Check out this article from Dirt Diggers Digest about Wal-Mart's recent announcement to donate $430,000 to the relief effort in areas of China hit by an earthquake. As the article points out, Wal-Mart donated about $15 million after Hurricane Katrina and got very good, and deserved, press coverage (thanks to their PR firm). It is odd then, that they are donating so little to China when 70% of their goods are coming from the country. I suppose it shows how much Wal-Mart values the people that make their goods; just enough to say they donated and get some good press out of it.

Here's the article:

Wal-Mart and the Chinese Earthquake: Cheap Help for A Cheap-Labor Country

Wal-Mart Stores has put out a press release patting itself on the back for promising the equivalent of about $430,000 for disaster relief and reconstruction for the area of China hit by a massive earthquake this week. The gesture was laudable but the amount was less than impressive.

After all, the giant retailer would be nowhere today without the countless Chinese workers who toil in sweatshops so that American consumers can be offered the cheap goods that are at the core of the company’s business model. Last year those largely Chinese-made goods brought Wal-Mart profits of $12.7 billion, or about $1.4 million every hour of every day. The $430,000 contribution thus represents less than 20 minutes of profit.

Wal-Mart also profits from Chinese consumers. The company operates more than 200 stores in China (through joint ventures and minority-owned subsidiaries), several of which have been shut down because of the tremblor. Wal-Mart was so eager to operate stores in China that it agreed to let its employees there be represented by unions (though of the government-dominated variety).

Wal-Mart has a history of using relatively inexpensive amounts of disaster relief to boost its reputation. After Hurricane Katrina hit the U.S. Gulf Coast in 2005, Wal-Mart maneuvered to get maximum exposure for its prompt delivery of relief supplies. A fairly routine operation for a company possessing the most advanced logistics infrastructure was seen as nearly miraculous, given the ineptitude of federal and state public officials.

The company made an initial faux pas (quickly reversed) in announcing that employees at its stores shut down by the storm would be paid for only three days. It also started out offering a measly $2 million in relief but soon overcame its parsimonious instincts and upped the figure by $15 million, thereby winning wide praise. The wave of favorable coverage went on for several months, thanks at least in part to the efforts of its army of p.r. operatives from Edelman and a conservative blogger who was paid to tout Wal-Mart’s hurricane work in the blogosphere.

Wal-Mart may have to part with more than $430,000 to get a similar public relations bonanza from China’s suffering.

Most of you have heard that Wal-Mart cheats US states out of taxes by paying themselves rent for stores and deducting that from their state taxes. It turns out that Wal-Mart is cheating developing countries out of taxes too. According to a new report put out by Christian Aid, large corporations, including Wal-Mart, are not paying their fair share of taxes. The countries in question are being cheated out of $160 billion or more in taxes. If you thought sweatshops were bad, or suing a former employee for health care money, this should really offend your sensibilities. We are talking about incredibly poor countries where many live in poverty you can't even imagine. Tax revenue is desperately needed in these countries for things like food and water. The report claims that by denying these countries tax revenue, children are dying by the thousands. We think Wal-Mart should pay its taxes, along with the rest of the corporations that are skipping out. It's not a terribly radical idea, after all, we have to pay our taxes, and we don't make nearly as much as Wal-Mart does.

Here's the story from The Independent:

Tax evasion 'costs lives of 5.6m children'

The lives of more than five million children could be saved in the developing world – if the super-rich and the world's largest companies paid their fair share in taxes, according to a leading British charity. In Death and Taxes: the True Toll of Tax-dodging, Christian Aid says that the extent of tax abuse "is so widespread and damaging that it is tantamount to a new slavery".

The charity estimates that governments in the poorest countries are being cheated out of at least $160bn (£82bn) a year in tax revenues, much more than the $40 to $60bn the World Bank estimates is needed to pay for the United Nation's Millennium Development Goals (MDG). The MDG aim of halving poverty by 2015 would save 350,000 children's lives a year.

The director of Christian Aid, Dr Daleep Mukarji, said: "We predict that illegal trade-related tax evasion alone will be responsible for the deaths of 5.6 million children under the age of five between 2000 and 2015. That's almost 1,000 a day". Christian Aid believes that up to $11 trillion of funds may be stashed away in tax havens.

The report notes the conventional distinction drawn between tax planning and tax avoidance, which are legal, and tax evasion, which is not, but says that avoidance is part of a "sliding scale of legitimacy", in which ever more ingenious and complex methods are used to get around the rules and shelter corporate profits, notably through the use of tax havens, places where extreme secrecy in turn encourages a more general criminality.

It says: "The inescapable fact is that there are only four reasons for banking 'offshore': to avoid tax, to evade tax, to function in secret, to sidestep regulations controlling financial services or monopolistic practices. In each scenario, the pursuit of profit outweighs all other considerations, including good citizenship and social responsibility".

Tax havens have come under increasing scrutiny lately, as European Union governments and the OECD have tried to rein in their activities. The German secret service recently paid €4m (£3m) to an informant to reveal details of money held in Lichtenstein. HM Revenue and Customs is following its example, with the hope of recovering £100m in lost revenue.

Christian Aid points out that the British Government has a special responsibility and influence because so many tax havens are linked to the Crown as overseas territories or crown dependencies. The list includes Jersey, Guernsey, the Isle of Man, the Cayman Islands, Bermuda and the British Virgin Islands. Ironically, Christian Aid adds, even CDC plc, formerly the Commonwealth Development Corporation and still owned by the Department for International Development, pays no taxes on its £350m of profits, thanks to its use of tax havens, even though its main aim is to fund development projects.

High-profile individuals are criticised by Christian Aid for minimising their tax bills, including the Formula One racing champion Lewis Hamilton, pop star Phil Collins and U2 lead singer Bono.

The widespread use of holding companies in tax havens to hold profits, licences and intellectual property, all to reduce tax bills, is also condemned: "Every transnational corporation uses holding companies", it said, and listed BP, Wal-Mart, Royal Dutch Shell, ExxonMobil and Ford Motor Company's reinsurance group as benefiting from offshore holdings.

Christian Aid's strongest words are reserved for the companies and firms of accountants who save billions through such activities as manipulating invoicing and cost structures to avoid paying taxes and royalties on mineral rights in developing economies.

Rather than protecting wealthy "non-doms" by acquiescing in the system of tax havens, Christian Aid calls on the British and Irish governments to "support international moves to curtail ...the secrecy of tax havens, thereby lifting the lid on the tax industry and its machinations".

Yesterday, Wal-Mart announced that it employs 2 million people world wide, and that doesn't include the huge number of people who are manufacturing good for Wal-Mart, which would bump that number by a lot. Comparing Wal-Mart to other Fortune 500 retailers, Target employs 352,000, Costco just 132,000, Kroger 310,000, and Home Depot employs 355,000. We're talking more than 5 times more employees than other large retailers.

If you don't think a campaign about Wal-Mart's business practices matter, think of the 2 million plus employees at Wal-Mart; it matters to them.

Here's the story from the AP:

Wal-Mart Reaches 2 Million Workers

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) _ Imagine Houston being populated only by Wal-Mart workers.

Houston proper, with its population of just over 2 million, has about the same number of people as Wal-Mart Stores Inc. now employs worldwide.

Put another way, if a city had only families of four and one member of each household worked at Wal-Mart, that would be a perfect fit with the 8 million-strong population of New York City, a market Wal-Mart happens to covet.

During a recorded call with investors Tuesday, Wal-Mart President and CEO Lee Scott mentioned offhandedly that the company now has more than 2 million "associates," as Wal-Mart terms its employees. Chief Financial Officer Tom Schoewe confirmed in an interview that Wal-Mart had reached the milestone.

The world's largest retailer is also the world's largest private employer. The company has about 1.3 million U.S. workers. As of April 30, Bentonville-based Wal-Mart had 7,343 units - 4,195 in the U.S. and 3,148 in its international division, which includes Puerto Rico.

Wal-Mart can have a detrimental effect on small, locally owned shops when it moves in to town. Apparently that effect is somewhat duller when Wal-Mart moves into a city. A new study found that stores near a rural Wal-Mart are more likely to close down than stores near an urban Wal-Mart. This, to me, makes a great deal of sense. Living in a city myself, I know that shopping in a city is about location. In the suburbs or rural towns, it's not a big deal to drive 3 miles, or 20 miles to go shopping, but in the city where many folks don't have cars, you tend to shop within a half mile radius if you can help it. Sure there are occasional runs out to malls or the like, but small shops pop up all around the city because there are lots of people who want to shop within a few blocks of their house.

Of course the study also confirms what we've known for a long time: Wal-Mart is bad for local businesses. The retail giant comes in and all the other businesses suffer.

The Chicago Tribune has the story about the new study:

Cities may mute effect of Wal-Mart

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. appears to have played a role in putting some retailers out of business since opening its first Chicago store in Austin more than 18 months ago, but the effect on its smaller rivals is likely milder than what occurs when the giant store arrives in a rural town, according to initial findings of a new study.

Researchers from Loyola University Chicago and the University of Illinois at Chicago tracked 191 stores within a three-mile radius of Wal-Mart from March 2006, six months before the store opened, through November 2007. The team found 23 stores, or 12 percent, of the businesses in the study group shut down last year.

Their preliminary conclusion is that a "small but statistically significant relationship" exists between local companies going out of business and Wal-Mart's arrival in the city. The researchers cautioned they are "hesitant to draw any strong conclusions" until a third phase of research is completed later this year.

For more than two decades, academics have studied Wal-Mart's effect on small-town America, but little is known about how Wal-Mart affects jobs, wages, property values and sales in an inner city.

The world's largest retailer has been moving into big cities and stirring controversy, especially in the union-dominated North. The researchers claim this is the first empirical study of the local economic impact of a Wal-Mart in a large city.

"People have their opinions on Wal-Mart," said Phil Nyden, director of the Center for Urban Research and Learning at Loyola in Chicago. "The idea is to get some actual data to inform the debate."

In a

bid to win over critics worried about the giant retailer driving out mom-and-pop stores with larger selections and lower prices, Wal-Mart launched an unusual program last year in 10 inner cities, starting in Chicago, aimed at helping local retailers near its urban stores. It offered to pay for local newspaper advertising and to showcase the independent stores on Wal-Mart's in-store TV network and donate funds to the local chambers of commerce.

Called "Jobs and Opportunity Zones Program," it received mixed reviews. Wal-Mart detractors called it a publicity stunt. And some participants said the program didn't make much of a difference in their day-to-day business.

According to the Chicago study, there is some "limited" evidence stores located closer to Wal-Mart are more likely to go out of business than those farther away within the three-mile radius.

Many of the stores that closed last year sold clothing, beauty supplies and shoes, all items available at Wal-Mart.

Lawrence LeBlanc, owner of LDL Furniture and Appliance, said sales at his secondhand-goods store just down the street from Wal-Mart have fallen dramatically since the discount chain came to town. The little shop had been generating about $130,000 to $140,000 in sales a year before Wal-Mart. Last year it rang up $35,000. The only reason LeBlanc has kept the store open, he said, is that he owns the building.

"I used to be able to sell 15 to 20 televisions a month," said LeBlanc. "Now I sell two or three."

On the other hand, Norman Delrahim, owner of B&S Hardware nearby, said that after an initial drop-off in sales, he thinks business is "a little better" as shoppers come to the neighborhood to visit Wal-Mart and notice his store.

Wal-Mart said it is attracting new business to the area, such as the Menards home improvement store going up across the street.

"There is a lot of development that has come into the area," said Roderick Scott, senior manager of public affairs for Wal-Mart in Chicago. "We've been a positive agent in that change."

The Bentonville, Ark.-based retailer opened a 142,000-square-foot discount store in the Austin neighborhood on the West Side in September 2006. It planned to open as many as 20 stores in the city, most of them Supercenters that also sell groceries.

Unions, angling to get non-union Wal-Mart to pay its workers more in wages and health benefits, fought to keep Wal-Mart from expanding in the city. Last month the city struck down a request to allow Wal-Mart to open a second store at Chatham Market on the South Side.

Researchers plan to learn more about Wal-Mart's effect on jobs and wages as they complete the final phase of the study. The last wave of data collection began in March 2008 and runs through November 2008. The study is financed by Woods Fund of Chicago, a foundation that helps the poor.

Check out this story from The Sun down in Texas:

Case on standby for woman who said Wal-Mart gave her car away

For Marta Velazquez, righting a wrong hasn’t been a speedy process.

In her attempt to seek damages from Wal-Mart, who she said gave her car to a man they believed to be her husband, she has been playing the waiting game with the judicial system for two years.

“It’s your typical Wal-Mart,” Velzquez said. “They are claiming to not be responsible.”

Lonnie Knowles, Velazquez’s attorney, said since Wal-Mart was first put on notice of the claim, there have been several attempts to contact the corporation, including a written demand on Jan. 2, 2007.

Knowles said when the company wouldn’t respond, they filed a lawsuit seeking damage reimbursements of $50,000 in June of 2007, nearly 10 months after the incident.

On Sept. 6, 2006, Velazquez took her 1999 black Pontiac Grand Am to the Wal-Mart on FM 1960 and Cutten Road to have a tire replaced, only to find out they had given her car to a man they thought was her husband. About a month-and-a-half later, it was found, destroyed, in a park in Acres Homes.

The inconvenience caused her to miss work. The house keys, mail and a laptop left in her car enabled one man access to her phone number, which he used to harass her. Fearing for her safety, she broke her apartment lease and moved.

Now awaiting her day in the 133rd Judicial District Court, Vazquez’z case has been on trial stand by since, April 30, meaning that when the court calls them, within two hours notice, lawyers for both sides will need to appear and be ready to pick a jury.

“There are a bunch of trials set to appear in that particular court, so the judge decides what the pecking order of those trials is going to be,” Knowles said.

The case likely won’t be tried this time around, he said. If not, their case won’t come up again for trial for four to six months at which point the standby process will recycle.

“We both indicated it would take no less than two days to try the case, and since the court hasn’t called as of 3 p.m. on Thursday, my experience tells me that we likely won’t be reached for this docketing period,” he said.

Wal-Mart said they couldn’t comment on a matter that is currently in litigation.

Today in a Reuters Story, Wal-Mart's CEO for U.S. stores is reported as having said:

"The economy continues to get tougher and the 'paycheck cycle' is more pronounced for customers than in past months," Eduardo Castro-Wright, head of Wal-Mart's U.S. store division, said in a statement.

"As money gets tighter for them toward the end of the month, sales drop more than we have seen in the past."

Poor, poor Wal-Mart. They're the worlds largest corporation, the number one fortune 500 company, rake in billions of dollars a year, but their sales may go down a bit because average American families are having trouble making ends meet. If it is not bad enough that Wal-Mart is complaining about not making that extra few million while their workers and working families across the country are facing real hardship, consider that Wal-Mart helped create this mess. By not paying their employees a living wage, driving down area wages, forcing companies to move jobs to China and elsewhere, and not providing adequate benefits Wal-Mart had a hand in creating the "paycheck cycle" they now bemoan.

Here's the Reuter's article via the Washington Post:

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Wal-Mart Stores Inc (WMT.N) on Thursday reported a better-than-expected 3.2 percent rise in April sales at U.S. stores open at least a year, boosted by demand for basic items like groceries and medicine.

But the world's largest retailer gave a tepid outlook for May as the economic situation gets more difficult and consumers try to stretch their dollars by purchasing cheaper cuts of meat or trading down to pasta.

"The economy continues to get tougher and the 'paycheck cycle' is more pronounced for customers than in past months," Eduardo Castro-Wright, head of Wal-Mart's U.S. store division, said in a statement.

"As money gets tighter for them toward the end of the month, sales drop more than we have seen in the past."

Sm

aller rival Target Corp (TGT.N), whose April sales at existing stores rose a less-than-expected 3.1 percent, also gave a weak forecast for May.

"We continue to see weakness in markets that are experiencing housing market-related stress, particularly in Florida, Arizona, Nevada and parts of California," Target said on a recorded call.

Wal-Mart shares rose 70 cents or 1.2 percent to $57.53, while Target shares fell $1.13 or 2.1 percent to $52.31 in morning New York Stock Exchange trading.

Ben Pivar, vice president at consulting firm Capgemini, said consumers are showing more caution, buying staples and holding back on splurges, in this environment.

"There's still a lot of uncertainty at the consumer level with respect to where the economy's going," he said.

WAL-MART SALES SURPASS EXPECTATIONS

Wal-Mart's 3.2 percent gain in April U.S. sales at stores open at least a year, known as same-store sales, was above analysts' average forecast for a rise of 2.1 percent, according to Reuters Estimates. It also surpassed Wal-Mart's own forecast for a gain of 1 percent to 3 percent.

Same-store sales at its namesake discount stores rose 2.6 percent, while they advanced 6.6 percent at its Sam's Club warehouse division.

Wal-Mart said net sales in the month, ended May 2, rose to $29.18 billion from $26.57 billion a year earlier.

"Customers are buying less expensive protein sources and trying to stretch their dollars with purchases of boxed dinners and pasta," the company said on a recorded call.

"Moreover, they are gravitating toward more private label than in the past few months."

Consumers continued to buy flat-panel TVs, video games and gaming systems, Wal-Mart said, while the allergy season boosted sales of prescription and over-the-counter medications.

Apparel sales improved, while sales in its home department remained soft, it said.

For May, it forecast U.S. same-store sales would be flat to up 2 percent.

"It's currently difficult to quantify the impact from the stimulus checks," said Chief Financial Officer Tom Schoewe, referring to rebate checks being mailed to U.S. consumers as part of Washington's $152 billion economic stimulus package.

Wal-Mart will report its first-quarter results on May 13. Last month, it said it expected earnings per share from continuing operations of 74 cents to 76 cents for the quarter, up from a previous forecast of 70 cents to 74 cents.

TARGET SALES OFF TARGET

Target's April same-store sales rose 3.1 percent, missing analysts' average forecast for a gain of 4.5 percent. Target had forecast a mid-single-digit increase.

"Comparable store sales performance in April was slightly below our planned range," Chief Executive Gregg Steinhafel said in a statement.

Sales were strongest in health care and consumable items and were weakest in jewelry, home decor and seasonal items, the retailer said.

Sales for the four weeks ended May 3 increased 9.0 percent to $4.25 billion.

For May, Target forecast same-store sales between down 1 percent and up 1 percent.

Target's sales have weakened in recent months as its shoppers overlook purchases of higher margin items like clothes and home decor in favor of basics like food or laundry detergent.

Wal-Mart's relationship with music vending has been somewhat tenuous of late. They lost the number one spot for Music sales to i-tunes, they bludgeoned major record labels with a new pricing scheme, and they dumped a ton of their online music library.

Now, they seem to be putting more emphasis on online sales, having just sealed a deal with Warner Music Group to vastly expand their music offerings. One wonders how much of this move is due to a bruised ego over losing to an online service.

hyperbot has the story:

WalMart Adds WMG MP3's. Napster Next?

The Warner Music Group family of labels has widened its full catalog mp3 offering to include WalMart.com. Previously Amazon was the only North American based download provider with the catalog.

Hypebot reported yesterday that WMG was about to broaden its DRM-free program to include other sites. Last month WalMart drop all tracks from WMG, Universal and Sony BMG and took its digital store DRM-free. EMI and a limited number of indies provided content until this morning when WMG effectively doubled WalMart.com's catalog.

As it does at brick and morter, WalMart is competing on price with all tracks a 94 cents (up from 88 cents last month) and album downloads from $7.98 - $9.22. (By contrast iTunes generally prices at $.99 track/$9.99 album and Amazon's offers variable pricing that is occasionally lower than WalMart but often hits $.99/$9.99.) Indie music plays only a minor role on WalMart.com also mimicing in-store content.

WMG's move puts pressure on the other label groups and download stores to move more rapidly towards all DRM-free. At yesterday's Digital NARM, a spokesperson for Napster hinted that they would go DRM-free within a month.

Usually a whistle-blower is taking action against a large corporation, but in this case, the whistle-blower is Wal-Mart itself. Apparently Wal-Mart tipped off the UK's Office of Fair Trading that large manufacturers and large grocery stores might be involved in some sort of price fixing scam. Now these major companies, many of whom supply Wal-Mart, or are Wal-Mart's competition, are under investigation. By tipping the OFT off, Wal-Mart avoids a fine if any illicit activity is discovered. What a deal! Wal-Mart avoids a massive fine, and their competition is under investigation. The only negative side effect is that they've pissed off some of their suppliers (but what can they do, it's not as if they can stop selling to Wal-Mart). Imagine if whistle blowers were treated like this. Instead of getting fired, harassed, and losing their livelihoods, they would get a nice raise, a promotion, and maybe have to suffer a few glares from coworkers. Again, what a deal!

Here's the article from the Telegraph:

Wal-Mart was whistleblower in OFT's supermarket investigation

Wal-Mart, the world's biggest retailer, was the whistleblower behind the Office of Fair Trading's current probe into alleged price fixing of food and toiletries, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal.

The investigation has embroiled some of the world's largest consumer goods manufacturers such as Unilever, Procter & Gamble and Reckitt Benckiser, as well as UK retail giants, including Tesco and J Sainsbury.

In blowing the whistle, Wal-Mart, which owns the Asda chain, has guaranteed itself immunity from a fine should the OFT discover any cartel activity. Any company found guilty could be fined up to 10 per cent of its annual worldwide sales, which in Wal-Mart's case would be $37bn (£18.7bn).

The move is likely to make the US retailer deeply unpopular with the companies involved, many of whom are its largest suppliers.

Last weekend this newspaper revealed that around 100 OFT officials and lawyers raided the offices of the country's biggest supermarkets ten days ago over allegations of price-fixing involving dozens of popular household brands, such as PG Tips, Aquafresh toothpaste and Andrex toilet roll. Consumer goods companies in the UK and the US were also visited or asked to provide pricing information.

It is understood that following an earlier OFT investigation into price-fixing of dairy products, which resulted in some supermarkets and dairies paying fines of £116m, senior Wal-Mart and Asda executives made the decision to go to the OFT with new information.

All the companies involved in the probe have strenuously denied that they are involved in any cartel activity, and Asda's decision to tip off the OFT does not mean that price-fixing has necessarily occurred. The OFT has refused to comment on the investigation.

Legal experts believe it will be at least two years until the OFT publishes any findings.

"Things will go quiet and it could drag on for two years. If the OFT gets a Statement of Objections out within a year I will be amazed," said one executive.

Other senior supermarket executives have dismissed the raids as a "fishing expedition". However, under its remit, the OFT needs to have a so-called evidential threshold before it can launch a raid, meaning that it must have good reason.

Last week the Competition Commission, the anti-trust watchdog, completed a separate two-year investigation into the supermarket sector. The commission gave the sector a largely clean bill of health, although it said that it had uncovered emails that "might raise issues of co-ordination" between supermarkets and suppliers.

Peter Freeman, chairman of the Competition Commission, said that the watchdog had passed on information to the OFT as part of the latter's new investigation.

He added that there was no contradiction between the commission finding the sector largely competitive and the OFT examining alleged price-fixing.

Cité Libre has a great article that, once again, links Wal-Mart to sweatshops. One interesting, but not surprising, fact in the article is that none of the workers in the factory profiled had heard of Wal-Mart's Code of Conduct. While most major companies have such a document, Wal-Mart's is just for show. It exists so Wal-Mart can point to it when someone writes about their sweatshop addiction.

Wal-Mart's Shirts of Misery from Bangladesh

When you purchase a shirt in Walmart, do you ever imagine young women in Bangladesh forced to work from 7:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., seven days a week, paid just 9 cents to 20 cents an hour, who are denied health care and maternity leave; screamed at to work faster; with monitored bathroom visits; and who will be fired for daring to complain or ask for their rights?

At the Beximco factory in the Dhaka Export Processing Zone in Bangladesh, there are 1,000 workers, at least 80 percent of them young women, sewing shirts and pants for Walmart and other retailers. Beximco is a sweatshop, where human rights are systematically violated.

Shame on Walmart

Walmart and its contractor Beximco do not pay the overtime premium. In fact, as we have seen, they do not even pay the legal hourly wage of 33 cents. They pay only 20 cents an hour and pay overtime at this same illegal 20-cent rate.

These workers are locked in poverty, being cheated out of over $20 a week in legal wages by the largest retailer in the world. The workers are being illegally paid just $16 for a full 80-hour workweek. For the forced 80-hour week, they should be earning at least $36.96. Surely Walmart, with $7.6 billion in annual operating profits, could afford this wage!

Some of the poorest people in the world are being illegally robbed of their wages, driving them deeper into misery. Even the 33-cent an hour wage does not come close to meeting basic subsistence needs.

This is why in Bangladesh there is no difference in the malnutrition rate of children whether their parents are unemployed or are working in factories sewing garments for the largest U.S. companies. Even the legal minimum wage is set too low to allow the workers to climb out of misery.

No maternity leave: At Beximco, legal maternity leave is denied and benefits are not paid.

Denied health care: By law, a factory the size of Beximco should have a health clinic, with a doctor present. Beximco has nothing. There is an empty first aid box for show. The women workers and their children have absolutely no health coverage or protection.

Access to bathrooms limited: The workers need a ticket and permission to use the bathrooms. Access is limited and bathroom breaks are timed.

Maltreatment/cursing/yelling: There is constant pressure to meet the high daily production goal; the workers are yelled at and cursed at to work faster.

Cheated of their tiny savings: In Bangladesh there is a government regulated savings system whereby a small deduction is made each pay period from the workers' wages and deposited in the Provident Fund, which the factory maintains. The workers can withdraw their savings from this fund when they leave the factory or are fired. It functions as a kind of severance pay, to act as a bridge or means of support while new work is sought. But most workers at Beximco, who have been forced to leave, report that they are cheated of their savings.

No worker has seen Walmart's Code of Conduct: Walmart says it has a corporate code of conduct which guarantees the human and worker rights of anyone sewing Walmart garments around the world. Even by industry standards, Walmart's code of conduct is very limited and extremely weak. Yet the workers at Beximco have never even seen this weak code of conduct. Walmart's code is not posted and it has never been explained to the workers. There has been no attempt to implement the code.

No right to organize: In Bangladesh's EPZs, unions and collective contracts are prohibited by law. The workers have no rights; the government authorities do nothing to implement labor law. The workers are fired for daring to protest forced 24-hour shifts. Denied their right to organize, the workers are isolated and vulnerable -- easily cheated of their legal wages and benefits.

Falling Real Wages

Devaluation and inflation have further eroded the real purchasing power of the Bangledeshi workers' wages.

The local currency, the taka, has lost 19% of its value against the U.S. dollar since 1995. (In 1995, there were TK 40.90 to $1.00. By October 1998, the taka had fallen to TK 48.50 to $1.00).

There is a five to six percent inflation rate each year.

Greed in the Global Economy

Walmart and its contractor pay no taxes to sew their garments in the Dhaka EPZ. All that they leave behind is the illegal 20-cent an hour wages and some small rent and fees.

In 1998, total government revenues in Bangladesh amounted to $3.872 billion (TK 187.8 billion), a sum far too low to even provide the most basic services to the over 125 million people in the country.

On the other hand, Walmart's sales in 1998 amounted to $137.6 billion, which means that Walmart's annual sales are 36 times greater than the total revenues of the Bangladeshi government. Yet Walmart does not pay a single cent in taxes or tariffs! Nothing!

Bangladesh, one of the poorest nations in the world, is being forced to subsidize Walmart.

Due to an inadequate tax base and overall low government revenues, Bangladesh must rely upon foreign aid to meet more than one-half of its entire development budget.

In the United States, Walmart also seeks multi-million-dollar state, county and city subsidies as a condition for locating its stores. But there is another indirect subsidy as well: one half of Walmart's 720,000 employees, or "associates" as the company calls them, qualify for federal assistance under the food stamp program. Wages at Walmart, now the largest private sector employer in the U.S., start as low as $5.75 an hour.

From PR Newswire comes this release:

DoJ Files Decree Ordering Wal-Mart To Pay Veteran $12,000

The Department of Justice said Thursday it filed a consent decree that will resolve its employment lawsuit against Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (WMT) on behalf of Sean Thornton.

The consent decree will require the Bentonville, Ark., retailer to pay Thornton $12,000 in back pay, less income tax and other withholdings, if it is approved by the court.

The Justice Department filed the complaint March 31 in the U.S. District Court of Orlando, Fla., alleging Wal-Mart violated the law by not reinstating Thornton to his civilian job as a cashier in the Orange City, Fla., store, after he was discharged by the Air Force.

For those of you who missed the story when it came out, Sean Thornton joined the Air Force and upon being discharged was refused his original Wal-Mart job. The DoJ then sued Wal-Mart because they violated the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994, designed to keep employers from discriminating against service members. Now it looks like Wal-Mart will have to pony up $12,000.

Just another example of how well Wal-Mart treats it's employees and the military.

Most of you will remember the heart breaking case of Debbie Shank. She was a Wal-Mart stocker until she was hit by a truck and left permanently brain damaged. While Wal-Mart paid her initial health costs, they later sued her for the money back because she won a law suit against the trucking company that hit her. The money won from the trucking company was supposed to be used for Debbie's long term care. Because of the public outcry, Wal-Mart dropped the law suit after causing years of stress and trouble for the family. We thought there was a happy resolution to the story, and even suggested that Wal-Mart could do something right with enough pressure. It appears we were wrong. Wal-Mart has not transfered the trust fund from its name back to the Shanks. Now a few hundred thousand dollars may not make much difference to a company that brings in tens of billions of dollars in profit each year, but to a family that needs to pay a hospital bill, it is vitally important. We hope that Wal-Mart follows through and keeps its promise to the Shanks for their sake.

From Countdown with Keith Olbermann, here's an interview with Jim Shank, Debbie's Husband:

A few months ago, we discussed how Wal-Mart profits from the general poverty of America. Well yesterday morning, Eduardo Castro-Wright, Wal-Mart America's CEO, acknowledged that we were precisely right, if in veiled terms. From The Morning News:

Wal-Mart's perfect storm paying off

Wal-Mart was hesitant to credit a tough economy and penny-pinching consumers with its solid performance in recent months, but said it plans to capitalize on cash-strapped shoppers by continuing to focus on low prices.

"I feel like we are well positioned to take advantage of the current market," Eduardo Castro-Wright, executive vice president and CEO of the Wal-Mart Stores division for Wal-Mart Stores Inc., said during a Tuesday morning Lehman Brothers retailing conference broadcast online.

The retailer announced the same morning plans to cash economic stimulus checks for free, enhance rollbacks through July and offer money-saving tips to consumers.

Castro-Wright downplayed the role of the economy in better-than-expected comparable store sales and increased earnings guidance in February and March, instead crediting improvements in merchandise assortment, management changes and a better store experience.

"I'm not going to say that (the economy) has not played a factor, but I'd like to think fundamentally the business is a lot stronger than it was six months ago," Castro-Wright said.

The economy is also considerably weaker.

Gas prices have increased almost 25 percent in the first quarter, reaching $3.59 this week. That's pushing squeamish consumers also facing increased food prices, job worries and plummeting home values to trade down, said Patricia Edwards, fund manager with Seattle-based Wentworth, Hauser and Violich.

"They couldn't have known this was coming, but they got to the right place at the right time, and the economy decided to help them out with that," Edwards said.

Castro-Wright said the retailer continues to see declines in its shoppers using credit for payment at U.S. stores, and that's clamping down on discretionary purchases.

"People don't have as much credit as they used to, and clearly this is having an impact on how they behave," Castro-Wright said. "Price matters today more than ever before."

New York-based Citigroup said 72 percent of consumers it surveyed gave Wal-Mart credit for the lowest grocery prices, a perception that will pay off for the retailer, according to a purchasing behavior study the company released last month.

"We believe Wal-Mart's business will benefit from the challenging consumer environment due to its strong value proposition," Deborah Weinswig, Citi analyst, said in the report.

Analysts are also confident the retailer's improved merchandising and inventory management is paying off, making it easier for Wal-Mart to attract affluent shoppers.

Castro-Wright reported that traffic at affluent-traited Wal-Mart stores outpaced the rest of the chain.

"We are very well-positioned, because first of all, we have credibility in price leadership, and you don't build that overnight," Castro-Wright said.

The retailing executive outlined Wal-Mart's growth strategy, a plan that is the brainchild of merchandising head John Fleming, who the company hired in 2005 as part of a management shake-up to turnaround lagging categories like apparel.

The company will focus on growth categories including entertainment, apparel, pets, and seasonal. Castro-Wright said the company's site-to-store program, a concept introduced in 2007 that allows consumers to circumvent shipping costs by sending online purchases to the store, has been "incredibly successful" with doubled online sales in one year.

"I know you've been hearing about how bad apparel is for us, and that is starting to turn around," Castro-Wright said.

So much for Wal-Mart's "always low prices" and their dedication to the environment. This little clip from CSR Asia explains that Wal-Mart is selling their reusable bags for 19.90 yuan (about $2.84) while other companies are selling bags for 8 or 9 yuan (about $1.14). The article goes on to state that, "an investigation by reporters showed that consumers are unlikely to swap to non-plastic bags if they costs this much." I guess Wal-Mart can benefit from Chinese sweatshops, and pollute the water and air of China, but if you want to buy a reuable bag there, it's going to cost you twice as much. I want to know how much it costs Wal-Mart to produce and stock those reusable bags?

We've discussed Wal-Mart's connection to sweatshops quite a bit recently. There was a tour where factory workers spoke about their experiences, and a report about shrimp processing, not to mention reports of labor abuses at a factory that makes Christmas ornaments. The list goes on.

An article in the Washington Monthly today, written by a former factory inspector, reveals that it's a systematic problem stemming from a corporate culture. He argues that factory inspections and codes of conduct can be incredibly effective, if the company takes them seriously. Wal-Mart, however, is far more interested in cheap labor, and the associated cheap goods.

Here are a few excerpts from the article, titled Is There Any Way to Stop Wal-Mart & Co. from Sweatshop Profiteering?

I remember one particularly bad factory in China. It produced outdoor tables, parasols, and gazebos, and the place was a mess. Work floors were so crowded with production materials that I could barely make my way from one end to the other. In one area, where metals were being chemically treated, workers squatted at the edge of steaming pools as if contemplating a sudden, final swim. The dormitories were filthy: the hallways were strewn with garbage—orange peels, tea leaves—and the only way for anyone to bathe was to fill a bucket with cold water. In a country where workers normally suppress their complaints for fear of getting fired, employees at this factory couldn't resist telling us the truth. "We work so hard for so little pay," said one middle-aged woman with undisguised anger. We could only guess how hard—the place kept no time cards. Painted in large characters on the factory walls was a slogan: "If you don't work hard today, look hard for work tomorrow." Inspirational, in a way.

But let's not be confined to praise. You may get the sense that I'm not Wal-Mart's biggest fan. You'd be right. I betray no confidence here, since Wal-Mart wasn't a client of ours while I was at my company. Nevertheless, I still got to visit plenty of its supplier factories. That's because any given factory usually has more than one customer, and during an audit we would always ask the bosses to name their other customers. Wal-Mart was often one of them. And its suppliers were among the worst I saw—dangerous, nasty, and poorly paid even by local (usually Chinese) measures. I noticed that Wal-Mart claimed to require factories to maintain decent labor standards—but why did it seem to think it could find them among the lowest bidders?

Now, I know about good and bad actors mostly because I saw them directly. But ordinary consumers searching on company Web sites—Walmart.com, Nike.com, etc.—can find out almost everything they need to know just sitting at their desks. For instance, just now I learned from Wal-Mart's latest report on sourcing that only 26 percent of its audits are unannounced. By contrast, of the inspections Target conducts, 100 percent are unannounced. That's a revealing difference. And companies that do what Nike does—prescreen, build long-term relationships, disclose producers—make a point of emphasizing that fact, and are relatively transparent. Companies that don't are more guarded. (When in doubt, doubt.)

If you hadn't figured it out already, Wal-Mart desperately wants your rebate check. And if you were skeptical about how much the retail giant wants that government money, you have new proof! Wal-Mart announced today that they will be cashing rebate checks for free and cutting prices on everyday goods. Wal-Mart's free cash checking also reveals that they are targeting the under banked population, the same group they were looking at with their new pre-paid store credit card. No wonder Wal-Mart praised the Bush Administration for the tax rebate plan, they knew they'd be getting a healthy chunk of the money.

Instead of taking your check to Wal-Mart, here some other ideas for spending your rebate money:

-Don't spend it, save it. Adding your money to a savings account means you can earn interest on it.

-Spend it locally. Take your money to a farmer's market, locally owned store, or restaurant. Money spend at these places will stay in your community instead of going to Bentonville or corporate headquarters.

-Pay down your credit card debt. With high interest rates on credit card debt, the less you have, the more money you get to keep.

The New York Times has a really interesting story about the environmental costs associated with the way we eat. It's easy to think of food as coming from the grocery store, but that tomato had to be grown somewhere, processed somewhere, and then sold to you. What the New York times reveals, is that often times the way we get the food from where it is grown to where it is eaten doesn't make much sense. In addition to being mind numbingly illogical, this system of eating is terrible for the environment because of the intense shipping needs. The article also suggests that Wal-Mart had a big part in creating this system. What is very clear from this article is what we've always said: it's great that Wal-Mart is selling environmentally friendly stuff instead of traditional, not environmentally friendly stuff, but Wal-Mart's model is itself unsustainable.

Here's the article from the New York Times:

Environmental Cost of Shipping Groceries Around the World

Cod caught off Norway is shipped to China to be turned into filets, then shipped back to Norway for sale. Argentine lemons fill supermarket shelves on the Citrus Coast of Spain, as local lemons rot on the ground. Half of Europe’s peas are grown and packaged in Kenya.
In the United States, FreshDirect proclaims kiwi season has expanded to “All year!” now that Italy has become the world’s leading supplier of New Zealand’s national fruit, taking over in the Southern Hemisphere’s winter.

Food has moved around the world since Europeans brought tea from China, but never at the speed or in the amounts it has over the last few years. Consumers in not only the richest nations but, increasingly, the developing world expect food whenever they crave it, with no concession to season or geography.

Increasingly efficient global transport networks make it practical to bring food before it spoils from distant places where labor costs are lower. And the penetration of mega-markets in nations from China to Mexico with supply and distribution chains that gird the globe — like Wal-Mart, Carrefour and Tesco — has accelerated the trend.

But the movable feast comes at a cost: pollution — especially carbon dioxide, the main global warming gas — from transporting the food.

Under longstanding trade agreements, fuel for international freight carried by sea and air is not taxed. Now, many economists, environmental advocates and politicians say it is time to make shippers and shoppers pay for the pollution, through taxes or other measures.

“We’re shifting goods around the world in a way that looks really bizarre,” said Paul Watkiss, an Oxford University economist who wrote a recent European Union report on food imports.

He noted that Britain, for example, imports — and exports — 15,000 tons of waffles a year, and similarly exchanges 20 tons of bottled water with Australia. More important, Mr. Watkiss said, “we are not paying the environmental cost of all that travel.”

Europe is poised to change that. This year the European Commission in Brussels announced that all freight-carrying flights into and out of the European Union would be included in the trading bloc’s emissions-trading program by 2012, meaning permits will have to be purchased for the pollution they generate.

The commission is negotiating with the global shipping organization, the International Maritime Organization, over various alternatives to reduce greenhouse gases. If there is no solution by year’s end, sea freight will also be included in Europe’s emissions-trading program, said Barbara Helferrich, a spokeswoman for the European Commission’s Environment Directorate. “We’re really ready to have everyone reduce — or pay in some way,” she said.

The European Union, the world’s leading food importer, has increased imports 20 percent in the last five years. The value of fresh fruit and vegetables imported by the United States, in second place, nearly doubled from 2000 to 2006.

Under a little-known international treaty called the Convention on International Civil Aviation, signed in Chicago in 1944 to help the fledgling airline industry, fuel for international travel and transport of goods, including food, is exempt from taxes, unlike trucks, cars and buses. There is also no tax on fuel used by ocean freighters.

Proponents say ending these breaks could help ensure that producers and consumers pay the environmental cost of increasingly well-traveled food.

The food and transport industries say the issue is more complicated. The debate has put some companies on the defensive, including Tesco, Britain’s largest supermarket chain, known as a vocal promoter of green initiatives.

Some of those companies say that they are working to limit greenhouse gases produced by their businesses but that the question is how to do it. They oppose regulation and new taxes and, partly in an effort to head them off, are advocating consumer education instead.

Tesco, for instance, is introducing a labeling system that will let consumers assess a product’s carbon footprint.

Some foods that travel long distances may actually have an environmental advantage over local products, like flowers grown in the tropics instead of in energy-hungry European greenhouses.

“This may be as radical for environmental consuming as putting a calorie count on the side of packages to help people who want to lose weight,” a spokesman for Tesco, Trevor Datson, said.

Better transportation networks have sharply reduced the time required to ship food abroad. For instance, improved roads in Africa have helped cut the time it takes for goods to go from farms on that continent to stores in Europe to 4 days, compared with 10 days not too many years ago.

And with far cheaper labor costs in African nations, Morocco and Egypt have displaced Spain in just a few seasons as important suppliers of tomatoes and salad greens to central Europe.

“If there’s an opportunity for cheaper production in terms of logistics or supply it will be taken,” said Ed Moorehouse, a consultant to the food industry in London, adding that some of these shifts also create valuable jobs in the developing world.

The economics are compelling. For example, Norwegian cod costs a manufacturer $1.36 a pound to process in Europe, but only 23 cents a pound in Asia.

The ability to transport food cheaply has given rise to new and booming businesses.

“In the past few years there have been new plantations all over the center of Italy,” said Antonio Baglioni, export manager of Apofruit, one of Italy’s largest kiwi exporters.

Kiwis from Sanifrutta, another Italian exporter, travel by sea in refrigerated containers: 18 days to the United States, 28 to South Africa and more than a month to reach New Zealand.

Some studies have calculated that as little as 3 percent of emissions from the food sector are caused by transportation. But Mr. Watkiss, the Oxford economist, said the percentage was growing rapidly. Moreover, imported foods generate more emissions than generally acknowledged because they require layers of packaging and, in the case of perishable food, refrigeration.

Britain, with its short growing season and powerful supermarket chains, imports 95 percent of its fruit and more than half of its vegetables. Food accounts for 25 percent of truck shipments in Britain, according to the British environmental agency, DEFRA.

Mr. Datson of Tesco acknowledged that there were environmental consequences to the increased distances food travels, but he said his company was merely responding to consumer appetites. “The offer and range has been growing because our customers want things like snap peas year round,” Mr. Datson said. “We don’t see our job as consumer choice editing.”

Global supermarket chains like Tesco and Carrefour, spreading throughout Eastern Europe and Asia, cater to a market for convenience foods, like washed lettuce and cut vegetables. They also help expand the reach of global brands.

Pringles potato chips, for example, are now sold in more than 180 countries, though they are manufactured in only a handful of places, said Kay Puryear, a spokeswoman for Procter & Gamble, which makes Pringles.

Proponents of taxing transportation fuel say it would end such distortions by changing the economic calculus.

“Food is traveling because transport has become so cheap in a world of globalization,” said Frederic Hauge, head of Norway’s environmental group Bellona. “If it was just a matter of processing fish cheaper in China, I’d be happy with it traveling there. The problem is pollution.”

The European Union has led the world in proposals to incorporate environmental costs into the price consumers pay for food.

Switzerland, which does not belong to the E.U., already taxes trucks that cross its borders.

In addition to bringing airlines under its emission-trading program, Brussels is also considering a freight charge specifically tied to the environmental toll from food shipping to shift the current calculus that “transporting freight is cheaper than producing goods locally,” the commission said.

The problem is measuring the emissions. The fact that food travels farther does not necessarily mean more energy is used. Some studies have shown that shipping fresh apples, onions and lamb from New Zealand might produce lower emissions than producing the goods in Europe, where — for example — storing apples for months would require refrigeration.

But those studies were done in New Zealand, and the food travel debate is inevitably intertwined with economic interests.

Last month, Tony Burke, the Australian minister for agriculture, fisheries and forestry, said that carbon footprinting and labeling food miles — the distance food has traveled — was “nothing more than protectionism.”

Shippers have vigorously fought the idea of levying a transportation fuel tax, noting that if some countries repealed those provisions of the Chicago Convention, it would wreak havoc with global trade, creating an uneven patchwork of fuel taxes.

It would also give countries that kept the exemption a huge trade advantage.

Some European retailers hope voluntary green measures like Tesco’s labeling — set to begin later this year — will slow the momentum for new taxes and regulations.

The company will begin testing the labeling system, starting with products like orange juice and laundry detergent.

Customers may be surprised by what they discover.

Box Fresh Organics, a popular British brand, advertises that 85 percent of its vegetables come from the British Midlands. But in winter, in its standard basket, only the potatoes and carrots are from Britain. The grapes are South African, the fennel is from Spain and the squash is Italian.

Today’s retailers could not survive if they failed to offer such variety, Mr. Moorehouse, the British food consultant, said.

“Unfortunately,” he said, “we’ve educated our customers to expect cheap food, that they can go to the market to get whatever they want, whenever they want it. All year. 24/7.”

Okay, so the title is a little Melodramatic, but in light of a recent article on CNNMoney, we can't quite figure out what's going on with Sam's Club and rice. Wal-Mart recently announced that they would limit sales of certain types of rice, presumably because there have been shortages reported around the world, and the price has, of late, exploded. Costco followed suit shortly after Sam's Club announced the 4 bag limit. But as of yet, no other grocery stores have limited rice sales. It raises a few questions. Was there really a reason to ration rice if, as this new article states, there is no real rice shortage? What prompted the ration; were people buying cart and carts of huge bags of rice? We don't quite get it, and we think Wal-Mart should explain.

Here's the full article from CNNMoney:

Most Grocery Chains Not Jumping On Buying-Limit Bandwagon

CHICAGO -(Dow Jones)- The move by some wholesale food outlets to restrict purchases of certain food staples caught the public's attention, but major supermarket chains aren't following suit, and food industry analysts say U.S. consumers shouldn't be worried about shortages.

Food prices have risen sharply this year, driven by increased global demand, drought and biofuel production. The March consumer price index reported food prices up 4.5% versus a year ago.

On Wednesday, Costco Wholesale Corp. (COST) indicated it had decided to limit bulk rice purchases in some stores. Likewise, Sam's Club, a division of Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (WMT), said it was limiting customers to four bags at a time of some types of rice.

However, the purchasing restrictions on staples like rice are limited to wholesale outlets, as several retail grocery store chains said Friday they weren't taking similar action.

Publix Super Markets Inc. (PUSH) has no plans to limit purchases of rice or any other items, said Dwaine Stevens, spokesman for the Florida-based grocery chain. Stevens called the possibility that the company would ever have to consider limits "not very likely at all."

Likewise, Food Lion LLC stores are "not limiting sales whatsoever," said spokeswoman Karen Peterson.

The Salisbury, N.C.-based grocery chain, which is a subsidiary of the Delhaize Group (DEG), maintains continuous contact with suppliers and hasn't heard anything from them to indicate rice purchase limits are necessary, she said.

While limits were placed on rice purchases at Sam's Club stores, spokeswoman Ashley Hardie said Wal-Mart's retail stores were not affected.

Safeway Inc. (SWY) and Kroger Co. (KR) were not immediately available for comment.

The Food Situation Is Not Dire - Industry

Ron Sterk, an editor at trade publication Milling and Baking News, said the food supply situation is not as dire as some have portrayed it. For instance, he rejected any comparison between the present situation and World War II.

"That's not a fair characterization," he said. "In World War II, there actually were food shortages."

That's not the case now, he said. Despite the actions of wholesale stores, there's no rice shortage "certainly not" in the U.S., Sterk said.

Sufficient supplies of other commodities such as wheat and rye are available, and prices for both are well off their peaks from earlier this year, he noted. For instance, Minneapolis Grain Exchange wheat prices hit $25 a bushel earlier this year, but forecasts for bigger crops this spring have pushed prices to around $11.20 a bushel.

"There's no doubt that wheat supplies are tight," Sterk said. "But no one's saying we're going to run out of wheat. It's just tight."

Bakers can also find the flour they need, "they just don't like paying what the price has shot up to," he said.

Tight Supply Doesn't Equal Shortage

There's no doubt grain supplies are tight. Wheat and rice supplies in the U.S and globally are at multi-decade lows and soybean supplies are also down sharply. Last year corn production was expanded to devote more acreage to ethanol production.

But it's not just biofuel usage that is lifting corn demand. Growing economies in China and India mean more sophisticated palates and demand for food there has grown. Livestock production continues to be the No. 1 user of corn in the U.S. Grain trade is dollar-based, and a weak dollar means greater buying power for foreign buyers, which has lifted U.S. agriculture exports.

Further, two years of bad weather in wheat-producing countries hammered output across the globe as demand rose. Poor rice harvests in Vietnam and other rice- producing countries combined with little advancement on acreage has limited global production.

Worldwide, demand for rice has outstripped demand for several years, said Bob Cummings, senior vice president of the USA Rice Federation, an industry group.

The U.S. rice industry is "confident there's enough rice in the U.S. to meet domestic demand as well the demand of our traditional export customers," Cummings said. But, he added, due to tight global supplies and higher production costs "it's fair to say that we don't see any slackening of cost pressure side." Cummings also said his group had not seen any across-the-board change in demand.

A significant factor in food costs is transportation. Crude oil prices are hovering just under $120 a barrel and the high energy costs reflected in manufacturing and transportation of packaged food items -- will sustain some level of inflation.

Consumers paid about $1.78 for a 20-ounce loaf of white bread in the first quarter of 2008, about 20% more than a year earlier, according to American Farm Bureau's market basket survey. During the same period, the farm-gate wheat cost reflected in that loaf's price increased to 7%, or 14 cents, from 4%, or 6 cents, a year earlier.

Consumers who are stocking up at wholesale outlets simply might be seeing a bargain.

"Most Americans have never really experienced absolute hunger; it's more likely a case of basic level arbitrage -- buy it while it's still cheap," said Michael Swanson, an agricultural economist at Wells Fargo. "Don't confuse disappearance (of supplies) with demand."

It's easy, here in America, to buy things without thinking about where they came from, how they were made, and what it took to get them to you. Every once in a while, though, we get a glimpse into a supply chain, and the glimpse we get can be disturbing.

A new report by the Solidarity Center found that Wal-Mart and other major retailers are selling shrimp processed in facilities with brutal, slave like conditions. Here's an excerpt from the CNN story:

The center's 40-page report found sexual and physical abuse, debt bondage, child labor and unsafe working conditions are common in Thailand and Bangladesh's shrimp processing factories, and that Thai plants often use trafficked workers.

"There's so much slime on the floor you can hardly stand up, and that just keeping your bearing and footing while you are trying to do work that involves using sharp knives," Ellie Larson, the executive director of the Solidarity Center, told CNN.

"They are treated in ways I'm sure most American people think went by in the days of slavery. In fact that's the kind of conditions these workers are engaged in -- slave conditions," Larson said.

CNN reports that Wal-Mart was the only company to respond to the story, and their response leaves a lot to be desired. In it, the Wal-Mart spokesperson writes "Although we have not seen the Solidarity Center's report, we are working with our suppliers to investigate the allegations shared by CNN. We're not aware of any issues in our supply chain,"

With all the negative press Wal-Mart has been getting lately, wouldn't you think they'd try as hard as they could not to have their name linked with slave labor? Of course, they'd have to do more than fix the issues with their Shrimp supply. Many of the factories Wal-Mart uses around the world have similar issues that Wal-Mart has not addressed. No, Wal-Mart is too interested in the low costs associated with using children and trafficked slaves to make the goods they sell to fix the massive problem.

Read the full CNN article here, and check out the Solidarity Center's Web Site where you can download the full report.

There has been quite a stir since the front page story in the Wall Street Journal about Flagler Production, Wal-Mart's former production company that taped nearly 30 years of private meetings and events. A few nights ago Dan Rather Reports used footage from Flagler for an inside look at Wal-Mart's relationship to Washington. Check out the video:

You know there's something not quite right when Wal-Mart begins to ration things. There were a few stories today that caught my eye, and one was about Wal-Mart rationing rice. Here's an excerpt from The Blue Marble Blog, Mother Jones Magazine's blog:

Because of rising rice prices around the globe and worries about shortages, the biggest big box has announced that it will ration long grain, jasmine, and basmati rice, allowing customers to purchase only four bags per visit.

Since the beginning of 2008, rice prices have risen 68 percent worldwide. This is one of the main reasons that food riots have broken out recently all over the developing world.

Another Blogger, this one at the Houston Chronicle noted that,

Last night, I noticed that the shelves in Walmart have not been re-supplied from the weekend madness...I asked a couple of employees what was going on. As near as they could figure, fewer supply trucks are coming to the store. When they do come, they are filled to the brim. They are stuffed in order to make fewer trips to the store and save money because of the high diesel costs. In other words, Walmart is trying to make the supply chain as efficient as possible to save money.

It's not totally clear why Wal-Mart is rationing rice, and cutting back on stocking their shelves. One contributing factor is almost certainly Ethanol, which Wal-Mart has started advertising. Likely, rising fuel costs are also to blame, and since Wal-Mart's 7,200 semi tractor-trailers used 6.3 billion gallons of diesel fuel last year, that's no small cost. Once can only hope that Wal-Mart's obsession with the bottom line won't lead to hardship for the poor and hungry.

Today we learn that in 2007 Wal-Mart's CEO Lee Scott made a whooping $29.7 million including his salary ($1.4 million), stocks (valued at $19 million) and $8.4 million in other compensation. His total compensation is up 27% from 2006. Now assuming Lee Scott works a full time schedule, he made roughly $14,279 an hour. Considering that an average Wal-Mart worker's hourly wage is $10.84, Lee Scott is making roughly 1,317 times more than the average associate. So the next time you hear that Wal-Mart 'can't afford' to give their workers a raise, or better benefits, or to pay a few cents more for safe goods, think about the 14 thousand dollars an hour they are paying Lee Scott.

Here's the article from the Associated Press via CNN Money:

Wal-Mart CEO gets $29.7 million for 2007, up 27 percent

NEW YORK (Associated Press) - Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Chief Executive Lee Scott received compensation valued at $29.7 million in 2007, up 27 percent in a year when company profits rose 12 percent, according to a regulatory filing Tuesday by the world's largest retailer.

Scott was paid a salary of $1.4 million, up from $1.3 million in 2006. The bulk of his compensation came in options and restricted stock that the Bentonville, Ark.-based retailer valued at $19 million when they were granted.

The CEO also received $8.4 million in non-equity incentive plan compensation and $431,446 in other compensation, including $101,208 for corporate air travel and $64,874 in a deferred compensation plan.

Wal-Mart reported net income of $12.73 billion for the past fiscal year, which ended January 31. Net sales totaled $374.5 billion, up 8.6 percent from the year before.

The Associated Press calculations of total pay include executives salary, bonus, incentives, perks, above-market returns on deferred compensation and the estimated value of stock options and awards granted during the year.

The calculations don't include changes in the present value of pension benefits, and they often differ from the totals companies list in the summary compensation table of proxy statements filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Wal-Mart listed Scott's total compensation as $31.6 million.

When the story broke about Flagler Productions, the small company that taped Wal-Mart meetings and events for nearly 30 years, it created quite a stir. Newpapers, blogs, networks and cable news all picked up the story of Wal-Mart firing Flagler for no reason. Wal-Mart then attempted to buy the tapes, but offered so little money that Flagler decided to start selling the tapes to anyone who wanted them. Now, according to HDNet, Dan Rather will air some of the Flagler video tonight on Dan Rather Reports. The segment will show how Wal-Mart bought meetings with influential lawmakers in order to weigh in on issues that might affect their business. Tune in at 8 to get an inside look at Wal-Mart's executives.

Here's the Press Release from HDNet:

DALLAS, April 21 /PRNewswire/ -- Wal-Mart is the largest corporation in the world, and this Tuesday's episode of "Dan Rather Reports" on HDNet will present recently obtained videos of corporate executives soliciting money for their Political Action Committee.

For the first time on television, "Dan Rather Reports: Wal-Mart Goes to Washington" will feature segments of these videotapes recently acquired from Flagler Productions. The production company was hired by Wal-Mart to film internal meetings for more than twenty years. They were suddenly dismissed in 2006.

What the tapes reveal is how Wal-Mart used money to influence politicians in the company's favor on pending legislation, like the Patients' Bill of Rights. It is a stunning look inside a large company using money, lobbyists and Political Action Committees to gain valuable access to politicians in Washington.

"How many times have we heard lawmakers deny that money given to my campaign [gets] you a meeting with me," said Bill Hogan of the Center for Public Integrity in an interview with Rather about the tapes. "What we find in the videos, at least from Wal-Mart's perspective, that's exactly what the money does. It gets them a 90-minute meeting with a U.S. Senator."

Tuesday's episode also presents a report from India, where 167 million people -- the equivalent of half the population of the United States -- are routinely being raped, abused even murdered.

They are called the Dalits -- or the "broken people" -- and all across India they are born into a centuries old caste system that even today still assures a lifetime of poverty and discrimination.

Dalit women especially experience oppression and brutality on an unimaginable scale.

"Dan Rather Reports: Wal-Mart Goes To Washington" premieres on HDNet, Tuesday, April 22 at 8:00 p.m. ET with a re-air at 11:00 p.m. ET to accommodate West Coast Prime Time.

It wasn't too long ago that Finland decided to drop Wal-Mart from their Government Pension Fund because of ethical concerns. Now it seems that Sweden has put Wal-Mart on a 'watch list' over ethical problems, along with Chevron and Ferrovial.

Here's the article from Thomson Investment Management News:

LONDON (Thomson IM) - Sweden's four buffer pension funds with 900 billion kroner in assets announced on Monday that Wal-Mart, Chevron and Ferrovial have been placed on their watch list over ethical, corporate governance and social (ESG) issues.

The combined Ethical Council of the AP1, AP2, AP3 and AP4 funds has also sold out of Singapore Technology Engineering over its manufacture of anti-personnel land mines.

The AP funds are all signatories of the UN Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI), through the Ethical Council. Set up at the beginning of last year, the council met eight times in 2007 to screen the funds' 3,500 holdings and selected 14 companies for their violation of ESG standards.

Once the council becomes aware of an infringement, it intensifies its scrutiny and starts engaging with the company, filing suggestions and voting at AGMs. If these measures do not lead to the desired result each fund decides whether to sell the holding in question.

The 2007 vetting process has resulted in the exclusion of Singapore Technology Engineering, although the council said it will keep in touch with the company once a year. The AP funds want the company to stop manufacturing anti-personnel mines.

Sharolyn Choy, spokeswoman for the Singaporean company said its primary client is the Singapore defence force. 'Beyond Singapore, we not only observe all UN sanctions, but also abide by any treaty obligations to which Singapore is a signatory,' she said.

The council said it has removed from its watch list energy company Halliburton Corporation after the company, once run by US vice president Dick Cheney, sold Kellogg, Brown and Root, a subsidiary at the centre of a bribery investigation in Iraq and Algeria.

Energy company Chevron is still on the watch list for allegations of human rights violations in Nigeria and environment degradation in Ecuador. The council is waiting for the company's report on its voluntary framework on security and human rights and is lobbying for an environmental conscious extraction in the South American country.

On Grupo Ferrovial, which includes airport operator BAA, the joint Ethical Council has requested the company preserve a protected area as part of a road construction project in Poland and strengthen its risk analysis for the assessment of environmental risks on similar projects.

PetroChina, which the Dutch pension scheme for healthcare Pensioenfonds Zorg en Welzij excluded from its investments earlier this year, is also on the watch list for pollution through discharges of chemicals in the river Songhua.

To tackle workers' rights issues at retailer Wal-Mart, the council presented a resolution at the company's 2007 annual general meeting to request a comparison of Wal-Mart's guidelines with international standards.

The resolution was supported by 4 percent of the votes, qualifying for presentation at the next general meeting.

AP2 on its own has already attempted a lengthy engagement with Wal-Mart before exasperation prompted it to sell down its entire stake in September 2006. The fund's Head of Corporate Governance Carl Rosen said at the time that the volume of accusations against the company had led him to believe it was 'impossible to say that there have been no systemic abuses'.

AP1, AP3 and AP4 still hold Wal-Mart stock.

For companies on the watch list, disinvestment is considered to be a last resort, when discussion has failed.

In 2007, the council also said it had visited China to address workers rights and pollution issues more broadly. 'It is quite clear that foreign customers and investors play an important role in accelerating China's development in these areas,' it said.

It is easy to forget that Wal-Mart's famous "low prices" are in fact a product of the company exploiting the workers who make the products they sell. We have heard about Wal-Mart paying next to nothing for labor, demanding 6 or 7 day work weeks and 12 hour shifts, and blatant abuses of labor laws and workers. It's not huge news that Wal-Mart uses such oppressive and draconian tactics to make their goods, but it isn't everyday you get to hear about sweatshops first hand from a worker.

A recent article from Press & Guide Newspapers highlights a speaking tour where 2 laborers talk about their experience in such conditions. Savin Phal was paid $1.08 to $2.16 per day working at a Wal-Mart clothing factory. She made that much until she got fired for trying to start a union. It is a humanizing example of a monstrous system, and a reminder of the costs others pay for the low prices Wal-Mart offers.

Here's an excerpt from the story:

Groups discuss alleged ills of Wal-Mart purchasing

DEARBORN - Giant purchasers like Wal-Mart should implement policies that protect the rights of workers, rather than abuse them, two sweatshop workers told several people Monday night at a town hall meeting at Dearborn's Ford Community & Performing Arts Center....

Savin Phal, from Cambodia, told the crowd she is paid $1.08 to $2.16 per day for the clothing she makes. She said she was fired, along with 18 other women, from her job sewing clothing for Wal-Mart because she tried to form a union at her factory.

"I would like to ask Wal-Mart and people in the U.S. to put pressure on the owner of this factory, King's Land, to negotiate with our union and respect Cambodian labor laws and our rights," Phal said as she described being forced to work overtime, and earning wages too low to cover basic living expenses.

Wal-Mart has, for quite some time now, been making a lot of noise about the environment. Between putting out a 'sustainability' report showing that their carbon emissions have actually increased and CEO Lee Scott admitting that the company is not green, Wal-Mart has found time to put out several ads. The ads seem, at least to me, a pretty obvious appeal for people to buy more stuff from Wal-Mart, (albeit environmentally friendly stuff) which is the theme to Wal-Mart's greenwash. AdFreak also points out that it is simply not a good ad. Here's what they have to say:

Shop at Wal-Mart, or the Earth bites it

I've heard people complaining about these new "green" ads for Wal-Mart, but you really have to see them yourself for the full effect. Sure, Wal-Mart’s been talking about cutting down on its planet-raping for a few years now, but is this how you sell it? With each preachy TV spot, the call to action is, “If every Wal-Mart shopper, all 200 million of us, bought one of these, then the Earth would cease its inexorable descent into a strip-mined wasteland.” So, instead of showing that it’s following through on serious, long-term corporate commitments to eco-friendly practices, the company is just tossing the job back in the consumer’s lap. The ads get extra demerits for smug delivery, forced natural backdrops and a blatant rip-off of Israel Kamakawiwo’ole’s beautiful “Somewhere Over the Rainbow.” Check out the other two spots after the jump. Via Ads of the World.

News about Wal-Mart's dangerous products may have been quieter recently, but that doesn't mean the problem has gone away. Far from it! Today the Consumer Product Safety Commission announced that Wal-Mart was recalling their "Hip Charm" key chains. The key chains are made in China and contains high levels of lead. This is just one more product on the long list of dangerous, Chinese made goods that Wal-Mart sells. The list includes Christmas tree lights, dinner plates, toys, baby bottles, rattles, and much more. The recall highlights the dangerous relationship between Wal-Mart and China. Not only are there dangerous products getting in to American homes that Wal-Mart seems not to care about, but we are also losing thousands of jobs. There are also the workers in China to consider. They are probably working in sweatshop conditions and dealing with lead to boot. If it's dangerous just to buy it and put it in your pocket, imagine how dangerous it must be to make these key chains and handle thousands everyday.

Click here for the official recall announcement.

According to 660 News from Alberta, Wal-Mart is pulling BPA plastic from stores in Canada. This is a dangerous toxic chemical found in, of all things, baby bottles, pacifiers, children's cups and the like. Now one might think that Wal-Mart would pull these dangerous products off of the shelves in America too, especially with the recent recall of baby bottles that contain BPA. Instead, Wal-Mart has done nothing here in the US. They only pulled the stuff from Canadian shelves because of a potential law declaring the plastic toxic. Yet another example of Wal-Mart's disregard for the safety of its customers. If they know what products contain this chemical, and they know its dangerous, they should pull them from all their stores everywhere!

Wal-Mart latest to yank BPA plastics

The biggest player in the retail market is moving to pull dozens of products that contain Bisphenol A.

Wal-Mart says it's immediately stopping the sale of select baby bottles, sippy cups, pacifiers, food containers and water bottles containing BPA.

The Forzani Group, HBC and Canadian Tire have already started to pull water bottles from their shelves.

The lining inside tin cans and water bottles are the most common places to find BPA.

Mae Burrows, with the Labour Alliance Environmental Society, tells 660News there is an easy way to tell if your water bottle should be tossed out or not. Suspect items should have a number seven in the recycling triangle at the bottom of the bottle.

If the number is two, four or five, you should be okay. But, just the same, Burrows says you shouldn't microwave plastics, or put them in the dishwasher.

If the federal government does declare BPA a dangerous chemical, Canada would become the first country to do so.

There was speculation awhile ago that Bharti stores, Wal-Mart's partner in India, would drop the Wal-Mart name because of protests against the retail giant, and organized resistance to the international company. It seems the Indian people, much like folks in Japan (where Wal-Mart isn't doing well), feel it is important to shop locally. Today, several Bharti stores did open, and the Wal-Mart name was nowhere to be seen. We'll see how big of a role Wal-Mart will play in the future of Bharti, but right now, it looks like the people have them running a bit scared. Good for the Indian people!

Here's article from Daily News and Analysis:

No Wal-Mart seen in low-key Bharti launch

NEW DELHI: You may not get to shop at Wal-Mart, after all.
The Bharti Group made a rather low-key entry in the retail sector on Wednesday by opening three neighbourhood format stores in Ludhiana.

Spread over 2500-4000 square feet and stocked with most daily use items, they do not refer to ‘Wal-Mart’ anywhere. Instead, they are called ‘Easy Day’.

So for now, the partnership between Bharti and Wal-Mart appears to be restricted to wholesale cash & carry format, which means selling to other retailers and providing back end support to Bharti’s front-end stores.

Wal-Mart’s cash & carry stores are slated for launch only by the end of the year but the retailer has provided most of the retail expertise - such as information technology back-up, retail practices and training guidelines - for Easy Day stores. Then, Bharti’s low-key retail entry prompted some experts to ask whether this was a deliberate strategy to deflect any protests.

Many big corporate houses, Reliance Industries prominent among them, have faced the music after launching front end retail stores with much fanfare.

Perhaps taking a cue from these incidents, Bharti was careful to announce that Easy Day stores would employ people from the local communities in Ludhiana and would be trained at the Bharti Academy of Retail set up specifically for the purpose.

A company spokesperson brushed aside any suggestions of protest apprehensions, saying this was a “soft launch” and the consumer response was “phenomenal” on the first day itself.

Easy Day stores stock personal care products, stationery, household articles, hosiery items, daily-need groceries including staples, processed foods, bakery and dairy products, meat and poultry and fresh produce.

Though there was no word on how Bharti has priced its wares at Easy Day, Wal-Mart’s reputation of driving down prices is well-known and the Giant of Bentonville always works on “Every Day Low Prices” concept.

It remains to be seen whether Bharti is as successful as its partner at offering products at the lowest possible price points.

Al Norman wrote this article in response to the news today that Wal-Mart will be partnering with Michael Bloomberg and Mayors Against Illegal Guns, which he founded. Apparently, Wal-Mart will now be taping and storing video transactions gun purchases, and denying the sale of a second gun to people who committed a crime with the first gun they bought at Wal-Mart. Al Norman suspects the motive for this move is to gain favor with Bloomberg on its way to breaking in to New York City. It is also possible that Wal-Mart has a new found desire to suck up to the government, what with their audits of State Capitols, and Lee Scott's political rhetoric not to mention officially praising President Bush's economic stimulus plan and announcing their own'stimulus package'

Here's the full story from the Huffington Post:

Wal-Mart has often found itself on the wrong end of a gun.

The company sells more firearms than any retailer on the planet, but this week Wal-Mart took aim at its own lax guns sales policies---and hit the target with some powerful potential political allies.

Wal-Mart told the media that it has joined New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, in an initiative called The Responsible Firearms Retailer Partnership. Wal-Mart pledged to implement new gun sale rules at less than one-third of its American stores. The retailer said it will create a new record and taping system for guns that are subsequently used to commit a crime. If the gun purchaser returns to Wal-Mart to buy another firearm, the system would warn the clerk not to make the sale. The system would also allow the police to view the tapes as part of a crime investigation. Wal-Mart said it would also institute tougher background checks for its "associates" who work in the firearms department. Wal-Mart admitted that the new policies would cost the company money. "The costs are, we think, part of what it takes to be responsible. Everything is not pain-free," the company's spokesman told the Associated Press.

Wal-Mart has had its own troubled history with guns. For example, in January of 2005, an investigation by the California Attorney General's office revealed that Wal-Mart allegedly violated the state's gun laws 2,891 times over a three year period. Wal-Mart illegally sold a gun to someone in California 2.6 times everyday from 2000 to 2003. The violations included selling to 23 people prohibited from owning guns, selling guns before waiting for a criminal background check, failing to identify the buyer's identity, and allowing people to make "straw purchases" on behalf of another person prohibited from owning guns. Wal-Mart violations of gun laws were so bad, the state--at taxpayer expense--set up a special training program for Wal-Mart workers to get them to follow state law. Apparently that training misfired. State agents found so many violations at numerous stores, that Wal-Mart eventually decided to stop selling guns in California. There are only two other states where Wal-Mart doesn't sell guns--New Jersey and Hawaii. Under the terms of the settlement with the California Attorney General, Wal-Mart paid $14.5 million to the state, and spent at least $4.5 million to comply with state and federal regulations, plus $3 million for a public relations campaign promoting firearm safety and to encourage other gun dealers to do what Wal-Mart failed to do: check the ages of people buying guns. The California AG said that compliance with the laws was necessary to keep "ex-felons, mentally ill and other prohibited people" from getting weapons.

If this California lawsuit is any indicator, similar violations could be happening all across the nation at thousands of Wal-Mart stores, and people who are not supposed to be buying guns, are walking out of superstores armed with Wal-Mart guns.

The National Rifle Association took immediate aim at the new Wal-Mart policy. The group's CEO called Wal-Mart's move "a public relations stunt". "I honestly think it's a corporation trying to curry favor with politicians as opposed to doing anything meaningful about stopping crime," said Wayne LaPierre of the NRA.
And he's probably right. Wal-Mart, after all, needs Michael Bloomberg strongly on their side if they are to have any hope of breaking into the Manhattan market. The retailer's efforts to site a store in Manhattan have been shot down.

"We didn't pressure them," Mayor Bloomberg told the media, " they're doing it because they think it's the responsible thing to do." No, they did it to declare a cease fire with the Founders of Mayors Against Illegal Guns---Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Tom Menino---the latter an outspoken critic of Wal-Mart who kept them out of Downtown Crossing.

Wal-Mart assured the NRA that it is not getting out of the lucrative business of selling guns. That includes selling guns to people who should not own them. Like every decision at Wal-Mart, the only behavior that is responsible is behavior that swells the bottom line. On that subject, Wal-Mart has deadly aim.

Shortly after a lawsuit over Wal-Mart's secret life insurance policies was thrown out because of a technicality, a class action suit has taken its place. Two husbands of deceased former Wal-Mart employees claim the company benefited off of their spouses' deaths, and more than a hundred others. As it turns out, Wal-Mart made around $9.6 million on 135 or so claims in the state of Florida alone. We don't know how much the company made from the 350,000 policies it took out nationally between 1993 and 2000, but if Florida is any indication, it is a lot. It's hard to think of a more disgusting thing to profit on than your employee's deaths.

Here's the story from the Tampa Tribune:

Wal-Mart Got Millions From Workers' Life Insurance Policies

TAMPA – Wal-Mart received more than $9 million from life insurance it took out on 132 rank-and-file employees in Florida, the company says in a federal court filing.

The company has been sued by the husbands of two deceased former Wal-Mart employees in Tampa and Pasco County who alleged the company profited from the policies it secretly took out on store employees.

Last month, U.S. District Judge James Moody granted a motion by Wal-Mart and dismissed a federal lawsuit by Richard Armatrout, of Tampa, because the value of the life insurance policy on his late wife, Karen, was $72,820, below the $75,000 threshold for a matter to be heard in federal court.

Anticipating Moody's ruling, Armatrout's attorney, Michael Myers of Texas, filed a suit in state court in Pasco County with Armatrout and another plaintiff, Wayne Atkinson, whose late wife, Rita, worked for Wal-Mart.

Now, Wal-Mart is asking that the new lawsuit be moved to federal court. Noting that the plaintiffs want the lawsuit to be a class action, the company is now arguing that the total value of the suit is actually more than $9 milllion.

Wal-Mart included in its court filing a settlement demand from the plaintiffs, seeking to settle the case for about $7.2 million, 75 percent of the $9.6 million life insurance policy proceeds they claimed Wal-Mart received.

The settlement demand included a list of deceased former Wal-Mart employees whose policies the plaintiffs said the company collected.

Wal-Mart says in its new court filing that it was able to confirm most of what the plai