Wal-Mart Rethinks Its Move on Deborah Shank
Reader Comments
It's a question of fairness
The whole point of this article was to take a step away from Deborah Shank's case and look at the problem more broadly. It doesn't matter whether you like or dislike WalMart -- the issue here is a legal one and I for one agree with an earlier comment (Disabled Veteran Jim of AZ) that said WalMart should not be entitled to any part of her settlement because they did not join her lawsuit or file their own suit seperately. In my opinion, what would seem to be "fair" is that the victim have the first opportunity to sue the offender (the trucking company) and then any other entity that incurred an economic loss (Wal-Mart, her health insurer) should be next in line to attempt to recoup its costs. In this case, the trucking company only had $1 million in liability insurance so if Shank was awarded the entire $1 million that would leave WalMart with either nothing or a long drawn-out lawsuit to go after the trucking company's other assets/profits -- I find this to be fair because health insurance is inherently based on risk, so WalMart knows the risks of offering insurance at all. Of course this money has to come from somewhere, but rather than raise health insurance premiums WalMart could easily find other areas to absorb this loss (profits seems the obvious one). If the victim needs the settlement money in order to cover related bills and post-accident care then they should always be given the first opportunity to sue. And for those who defend WalMart's actions, please realize that if Shank had been left penniless she would inevitably have had to depend on a public program (Medicaid, Medicare) to pay for her care in which case taxpayers will pick up the tab -- which alternative do you prefer, having WalMart (her employer and health insurer) pay for her healthcare, or the American public? Seems like a no-brainer to me.
I can't believe some of you people....
This lady was in an automobile away from work. Walmart paid for her care that resulted from this accident. This lady sued and won ONE MILLION dollars for said medical bills and whatever else was judged. Walmart should get back the money it put out for her treatment. Sometimes life really sucks for us, but WalMart has EVERY RIGHT to expect this money back.
And you people that are so anti Walmart...where the heck do you think Target and most of the other stores purchase their products....and who do you think makes these products???? Are you so easily swayed in your stupidity????? Do some freaking research before you spew your left wing liberal KAKA about things you have no clue about. Does Target pay top dollar for minimum wage workers? Does Target give away overtime???
Does WalMart do it the best way possible??? They must because they OWN the retail WORLD.
To Chris of Az
You make some great points, but what do we do? We get angry at Wal-Mart because many of us (low to moderate income folks) feel as though it's unfair to have to pay money from a settlement to an insurance company to which we've been paying.
Yes, employers provide insurance; but we pay. Doesn't it come from our paychecks? Even if we had to pay on our own; we can't? So...
Perhaps blaming Wal-Mart is unfounded. What can we do? We certainly can't expect people making $8.00/hour to full pay for insurance.
Lawyers
The Wal-mart issue aside; I have a problem with the fact that the lawyers/legal firm involved collected over 1/2 the million dollar settlement. It is amazing to me that no one has said anything about what the legal arena charges if you need to stand up and defend your rights!
Walmart is an outrage playing itself off as beneficial!
Check out this link below about how Walmart pays it's employees wages well below the poverty rate! It all makes me sick!
http://wakeupwalmart.com/facts/
Wal-Mart forces employees to work off-the-clock
Wal-Mart's 2006 Annual Report reported that the company faced 57 wage and hour lawsuits. Major lawsuits have either been won or are working their way through the legal process in states such as California, Indiana, Minnesota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Washington. [Wal-Mart Annual Report 2006]
In December 2005, a California court ordered Wal-Mart to pay $172 million in damages for failing to provide meal breaks to nearly 116,000 hourly workers as required under state law. Wal-Mart appealed the case. [The New York Times, December 23, 2005]
A Pennsylvania court, also in December 2005, approved a class-action lawsuit against Wal-Mart Stores Inc. by employees in Pennsylvania who say the company pressured them to work off the clock. The class could grow to include nearly 150,000 current or former employees. [Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, January 12, 2006 ]
In Pennsylvania, the lead plaintiff alleges she worked through breaks and after quitting time — eight to 12 unpaid hours a month, on average — to meet Wal-Mart's work demands. "One of Wal-Mart's undisclosed secrets for its profitability is its creation and implementation of a system that encourages off-the-clock work for its hourly employees," Dolores Hummel, who worked at a Sam's Club in Reading from 1992-2002, charged in her suit. [Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, January 12, 2006 ]
YOUR TAX DOLLARS
Your tax dollars pay for Wal-Mart's greed
The estimated total amount of federal assistance for which Wal-Mart employees were eligible in 2004 was $2.5 billion. [The Hidden Price We All Pay For Wal-Mart, A Report By The Democratic Staff Of The Committee On Education And The Workforce, 2/16/04]
One 200-employee Wal-Mart store may cost federal taxpayers $420,750 per year. This cost comes from the following, on average:
$36,000 a year for free and reduced lunches for just 50 qualifying Wal-Mart families.
$42,000 a year for low-income housing assistance.
$125,000 a year for federal tax credits and deductions for low-income families.
$100,000 a year for the additional expenses for programs for students.
$108,000 a year for the additional federal health care costs of moving into state children's health insurance programs (S-CHIP)
$9,750 a year for the additional costs for low income energy assistance.
[The Hidden Price We All Pay For Wal-Mart, A Report By The Democratic Staff Of The Committee On Education And The Workforce, 2/16/04]
Health care subsidies compared to executive compensation
Excluding his salary of $1.2 million, in 2004 Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott made around $22 million in bonuses, stock awards, and stock options in 2004.
This $22 million could reimburse taxpayers in 3 states where Wal-Mart topped the list of users of state-sponsored health care programs, covering more than 15,000 Wal-Mart employees and dependents. [Wal-Mart Proxy Statement and News Articles GA, CT, AL].
Your tax dollars subsidize Wal-Mart's growth
The first ever national report on Wal-Mart subsidies documented at least $1 billion in subsidies from state and local governments.
A Wal-Mart official stated that "it is common" for the company to request subsidies "in about one-third of all [retail] projects." This would suggest that over a thousand Wal-Mart stores have been subsidized. ["Shopping For Subsidies: How Wal-Mart Uses Taxpayer Money to Finance Its Never-Ending Growth," Good Job First, May 2004]
Tax Breaks for the Rich
Where do Walmart's philanthropic 'gifts' come from? From negotiating tax breaks from the government. Tax breaks that being about the inevitable tax increases on the 'regular folks'. Of course, not all that cash comes back. Walmart takes a big chunk. Whenever Walmart opens a store, they pit local communities against each other so that they can get access to land below market price coupled with tax abatements. There is no such thing as a free lunch, yes, and when your real estate taxes rise, look no further than your local big box stores, which have cut themselves a serious piece of the government revenue cake: below-market land, 20 year tax abatements (partial or full), and often, they are allowed to hold on to that sale tax you thought you were paying to the government. Wake up, people. The new business of business is to subvert the market and diversify revenue the revenue stream to include your tax money
sweatshops?
Let's put aside this tragic event that almost took the life of an outstanding woman and an even more outstanding family... because it seems that this has become a hate post against wal-mart, lawyers, and corporate america...
let's remind ourselves that we live in one of the greatest countries in the world and those of us lucky enough to support ourselves and have a computer/a voice should be looking up to wal-mart's standard of giving back. i'm not saying that they couldn't do more(and they could be) but realistically they are giving back more than i'm sure at least half of our posters here. i, myself am a college student and feel fortunate to live in a system where everyone's opinion counts. and i can luckily get an education to hopefully prosper this great world i live in.
but back to why i decided to reply. sweatshops? you're kidding me? let's remind ourselves that some products sold at our local wal-marts(and alot of other retail chains) are not allowed to be made in our country. let's also remind ourselves of the amount of imported products from other countries that allow wal-mart to sell its products at a low cost. i say GOOD FOR THEM to outsource to another country. it allows those less fortunate to make a dollar and feed their family. ultimately a dollar might not be a meal to me and you, but it might feed a family of four for a week in a 3rd world country. should they be paid more? well of course! but in this system, wages are reflected by costs of living(as a previous poster had stated)...if our cost of living were $20 a month for a home and a loaf of bread was 10cents, well i bet i would only make $30 at most a month just to make ends meet. i certainly wouldn't have a car. a bike seems much more cost efficient in that standard of living.
so again i say. GOOD FOR THEM. if a 7 year old boy works a 24 hour shift to make some money to survive, well i dont blame him. i would as well. and you would too if you knew that you would starve if you didn't. and you think TARGET is any better?
AMERICA. let's put our heads on straight and attack the problems that matter. I believe wal-mart made an ethical and possibly moral choice by foregoing the lawsuit to recoup money from this tragic event. In saying that, let's rethink our policies in many matters. why is education so expensive and teachers aren't paid a decent salary? my tuition is knowingly going towards an educator, maintenance costs, and employees to make my institution function. they provide jobs just the same as wal-mart. but 30,000 students. estimated $30,000 a year? well...
I'm done ranting. sweatshops? you've got to be kidding me. where's your bleeding heart for Debbie Shank? you can bet that i'll still shop at wal-mart, wont care about people hating "corporate america", and let as many people know about this debbie shank case. because there's a lot to learn from this.
keep your head on a swivel. be a sponge.
There shouldn't have been any money for Wal-mart to ask for
Sorry folks, Mrs Shank made an illegal u-turn in front of an oncoming truck. I'm sorry about her condition, but she caused the accident. The ruslting lawsuit left an innocent truck driver fired and unemployable. I haven't heard anyone worry about his family. They are the real victims here.
research before you rant
Wal Mart is cheap, yes. AT THE PRICE OF PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF AMERICA. Wal Mart is able to sell at low prices because they are paying adults AND CHILDREN 9 cents an hour to manufacture their products. These people are forced to work sometimes 24 hour straight shifts without overtime. These places are what we call sweatshops. And any American company that thrives off of this is inhuman. In the mean time niave people, OR people here who simply dont care, get to save 50 cents. These people working for wal mart and its affiliates in other countries can not afford to lose there job. They really are poverty stricken and cant afford to get fired by fighting for their rights. 99% of WalMart shoppers have no idea what it means to live in these people's shoes. But as long as they save a few sents, who care if a 7 year old boy works a 24 hour shift to make that happen?? Of course Wal Mart gives money to charities in our nation....they get a tax break, and it takes the heat off of what everyone else knows they are promoting elsewhere!!! Go to Target!!!!
CEO tommy
I am glad to see that Walmart finally came to their senses. As for Tommy D of Oklahoma. Are you like an official spokesperson for the company? The only reason Walmart donates so much is because they get a fat tax exemption for doing so. So spare me your rant about philanthropy among Walmart or any other corporation. They give to get in return and because it's good publicity. Period.
