limited," Markovich said.

From the Boston Herald:

Embarrassed by a bombardment of negative publicity, Wal-Mart has sprung to the aid of an Avon couple struggling to fit newborn quadruplets into their tiny home.

The retail behemoth yesterday delivered Chris and Karen Lynch a $500 store gift certificate. More importantly, the company said it would review the family's request to hook up to their sewer line to a neighboring Wal-Mart store so the Lynches can expand to accommodate the baby boys, born Monday.

``We seldom receive requests of this type, so we need to carefully examine all possible impacts of our decision,'' Wal-Mart said in a written statement. ``We hope that we will be able to help the Lynches meet their housing needs.''

The change of heart came after yesterday's Herald reported that the Lynches – who now have five children and a cat – were given the snub by Wal-Mart executives.

To read the entire Boston Herald article, click here.

Wal-Mart has issued yet another about-face after the public was made aware of Wal-Mart's wrongdoing. It is clear that Wal-Mart is on the defensive, doing all that they can to improve their public image.

First, Wal-Mart used Nazi imagery in an advertisement in May, used to denigrate Wal-Mart's opponents. Initially, Wal-Mart claimed ignorance, saying that they hadn't approved the ad. Then they admitted that Wal-Mart had reviewed the ads and raised no objections. Then of course they were forced by public pressure from people like you to issue an apology advertisement.

In June, Wal-Mart officials at a store in West Virginia told their employees that they had to agree to work any shift, any day that they were asked, or they would be fired. Once again there was public uproar, and once again Wal-Mart flip-flopped, and the very next day, said that this was not a Wal-Mart policy.

Wal-Mart's newest attempt to run away from criticism can be found in an article by the Associate Press. As we reported yesterday, a columnist for the Pensacola News Journal wrote a column on June 19th that was critical of Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart's response was to ban the sale of the Pensacola News Journal from their stores. Randy Hammer, executive editor at the Pensacola News Journal, wrote an op-ed yesterday about the incident which included the following:

"When we stop listening to people on the other side of the fence, when we try to silence and even punish people for thinking differently than we do and raising facts and figures we don't like, well, we won't be red, white and blue anymore."

"Wal-Mart Stores Incorporated spokeswoman Sharon Weber says that the company should not have removed the newspapers from the store. She says they should be available by the end of the week."

From AsianWeek.com:

Many see Wal-Mart threatening the Asian American economic base of small businesses...

[...]Wal-Mart’s practices have caught the eye of Congress and the ire of local politicians like Jun Choi, mayoral candidate for Edison, New Jersey.

Choi’s campaign has included an anti-Wal-Mart platform. “Blue collar jobs will be lost and small businesses ... owned by Asians will be threatened,” Choi said. “It’s safe to say that Wal-Mart has a negative effect on Asian Business owners. I disagree with Wal-Mart’s corporate philosophy in not providing health care benefits and acceptable wages for a state, which has the highest median household income in the U.S. It would be very tough for families to survive.” Choi is now trying to reverse a decision to let Wal-Mart into his town.

[...] “Wal-Mart believes in featuring real-life people in their advertisements,” Bill Imada, chairman and CEO of IW Group says. “Many consumers have told us that they like the fact the people are real people. Some of them have accents. Some are a bit shy. But the nice thing about the people in Wal-Mart’s ads is that it reflects people who truly appreciate what they find at Wal-Mart.”

The advertising campaign has received mixed reviews and is targeted only to Asian immigrants rather than addressing the Asian American community as a whole.

“We’re excited about our campaign,” Wal-Mart’s Senior Communications Manager Linda Blakely said. “Our goals were two fold. We wanted to acknowledge and thank our Asian American shoppers and also extend an invitation to Asian Americans who have not been to our stores.”

I'd say that Wal-Mart's goal in this new advertising campaign is actually not two fold, but simply another big-money attempt at the brainwashing of a community that has obviously been hurt by Wal-Mart's business practices.

To read the rest of the article, click here.

What is going on at Wal-Mart?

First, we learn that Wal-Mart has hired former CIA and FBI officials to work for the company.

Then, the Vice Chairman of the company, Tom Coughlin, resigns alleging he set up an illegal anti-union slush fund to spy on workers.

Now, the New York Times reveals this morning that Wal-Mart hired a security official to spy on James Lynn, the company official who was cracking down on apparel factories in Central America.

Mr. Lynn says he was terminated because he told Mike Duke, president of the Wal-Mart stores division, that “…working conditions at the factories were terrible and violated the rules and regulations of Wal-Mart.”

Not to mention that Dateline NBC just did a hidden camera investigation exposing the truth about Wal-Mart’s exploitation of sweatshop labor in 3rd world countries. Or, when confronted about those violations a Wal-Mart spokesperson said international labor violations were “common.”

Wal-Mart’s systematic pattern of spying and alleged illegal activity is disturbing and wrong. For too long, Wal-Mart has sacrificed the wages and health care of its employees for profit, but to sacrifice people’s human rights and dignity is un-American. Wal-Mart’s spying must cease and desist immediately.

Until Wal-Mart changes, we will continue to expose the truth about the high cost we all pay for Wal-Mart’s false prices.

At the same time Dateline exposes Wal-Mart's exploitation of Bangladesh labor, now it turns out Wal-Mart may have fired an employee for exposing such violations. From the Morning News (AR):

A Searcy man who says he was wrongfully terminated by Wal-Mart Stores Inc. of Bentonville after he reported "abysmal" working conditions in Central American factories used by Wal-Mart is suing the company.

...

James W. Lynn of Searcy says in the court documents that he worked for Wal-Mart's factory certification program in Central and South America from Jan. 12, 2001, to May 7, 2002, where he allegedly observed "unacceptable working conditions" in factories producing Wal-Mart clothing. After reporting the situation to Wal-Mart, Lynn says he was fired.

Lynn accuses Wal-Mart in his lawsuit of wrongful discharge, emotional distress, libel, invasion of privacy and breach of contract. He is asking for punitive as well as other damages, court costs and attorney fees in his suit.

Statement by Paul Blank, UFCW’s Wake-Up Wal-Mart campaign director on child labor violations and NBC’s Dateline hidden camera investigation:

“Wal-Mart’s greed and blatant disregard for children in this country and abroad is outrageous. Today we have uncovered the true Wal-Mart – a company willfully violating morality in pursuit of profit.

Tonight, the American people will discover the true cost we all pay for Wal-Mart’s false prices. Despite having paid a $135,000 fine for child labor violations in February, the state of Connecticut fined Wal-Mart today for additional child labor violations. Most disturbingly, NBC’s Dateline documents how Wal-Mart exploits poor women and children in 3rd world sweatshops.

According to an executive who supplies Wal-Mart, when he asked for one penny more to ‘pay these poor people,’ Wal-Mart actually asked him to cut the wages of these exploited workers living in poverty. Wal-Mart’s own investigation into its sweatshops uncovered “numerous violations of standards.” Yet, Dateline demonstrates that Wal-Mart still uses these suppliers.

Wal-Mart’s greed is creating an unprecedented race to the bottom that is both morally bankrupt and endangers people’s lives. With total disregard for human dignity, Wal-Mart knowingly turns a blind eye to the horrors of sweatshops.

What will it take for Wal-Mart to change?

How serious will the violations have to be for Wal-Mart to wake up and finally do what is right by putting people first, not corporate profit and greed. Until Wal-Mart changes, we will continue to lead the campaign to make Wal-Mart live up to its responsibilities as America’s largest corporation."

To read the NBC Dateline investigation piece, click here.

From the Associated Press:

Three Wal-Mart stores in Connecticut have been fined a total of $3,300 for child-labor law violations, the state Department of Labor said Friday.

The stores in Hartford, Norwalk and Putnam were cited for 11 violations, including illegally assigning youngsters to work on hazardous equipment such as compacters and vehicles and working past 10 p.m.

The most recent fines were assessed this week, while others were imposed last month, said Gary Pechie, director of the wage and workplace standards division at the state Department of Labor.

Does a company with $10 billion in profits need to be spying on its competition to engage them in price wars?

From the AP:

SKIATOOK, Okla. (AP) A northeast Oklahoma grocery store is suing Wal-Mart for allegedly stealing price information.

Super H accuses Wal-Mart of sending its workers to illegally scan bar codes on products in the Super H store in Skiatook, which is just down the street from a Wal-Mart SuperCenter that's to open in August.

The bar codes contain not only the price of the product, but also the cost Super H paid, its inventory and other details the store considers highly private. The judge is prohibiting police from returning the scanning device allegedly used to collect the bar code information.

This isn't the first time Wal-Mart has been accused in Oklahoma of scanning bar codes of competitors.

In 2000, Crest Foods in Edmond accused five Wal-Mart employees of scanning bar codes. Among the five was former long-time Wal-Mart Chief Executive David Glass.

In today's Chicago Tribune, Lee Scott has an ironic take on the use of foreign products:

"Getting a hybrid is probably also a good way to send a message to the kids. I love the idea of emission control, and I just hate dependence on foreign oil.

"I don't think importing towels is extraordinarily dangerous," maintains Scott, whose company is criticized for stocking too many foreign goods.

"But I do think our dependence on foreign oil and the impact it has on our economy is something we have to come to terms with," he added.

So foreign oil is bad, but Wal-Mart's importation of foreign goods (according to PBS Frontline, about 60% of Wal-Mart's total merchandise was imported in 2004) is OK. It's interesting to note that while high oil prices have negatively affected Wal-Mart's sales, the low costs of merchandise imported from countries like China and India help Wal-Mart's bottom line. I wonder what is driving Lee Scott – a concern for America or his bank account?

At his "veto celebration" yesterday, Gov. Ehrlich was joined by many supporters, including Wal-Mart COO Eduardo Castro-Wright. Instead of being ashamed of their decision to choose tax subsidies for a multi-billion dollar corporation over health care for working families and their children, these supporters, including Castro-Wright, were laughing at it all.

Governor Ehrlich signing the bill, backed by people laughing and smiling:

Eduardo Castro-Wright laughing as he addresses the crowd:

Source: just-style.com

US retail giant Wal-Mart says it plans to expand its retail and export operations in China in 2005, with up to 15 store openings and Chinese exports worth $18 billion anticipated, AFX News reported.

Wal-Mart, which last week reported first-quarter results below expectations, buys footwear, toys and seasonal merchandise from China, making it the company’s ‘largest export country’, chief executive John Menzer was quoted as saying.

John Menzer said that Wal-Mart expected 12-15 store openings in China in 2005, but added that the nation was not really developed for chain stores and brands.

Send a letter to ABC News now, calling For them to drop Wal-Mart as "Only In America" sponsor:

http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/abcnews

Yesterday, Wal-Mart spokesman Peter Kanelos’ was quoted in the Arizona Sun Daily denying Wal-Mart knew about the Nazi image paid for by their campaign group Protect Flagstaff.

But now, Bloomberg News is reporting that Chuck Coughlin, the consultant to the Wal-Mart campaign group and the designer of the ad, said that Wal-Mart “reviewed all the ads before they ran…They (Wal-Mart) did not raise an objection.”

Here is the quote from yesterday’s Arizona Daily Sun, “Campaign involvement was not part of the equation, he (Kanelos) said, adding that Wal-Mart's involvement is merely funding, and the corporation doesn't participate at a grassroots level. Because of this, Kanelos is unaware of the controversial campaign ads or whether Wal-Mart would support a campaign that used them. ‘I can't comment on the ad. I haven't seen it,’ he said. ‘We donate to the campaign committee’."

Which one is it Wal-Mart?

And when is Wal-Mart going to denounce the Nazi imagery used by a campaign group it funds and apologize?

Here’s a small story out of St. Louis that tells you a lot about the way Wal-Mart operates:

A state appeals court has ordered Wal-Mart Stores Inc. to pay legal fees for [Linda Monroe,] a former worker who sued after injuring herself stocking 50-pound sacks of dog food.

The court called the company's previous delay in covering her medical costs “egregious and outrageous.”...

“The problem here is that it's now 2005, and we've still got to wait for another hearing to get some compensation,” Damick said….
After years of legal challenges, Wal-Mart paid Monroe's medical expenses in August after the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission upheld an administrative judge's 2003 finding that Monroe deserved the compensation.

In the commission's ruling, member John Hickey wrote that Wal-Mart “has consistently demonstrated that it is unwilling to comply with the spirit of the Workers' Compensation Act by failing to provide timely medical care and temporary benefits.”

Think this case isn’t typical? Then read this story out of Seattle.

Think these kinds of workplace injuries happen at every large store? According to the Corporate Social Research Center:

Wal-Mart now ranks second behind the U.S. government as the most-sued organisation in the world. The supermarkets chain was sued 4,851 times last year - once every two hours... There are 9,400 cases pending against Wal-Mart in the U.S. court system. The curious phenomenon has created a micro-economy for lawyers across the U.S...The lawsuits are many and varied: slipping on just-cleaned floors, sex-discrimination claims from workers, a woman who was killed by a rifle bought illegally from the store by her husband. Even when the store is found liable, it still continues its legal trench warfare...

Wal-Mart is embattled as it has never been before. Sex-discrimination litigation, wage and pay disputes, fights with unions, and other workplace problems have left the company at loggerheads with plaintiffs lawyers, federal investigators, and even the chattering classes.

Such a record of litigation begs the question, “Why does Wal-Mart think it’s above the law?”

JR

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

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/

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.