Wal-Mart & the Sins of Our Fathers
"Judge King wrote that Ms. Braun had recounted the humiliating experience of soiling herself while at work because she had not been permitted time to use the restroom."
I'm hoping that the recent ruling by a Minnesota state judge, who found that Wal-Mart violated state laws on wages more than two million times, marks the end of a culture that put profits ahead of people. Wal-Mart has worked hard to change, but the past still takes a long time to go away. And while I like to cheer Wal-Mart's progress, the facts of this case are an astounding reminder of just how horribly big companies can behave. As reported yesterday in the New York Times:
- Wal-Mart Stores could face more than $2 billion in fines.
- Judge Robert King Jr. also ruled that Wal-Mart owed $6.5 million to 56,000 current and former employees because of contractual violations, including a failure to give workers promised rest breaks at least 1.5 million times.
- Four women filed the lawsuit in September 2001, contending that Wal-Mart managers had often made employees work off the clock and denied them meal breaks and rest breaks that were promised in the employee handbook.
- In Pennsylvania in 2006, a jury awarded $78 million in a lawsuit against Wal-Mart over rest breaks and off-the-clock work. Last year, a judge increased that award to $188 million to include damages, interest and lawyers’ fees.
- In a 2005 verdict in California, Wal-Mart was ordered to pay $172 million for making employees miss meal breaks. The company has appealed both verdicts.
Altogether, Wal-Mart faces more than 70 lawsuits, filed throughout the country, in which employees have accused the company of making them work off the clock or miss required breaks. Cheating people who make so little is pretty unconscionable. But to learn that the practice was part of a national strategy, well, that’s a sad statement on big business.










Back in Montreal in the early nineties I worked at Wal-Mart for a month or so. Since I was an MBA student, I made it my second duty to watch management practices at the famous retailer. In human terms those were peripatetic, especially the treatment of part-timers - who were the majority of employees working full-time weeks.
Now that it is abundantly clear that Wal-Mart's policy was to cheat on its employees, the picture accompanying this article fits its image really well.
But Wal-Mart tries to remake this outward image by changing its logo to "sunnier" and more modern one (can be seen here, and also by placing new stores into more architecturally attractive, non-box-like buildings.
Whether the facelift will work is hard to say. Back in the nineties the machine-like consistency and the (somewhat, sometimes) lower prices attracted to Wal-Mart tens of millions of economically-pinched consumers. I think that the broadening of stagflation in the country, just announced by Warren Buffett, might drive consumers to Wal-Mart far more than any "green" or "friendly" imagery, thus, in a sense, rewarding the monster company for still being what it is, new logo or not.
The greatest irony is that Wal-Mart's image could be changed in a few month if only its brass dropped its top-down, inhumane approach to dealing with its own people: after all, Wal-Mart has about a million of employees in the United States alone, and if a million people suddenly started speaking well about their own company (right now they don't) – that'd be an awful lot of good word of mouth circulating around month after month, year after year…
Andrei Vorobiev