By Hannah Wever,
Orange County Review
December 26th, 2008                              [back to top]   

One local group says a Wal-Mart in Orange County is alright, but the planned location for the big-box store is all wrong. The 140,000-square foot retail store, as planned, will take up 19 acres of a 50-acre parcel on the north side of Route 3, and is already zoned for commercial use. But the recent adoption of a large retail use ordinance into Orange County’s code means any retail establishment in excess of 60,000 square feet must submit a special use permit, and go through the public hearing process. Since Wal-Mart has not officially filed, a hearing date has yet to be set. Members of the community, including Craig Rains, spokesperson for the Friends of Wilderness Battlefield (FoWB) preservation group, argue that building a Wal-Mart on a site so close to important Civil War locations would have a devastating impact. What stands to suffer if the big-box is built at routes 3 and 20, Rains said, is the loss of a vital feature of American history, and additional congestion on an already over-traveled and poorly engineered roadway, among other things. Rains is quick to clarify: He, and other members of the FoWB are not opposed to a Wal-Mart in Orange. “I’m all for it, it’d be great for the county,“ he said. “I just think it’s absolutely the worst place to put it is on the battlefield.“ Instead, Rains suggested alternative locations could protect the Wilderness Battlefield area, while better serving the county with no negative aspects for the Wal-Mart corporation. “There are plenty of places for them to move we think they’re creating the wrong environment at the battlefield,“ Rains said. Two possible substitute sites could be at the intersection of Routes 20 and 611 in Locust Grove, or further down Route 3 on an area behind the Bloom grocery store. Suitable existing traffic patterns, and site plans are already in place at both locations. And, he added, engineering improvements to traffic at a Locust Grove location, or at an intersection nearer to Lake of the Woods would be far simpler than trying to improve travelways at routes 3 and 20. “We’d like to see them get away from this intersection [routes 3 and 20] and move down the road,“ he said. “If they would move it up here to LOW and put it behind the Bloom there’s already a traffic light there.“ But when Wal-Mart representatives visited community members last month to present their ideas and open a dialog, other locations in Orange County had apparently already been ruled out. Wal-Mart Senior Manager for Public Affairs Kelly Hobbs said project planners were aware of community concerns about a big-box, national chain retailer locating close to historic sites in Orange. “We did look at other sites, and we feel like this is better for the county, for the community and for the company,“ Hobbs said. Further, Hobbs added, the site of the proposed Wal-Mart is within an area designated by the county for economic development, and has had a commercial zoning classification for about 20 years. But Rains contended that when that piece of property became classified as commercially zoned, county officials at the time weren’t envisioning a behemoth discount department store. “It is zoned commercial; it is not zoned for a big box store. When this property was zoned commercial by the board of supervisors, they never envisioned a Wal-Mart coming in,“ Raines said. And perhaps more threatening to the area’s historic atmosphere is the pad site proposed between the Wal-Mart and Route 3, where any combination of businesses could spring up without having to submit to the county’s special use permit process. Additionally alarming to Rains is a massive mixed-use development project-now in planning stage infancy-proposed for several thousand acres next door to where the Wal-Mart will be. “All of a sudden there’s this monster coming in,“ Rains said. “And where does it stop?“ Rains said neighboring localities have preserved similar historic sites by rallying the community to become active. And for Orange County, he said, there’s still time. “What everybody needs to do is let their supervisor know how they feel,“ Rains suggested. “Unless there’s a million people contacting Wal-Mart they’re not going to care, but the supervisors will.“ According to Orange County Director of Community Development David Grover, a multi-phase archaeological study on the area where Wal-Mart proposes to build has determined that “there has been no evidence of encampments, movements of significance, or engagements on the subject site. The consultants retained by Wal-Mart have advised me that they have conducted Phase I and II archaeological studies of the site and found nothing of significance.“ But during the special use permit process, (which will include presentations by Wal-Mart representatives, recommendations by county officials, and a public hearing), more information may come to light about the project’s potential negative and/or positive impacts on the county’s history and its future. “I am cognizant of the proximity of the subject site to significant portions of the Wilderness Battlefield, and the potential impacts high intensity uses might have on historic resources. The special use permit process affords the county the best tools to ensure any adverse impacts are appropriately mitigated,“ Grover said. Wal-Mart has yet to submit their application for a special use permit.

 [back to top]   

Wal-Mart agrees to pay workers up to $640 million

By SARAH SKIDMORE,
Associated Press
12.24.08                                         [back to top]   

Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world's largest retailer, said Tuesday it will pay as much as $640 million to settle 63 lawsuits over wage-and-hour violations, ending years of dispute.

The discount retailer, which has more than 1.4 million employees, said the amount it pays will depend on how many claims are submitted by eligible workers and could range from $352 million to $640 million.

The agreement the company announced Tuesday ends the vast majority of such cases against Wal-Mart (nyse: WMT - news - people ). Each settlement still must be approved by a trial court.

Wal-Mart faced 76 similar class action lawsuits in courts across the country as of March 31, the company said in its most recent 10-K filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The Bentonville, Ark.-based company said many of the settled lawsuits were filed years ago and the allegations are not representative of the company Wal-Mart is today.

"Our policy is to pay associates for every hour worked and to provide rest and meal breaks," Tom Mars, Wal-Mart's executive vice president and general counsel, said in a statement.

The company declined to discuss the case further. Lawyers for the plaintiffs did not return calls for comment Tuesday.

Wal-Mart has been working steadily to rehabilitate its image amid continuing scrutiny of its labor and business practices.

Earlier this month, Wal-Mart said it would pay up to $54.25 million to settle a class-action lawsuit alleging it cut workers' break time and didn't prevent employees from working off the clock in Minnesota.

Last year, Wal-Mart said it would pay more than $33 million in back wages to thousands of employees after turning itself in to the Labor Department for paying too little in overtime over the previous five years. Also last year, a judge in Pennsylvania ruled that Wal-Mart workers in that state who previously won a $78.5 million class-action award for working off the clock will share an additional $62.3 million in damages.

Under the announced agreement, Wal-Mart will continue to use various electronic systems and other measures to ensure its compliance with wage-and-hour policies and law.

Wal-Mart labor critics welcomed the settlement but said it gives no indication the company is changing its ways. Wal-Mart Watch Executive Director David Nassar said many workers still suffer mistreatment.

He said such lawsuits could have been avoided if the company had followed the law to begin with or allowed workers to unionize for better representation of their rights.

"If these millions of workers had been allowed union representation, they never would have had to hire lawyers and wait years to get their paychecks," he said.

Nassar and others said Wal-Mart, which has GOP ties, is settling the cases before the new presidential administration takes over.

"Wal-Mart typically fights lawsuits to the end more than any major corporation in America," said Burt P. Flickinger III, managing director of Strategic Resource Group, a retail-consulting firm. "So for the company to settle them within 30 days of President-elect Obama's inauguration indicates the company is trying to do what it can to present a newer face to the new administration and hope for the best given what the company did to try and keep the new administration being elected."

Flickinger said the company is changing, but still faces many of the labor hurdles that have riled its critics for years.

However, Flickinger said "ultimately everyone will be better off because of the settlement."

Richard D. Hastings, a strategist with Global Hunter Securities, said the settlement was good news for shareholders and Wal-Mart because it exacts only a one-time cost.

Wal-Mart, one of the few retailers doing well in a dismal holiday season, said it would take an after-tax charge to continuing operations of about $250 million, or approximately 6 cents per share, in its fiscal fourth quarter.

"This is a conclusion to the many years of issues, and everyone should be glad that it is behind them," Hastings said.

Shares in Wal-Mart, which rose 70 cents to close at $55.29 before the settlement was announced, rose 21 cents further in after-hours trading.

AP Business Writer Anne D'Innocenzio contributed to this story from New York.

Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved.

 [back to top]   

Retail giant Wal-Mart bids to enter Chile market

By TOM PARSONS ,
Associated Press
12.19.08                                 [back to top]   

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. announced Friday an effort to enter another Latin American market, with an offer to buy all shares of the Distribucion y Servicio chain of supermarkets in Chile.

Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, said it has the support of the controlling shareholders of D&S, the Ibanez family, which has agreed to sell a portion of its D&S shares.

"These controlling shareholders will enter into a long-term stockholders' agreement with Wal-Mart regarding D&S, which will continue to operate with its existing leadership, associates and brands," Wal-Mart said in a news release.

The retail giant said it would begin Tuesday offering to pay 40.8 cents a share for D&S stock, a price Wal-Mart said represented a premium of about 37.4 percent over the stock's average closing price for the past 30 trading days.

Wal-Mart spokesman Kevin Gardner said from the company's headquarters at Bentonville, Ark., that D&S operates 185 stores in Chile and is a "significant" player in the country's grocery-retail sector.

"Moving into Chile is an important step in implementing Wal-Mart International's strategy. We continue to focus on portfolio optimization, global leverage and winning in every market," said Wal-Mart vice chairman Michael T. Duke. "A successful tender offer will give Wal-Mart the opportunity to be a significant participant in Chile, which continues to have a strong and growing economy among South American countries."

In Latin America, Wal-Mart already operates in Argentina, Brazil, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua and Puerto Rico.

Craig Herkert, Wal-Mart International president for the Americas, said Wal-Mart and D&S share "a laser focus" on price leadership.

"Both companies also have the same core values and business philosophies: respect for the individual, service to the customer and striving for excellence," Herkert said.

The Wal-Mart release said completion of the deal was conditioned on the U.S. company being offered at least 50.01 percent of the fully-diluted common shares of D&S.

The international business is Wal-Mart's fastest-growing division, with profits rising 11 percent during the most recent quarter, while U.S. profits rose 7 percent. Last month, the company announced it was shifting more of its focus over the next five years away from mature markets and to emerging markets like Brazil and India to drive sales.

Wal-Mart stock closed Friday at $55.74, up 33 cents a share. D&S shares closed at $19, unchanged.

Wal-Mart operates 4,100 stores in the U.S., and 3,100 stores in other countries. The company reported sales of $374.5 billion for the fiscal year that ended Jan. 31.

Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved.

 [back to top]   

Muslim-American files bias suit against Wal-Mart

By JEFF KAROUB ,
Associated Press
12.18.08                       [back to top]   

An Arab- and Muslim-American man filed a $12 million lawsuit Thursday against a Wal-Mart store that caters to his community - saying employees discriminated against him and fired him because of his background.

Louay Kezy, 43, of Dearborn filed the suit in Wayne County Circuit Court. He accuses Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart (nyse: WMT - news - people ) and three employees at its Dearborn store of violating his civil rights through threats, harassment and dismissal after complaining about the employees' conduct.

The lawsuit uses aliases for the three employees because their full names are unknown, but it said they will be fully identified during the discovery process.

Wal-Mart spokesman Greg Rossiter said he had not seen the lawsuit and could only confirm that Kezy had been terminated. But Rossiter stressed Wal-Mart has a strict policy prohibiting discrimination in any form.

"The Dearborn store has gone to great lengths to serve the community there," he said.

The store opened in March with the area's large Arab and Muslim population in mind. It offers hundreds of items geared toward them, such as food and music. It also opened with 35 Arabic-speaking employees - noted in Arabic script on their badges - and hired a local Arab-American educator to teach the staff cultural sensitivity.

Kezy, who worked at the store from March to August, said he was the only Arab or Muslim to work in the stock room, where he said he endured jokes about terrorists and was threatened by another employee. The lawsuit says his hours were reduced, he was denied mandated break time and was "arbitrarily shuffled" between departments after complaining to managers.

"They start telling me stuff - `We don't like you. We hate you all,'" said Kezy, who remains unemployed. "They want to beat me up. (One said), `I want to punch you in the face.'"

After that threat, Kezy said he filed a written report. He said a manager insisted on bringing in another manager to serve as a translator during a meeting, but Kezy said he has been in the U.S. for 28 years and speaks fluent English.

Kezy said he was told he had to apologize to one of his managers, but he refused because he had done nothing wrong. The lawsuit said he was suspended Aug. 11 and fired three days later without explanation.

The lawsuit says Kezy has suffered mental and emotional distress and seeks $12 million for compensatory and exemplary damages, lost wages, the value of fringe benefits and attorney fees.

Nabih Ayad, Kezy's attorney, said efforts by the store to reach out to the Arab and Muslim community do not appear to have helped his client.

"Employees committing these acts were not Arab or Muslim, and the company did nothing to remedy it," Ayad said.

Store officials said earlier this year they spent more than a year studying the market and meeting with community groups before opening the first-of-its kind store in the region with one of the nation's largest Arab and Muslim populations.

Dawud Walid, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations' Michigan chapter, said a representative of his organization was among those that met with Wal-Mart officials before the store opened.

Walid said the store has done a great deal of marketing and public relations, but added "there's a difference between seeking to profit from the community" and having a "true appreciation for diversity as well as workers' rights."

Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved.

 [back to top]   

Wal-Mart changes its rules on recovering money for medical expenses

By Rudi Keller,
Southeast Missourian
December 11th, 2008                  [back to top]   

Wal-Mart has changed the health insurance rules that almost cost permanently disabled former employee Debbie Shank her trust fund.

When the world's largest retailer announced in April it would not pursue the money despite a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that it could, the company also announced it was reviewing the rules that prompted it to pursue the court case.

On Wednesday, Wal-Mart Watch, the Washington, D.C.-based group that keeps a critical eye on the company, announced it had learned the details of those rule changes and declared the changes a victory for workers.

A spokesman for Wal-Mart, Greg Rossiter, said the policies were put in place in April.

"Everyone was moved by Mrs. Shank's extraordinary situation," Rossiter said. "The plan did not give us much flexibility. We reviewed the guidelines of the trust that pays benefits for our associates and family members and modified the plan to allow us more discretion."

Jim Shank, Debbie Shank's former husband, said he is grateful that national publicity surrounding the case helped push Wal-Mart to change its policy. "I wish it wouldn't have taken national outrage to push Wal-Mart to do the right thing, but I'm glad the company listened to everyone who spoke up on our behalf."

Debbie Shank was a night stock clerk at the Cape Girardeau Wal-Mart in 2000 when she was in a severe car crash. The company's health insurance paid $469,000 for her care, covering expenses until she won a $1 million settlement from the accident. Attorneys fees and a $100,000 share for Jim Shank to care for their three sons left a trust fund of $417,000.

The Wal-Mart insurance plan trustees launched a lawsuit to recover the money remaining from the settlement. Using a legal theory known as subrogation, the company said it had a right to be reimbursed for medical expenses that were the responsibility of another party when that third party had met its obligation.

While the giant company won the legal battle, it lost the public relations war. An article about Shank's situation that appeared in the Wall Street Journal prompted a wave of publicity that included stories on CNN, NBC, Fox News and other national outlets.

While the case was pending, Debbie and Jim Shank's son, Cpl. Jeremy Shank, was killed while serving in Iraq.

Now, Wal-Mart Watch said, the company has included new rules in its health plan documents for the plan year beginning Jan. 1 that specifically exempt a worker left in Shank's condition from being hit with a similar lawsuit. Shank has lived in a nursing home since the accident. She has brain damage, can't walk or use her arms and has a limited short-term memory.

"We applaud Wal-Mart for making this positive change to its subrogation policy," David Nassur, executive director of Wal-Mart Watch, said in a news release. "While we believe Wal-Mart could have done the right thing much sooner, we are very pleased with the end result. Wal-Mart still has a long way to go to improve the quality and affordability of its employee health-care plans, but this is a specific step in the right direction and a victory for Wal-Mart workers."

The new rules, set out in the explanation of worker benefits for the coming year, say the insurance plan will not pursue recovery when the injury or illness involved results in paraplegia or quadriplegia, severe burns, total permanent mental or physical disability or death.

And in other cases, the rules say, the recovery will be limited to no more than half of the amount recovered from a third party. Rossiter declined to discuss the specific changes. To do so could undercut Wal-Mart's competitive advantage, he said.

"Our focus is on providing the best possible coverage that we can for our associates and their families," he said.

As the corporation sought to portray the changes as old news, Wal-Mart Watch spokeswoman Stacie Temple said the company had not announced the specifics until it appeared in the employee handbook. "Our whole point is that this particular change is a very small step in making progress on their health-care plan and it is a good step."

 [back to top]   

Sask. mayor worried Wal-Mart will close unionized store

By Niall McKenna,
CBC News
December 10th, 2008                    [back to top]   

The mayor of a southeastern Saskatchewan community is worried the area's biggest retailer could close, following a decision by the province’s labour board allowing employees to unionize.

In a 71-page decision dated Dec. 4, the Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board approved a request to certify the Wal-Mart in Weyburn. All employees, except pharmacy, office staff and department managers, are affected.

Wal-Mart was criticized after it closed a store shortly after employees unionized in Jonquière, Que., in 2005, a move the company continues to blame on poor performance by the store.

Now, concerns are being raised about the future of the outlet in Weyburn, a city with a population of about 9,400.

“We're very concerned about losing a major retailer in our community,” Weyburn Mayor Debra Button said. “We worked too hard to get the Wal-Mart here … If the decision by Wal-Mart is to close the store, we'll certainly be feeling that.”

Both Button and Weyburn-Big Muddy MLA Dustin Duncan said they have received phone calls from residents worried about the future of the store. Button said she has written the CEO of Wal-Mart Canada to ask about the company’s intentions.

Wal-Mart Canada said it will appeal the ruling to unionize, pointing out that many of the employees who signed union cards no longer work at the Weyburn store.

“The fact that you’ve got a store now with 104 associates … and only 29 of them were even there at the time of the union’s application, really speaks to the fact that it would be a bit of a stretch to assume that there is widespread support for that store for this union,” said Andrew Pelletier, spokesman for Wal-Mart Canada.

Changes to Saskatchewan’s Trade Union Act this year made it a requirement that a secret ballot vote be held, open to all employees in the proposed bargaining unit, before a union can be certified.

Paul Meneima, president of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 1400, said the decision to unionize the Weyburn store fits with the pre-2008 act, which allowed for union certifications when 50 per cent of employees, plus one, signed union cards.

Meneima stressed that the majority of employees wanted the union at the time of the application, but said workers have the right to seek decertification of the union if they wish. He said he expects Wal-Mart to delay negotiations of a collective agreement using the courts as long as possible.

The UFCW and Wal-Mart have been trying to negotiate a collective agreement in Ste-Hyacinthe, Que., Canada’s only other unionized Wal-Mart, for almost four years.

The decision to unionize the Weyburn Wal-Mart came after almost five years of legal wrangling. The UFCW applied for certification on April 14, 2004. During labour board hearings, some employees made claims that the union intimidated them into signing union cards. The board dismissed those claims, saying there was no evidence.

Anthony Bianco, a writer for Business Week and author of The Bully of Bentonville: How the High Cost of Everyday Low Prices is Hurting America, said the unionization of the Weyburn store has significance, not only for Canada, but also for North America.

“Wal-Mart has always offered stiff resistance to any attempts to organize,” said Bianco, pointing out that the UFCW “basically gave up trying to organize in the United States in 2003.”

Bianco said Wal-Mart is worried that by having a store with union members, it will “entice” other workers across North America to organize.

“There’s no doubt that Wal-Mart recognizes that, and that’s why they fight so hard to thwart the efforts of their employees to get a union,” said Meinema.

The UFCW is awaiting labour board decisions to unionize Wal-Mart stores in the Saskatchewan communities of North Battleford and Moose Jaw.

 [back to top]   

Cop: Customer safety 'onus' on retailers

By WILLIAM MURPHY,
Newsday
December 10th, 2008                          [back to top]     

A Nassau County police inspector Wednesday told a county legislative committee investigating the Wal-Mart Black Friday "door-busters" sale tragedy that the onus for protecting customers falls on retailers -- and not police.

Police Insp. Thomas Krumpter also said that Nassau Police Commissioner Lawrence Mulvey would advocate the use of protective barriers in a meeting next week with representatives of retailers in Nassau.

Speaking before a hearing by the Public Safety Committee of the Nassau County Legislature in Mineola, Krumpter, the lead-off witness, said: "These types of situations in the box stores and these door-buster type sales, the onus or responsibility for the security and the safety of the customers falls with the retail establishment."

The committee was expected to hear testimony Wednesday from several witnesses regarding the stampede that killed a security guard and injured five other people at a Wal-Mart store in Valley Stream on the day after Thanksgiving.

That Friday is the traditional kick-off to the holiday shopping season and is known as Black Friday -- because it is the biggest shopping day of the year, one that signals if stores will have a profitable season.

Witnesses expected to testify include representatives of the Retail Council of New York State and the county emergency management commissioner.

"Black Friday was a terrible tragedy and what we propose to do is shine a light on what happened so we can prevent it from happening in the future," committee Chairman Joseph Scannell (D-Baldwin) said in an interview Tuesday.

"I'm going to keep my mind open about what should be done," Scannell said.

"We will listen to the testimony. I don't want a knee-jerk reaction. I want to take a hard look at what happened here, and that might mean we have pass to legislation."

Scannell said he had not made up his mind, but he thought legislation might be necessary to require large stores to consult with police before big sales events, and that stores might be required to erect barriers to keep crowds away glass front doors.

The stampede on Nov. 28 occurred after people waiting in their cars for the 5 a.m. store opening tried to rush by customers who had waited in line for hours, police said last week. Glass doors were broken by the surging mob and temporary security worker Jdimytai Damour, 34, of Queens, was trampled and died of asphyxiation, police said.

 [back to top]   

Wal-Mart Says It Suspended Share Buybacks on Economy

By Chris Burritt,
Bloomberg
December 10th, 2008                       [back to top]   

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. said it suspended its share repurchase program, citing the economy and “instability in credit markets.”

The world’s largest retailer, based in Bentonville, Arkansas, has bought back about $10 billion of the $15 billion of shares authorized by the board on May 31, 2007, Wal-Mart said in a regulatory filing today.

The filing comes after Wal-Mart Chief Financial Officer Thomas Schoewe told analysts Oct. 28 the company had decided to “step back on share repurchases.”

Wal-Mart is the best performer among the 30 companies of the Dow Jones Industrial Average this year and one of the few U.S. retailers that reported higher comparable-store sales last month.

Other retailers, including smaller rival Target Corp., have also suspended buyback plans as almost $1 trillion in losses and writedowns by Citigroup Inc. and other financial institutions have frozen credit markets and deepened the recession.

Wal-Mart fell $1.75, or 3 percent, to $55.81 today in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. The shares have climbed 17 percent this year, compared with a decline of 34 percent in the Dow Jones Industrial Average.

The stock drop “was an overreaction to the update in the 10Q and the use of the word ‘suspend,’” Joe Feldman, an analyst at Telsey Advisory Group in New York, said today in a telephone interview. The company’s “prior commentary used words like ‘step back’ and ‘pause.’”

Wal-Mart plans to “let things settle down just a little bit before we re-enter the market,” Schoewe said at an analyst meeting in Rogers, Arkansas in October. “It’s not that we don’t have confidence in our stock.”

Wal-Mart had $5.92 billion in cash as of the end of the third quarter, less than the $6.91 billion it had at the end of the second quarter.

[back to top]   

Weyburn Wal-Mart workers unionize

By Bruce Johnstone,
Leader-Post
December 9, 2008                        [back to top]    

/*The United Food and Commercial Workers Union has been certified to represent about workers at the Wal-Mart in Weyburn.*/

REGINA -- After more than four years of legal wrangling, the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) has finally been certified to represent about 85 workers at the Wal-Mart store in Weyburn.

The Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board (SLRB) issued a 71-page ruling Monday granting the UFCW the right to bargain on behalf of the Wal-Mart employees.

Paul Meinema, president of UFCW Local 1400, which represents the Weyburn Wal-Mart workers, said the decision has been a long time coming. “We applied (to the SLRB) on April 19, 2004,’’ Meinema said.

But an official with Wal-Mart Canada said the company intends to challenge the decision based on changes to the Trade Union Act and the board itself since the election of the Saskatchewan Party government in November 2007.

“We’re disappointed that our associates in Weyburn have not been given a chance to vote on whether or not their store would become unionized,’’ said Andrew Pelletier, vice-president of corporate affairs for Wal-Mart Canada.

“As a result, we expect to seek reconsideration of this decision to certify this store without a vote,’’ Pelletier said.

Meinema said the ruling is consistent with the pre-2008 Trade Union Act, which required 50 per cent of the employees, plus one, to sign union cards to certify a bargaining unit.

The SLRB also ruled that UFCW Local 1400 “represents a majority of employees in the appropriate unit,’’ which includes all employees of Wal-Mart in Weyburn, except department managers and above, pharmacy employees and office staff.

But Pelletier said the SLRB decision “excludes 17 hourly associates from the bargaining unit. The jobs of these 17 associates have been included in previous bargaining units determined by Canadian labour boards, which calls into question their exclusion from the (Weyburn) bargaining unit.”

He also noted that only 29 of the original 85 employees who signed union cards are still with the company.

Pelletier added that the SLRB decision should be reconsidered in light of the changes made to the Trade Union Act requiring certification votes and the replacement of the SLRB members, who made the decision.

“The individual who rendered this decision is somebody who had been cancelled as the chair of the previous labour board early in the year, many, many months ago. That is something that also raises a question with respect to the decision.’’

The decision was handed down by the previous SLRB chair James Seibel, who was replaced earlier this year by the Saskatchewan Party government.

Under the Trade Union Act, following certification, the parties have 20 days to begin contract negotiations and 90 days to conclude a collective agreement. Failing that, the SLRB could intervene to ask a third-party to help with negotiations or seek proposals from both sides to develop a first contract.

The legal battle between UFCW and Wal-Mart has been fraught with delays and appeals. After 19 months of hearings before the SLRB, Wal-Mart sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada twice and were denied.

Employees at three of the Bentonville, Ark.-based retailer’s locations in Quebec are already represented by the union. Applications for unionization of two others in Saskatchewan are before the labour board.

[back to top]   

Wal-Mart to pay $54.25M to settle Minn. lawsuit

By STEVE KARNOWSKI ,
Associated Press
12.09.08                                           [back to top]   

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. said Tuesday it will pay up to $54.25 million to settle a class-action lawsuit that alleged the discount giant cut workers' break time and didn't prevent employees from working off the clock in Minnesota.

The class includes about 100,000 current and former hourly workers who were employed at Wal-Mart Stores (nyse: WMT - news - people ) and Sam's Clubs in Minnesota from Sept. 11, 1998, through Nov. 14, 2008.

Wal-Mart has also agreed to maintain electronic systems, surveys and notices to stay compliant with wage and hour policies and Minnesota laws.

In July, a Dakota County judge ruled against Wal-Mart in the lawsuit, saying the Bentonville, Ark.-based retailer violated state labor laws 2 million times by cutting worker break time and "willfully" not stopping managers from having employees work off the clock. Court proceedings had been scheduled for next month to determine punitive damages, and Wal-Mart could have faced more than $2 billion in damages. Instead, the settlement announced Tuesday will have a preliminary hearing for approval on Jan. 14.

Justin Perl, a lead attorney for the plaintifffs, said he was "gratified that these hourly workers will now be paid after seven years of litigation."

Wal-Mart spokesman David Tovar said the company is committed to paying its workers for all time worked and to make sure they get rest and meal breaks. Managers who violate its policies are subject to punishment including firing, he said.

An undisclosed part of the settlement will go to the state of Minnesota.

[back to top]   

Wal-Mart confirms suspension of stock buybacks

Associated Press,
12.09.08                                    [back to top]     

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. confirmed Tuesday in a government filing that it is temporarily suspending its stock buyback program, citing the economic environment and instability in the credit markets.

The world's largest retailer officially announced the move in a quarterly statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. It said it considers several factors in determining when to buy back shares, including its current cash needs, the cost of borrowing and the market price of its common stock.

Wal-Mart (nyse: WMT - news - people )'s chief financial officer, told investors at the company's analyst meeting on Oct. 28 that the discounter did "step back" on its share repurchase program in mid-October.

"It's not that we don't have confidence in our stock, and in fact I like the value today, better today, than I did a month ago, but we just thought to be consistent, to be conservative ... we did step back," Schoewe told investors.

Wal-Mart had bought back shares of its common stock from time to time under a $15 billion program approved by the board of directors. As of Oct. 18, about $5 billion remained of the total authorized.

Since January, Wal-Mart's stock has risen 19 percent as the company has benefited from frugal shoppers switching to cheaper stores and focusing on necessities as the economy worsened. That marks a sharp contrast to other major retailers that have seen their shares plunge.

Richard D. Hastings, a consumer strategist with Global Hunter Securities, noted that Wal-Mart, like many other companies, aims to preserve cash in a tight credit market.

He noted that companies' moves to buy back shares had been a boost to the stock market during the last five years, but at this point, "it's losing its influence on the market."

Wal-Mart shares fell $1.75, or more than 3 percent, to close at $55.81 on Tuesday in an overall lower market. Over the past 52 weeks, they have traded from $45.24 to $63.85.

Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved

 [back to top]   

Wal-Mart suspends stock repurchase program

Associated Press,
12.09.08                                  [back to top]   

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is temporarily suspending its stock repurchase program. The company, which is the world's largest retailer, cites the economic environment and instability in the credit markets.

The company announced the move Tuesday in a quarterly statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

From time to time, the discounter had repurchased shares of its common stock under a $15 billion share repurchase program authorized by the board of directors. As of Oct. 18, about $5.0 billion remained of the $15 billion authorized.

Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved.

[back to top]   

Wal-Mart Workers in Canada Store Granted Union Status

By Kevin Bell,
Bloomberg
December 9th, 2008                                [back to top]   

Workers at a Wal-Mart Stores Inc. outlet in Canada will be represented by a union after more than four years of legal challenges by the retailer, the United Food and Commercial Workers said.

The Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board granted union status yesterday to workers at a store in Weyburn, Saskatchewan, the group said in a statement today. The application was submitted in April 2004.

Employees at three of the Bentonville, Arkansas-based retailer’s locations in Quebec are already represented by the union. Applications for unionization of two others in Saskatchewan are before the labor board.

In April 2007, the Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear an appeal from Wal-Mart.

Wal-Mart closed a unionized tire and lubrication shop in Quebec in October, citing costs tied to a labor contract that was imposed by the Quebec Labour Relations Board.

Wal-Mart will ask the labor board to reconsider its decision on the basis that workers didn’t have a secret-ballot vote on union representation, Andrew Pelletier, a spokesman for the retailer, said in a telephone interview.

Since the original application, the legislation in Saskatchewan has been changed to require a vote, Pelletier said.

Wal-Mart fell $1.75, or 3 percent, to $55.81 at 4:02 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading.

 [back to top]  

Joint Statement from Wal-Mart and Counsel for Plaintiffs Regarding Wage and Hour Class Action Case of Braun v. Wal-Mart

Market Watch
December 9th, 2008                 [back to top]  

MINNEAPOLIS & BENTONVILLE, Ark., Dec 09, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Counsel for Plaintiffs and counsel for Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., (WMT: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc News, chart, profile, more Last: 54.72-1.09-1.95% 1:55pm 12/10/2008 Delayed quote data Add to portfolio Analyst Create alert Insider Discuss Financials Sponsored by: WMT 54.72, -1.09, -1.9%) jointly announce that they have reached a settlement of a wage and hour class action against Wal-Mart in Minnesota captioned Braun et al. v. Wal-Mart, Inc. et al. The class includes approximately 100,000 current and former hourly associates who worked at Wal-Mart Stores and Sam's Clubs locations in Minnesota from September 11, 1998 through November 14, 2008, and the settlement provides for payment by Wal-Mart of up to $54.25 million, including a substantial payment to the State of Minnesota. Also, as part of the settlement, Wal-Mart has agreed to maintain various electronic systems, surveys, and notices that will further compliance with wage and hour policies and Minnesota laws. The settlement is subject to approval by the trial court, and the exact amount paid to class members will depend on the court's approval as well as on the number and amount of claims that are submitted by class members. All parties believe this settlement is fair and reasonable for all concerned. "We are satisfied with this settlement, gratified that these hourly workers will now be paid after seven years of litigation, and happy that the State of Minnesota will receive the largest wage and hour civil penalty in its history," said Justin Perl, of the Minneapolis law firm of Maslon Edelman Borman & Brand, co-lead counsel for the class. Wal-Mart spokesperson David Tovar added, "Wal-Mart is pleased that the court in Minnesota ruled in its favor on many claims. Our policies are to pay every associate for every hour worked and to make rest and meal breaks available for associates. Any manager who violates these policies is subject to discipline, up to and including termination. We remain committed to providing good jobs with real career opportunity to the 1.45 million U.S. associates who choose to work for Wal-Mart and serve our customers every day." A hearing for preliminary approval of the settlement has been scheduled for January 14, 2009. About Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (WMT: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc News, chart, profile, more Last: 54.72-1.09-1.95% 1:55pm 12/10/2008 Delayed quote data Add to portfolio Analyst Create alert Insider Discuss Financials Sponsored by: WMT 54.72, -1.09, -1.9%) Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. operates Wal-Mart discount stores, supercenters, Neighborhood Markets and Sam's Club locations in the United States. The Company operates in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Japan, Mexico, Nicaragua, Puerto Rico and the United Kingdom and, through a joint venture, in India. The Company's securities are listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol WMT. More information about Wal-Mart can be found by visiting www.walmartstores.com. Online merchandise sales are available at www.walmart.com and www.samsclub.com.

[back to top] 

Wal-Mart fined, fesses up to charging illegal taxes in Connecticut

By George Gombossy,
The Hartford Courant
December 7th, 2008                             [back to top] 

After denying for weeks that it was violating Connecticut laws by charging a second tax on exchanges, Wal-Mart has agreed to change its practice and pay a $2,500 fine.

Wal-Mart also agreed to refund all customers who can show that when they returned an item for an even exchange they were charged a second tax.

The agreement between Wal-Mart and the state Department of Consumer Protection was made last week.

It came after state tax officials refused to look into more than a dozen complaints I had forwarded them from customers who were required to pay sales taxes when they bought an item and again when they exchanged that item for a similar one. Most of the complaints involved Wal-Mart.

Wal-Mart charged the tax for people who didn't have receipts as well as some who had credit card statements proving that they had bought the item recently. The taxes were turned over to the state.

Customers wrote that this illegal policy was being followed in at least a dozen of its stores in Connecticut, a fact I verified at several stores.

Stores even had posters behind courtesy desks blaming the state for its policy.

"State law PROHIBITS Wal-Mart from refunding SALES TAX to any customer returning or exchanging merchandise without an original purchase receipt," the "tax refund laws" posters said.

However, state tax laws clearly say the opposite, state Consumer Protection Commissioner Jerry Farrell Jr. said Wednesday in an interview explaining the out-of-court settlement he reached with Wal-Mart.

State laws mandate that if a company has an exchange policy, it cannot charge a second sales tax on the new item. Wal-Mart's website clearly says it has such an exchange policy.

Besides Wal-Mart, Farrell said state Director of Trade Practices Richard E. Maloney and his unit investigated return and exchange policies at Target, Best Buy, Home Depot, Lowe's, Babies "R" Us, Sam's Clubs and Toys "R" Us.

As the result of the investigation, Farrell and Maloney said Babies "R" Us, Home Depot and Target are being sent letters asking the companies to improve training because they found uneven procedures in implementing state laws on taxes. None faces sanctions.

Lowe's, Sam's Clubs, Toys "R" Us and Best Buy were found to be following tax laws properly.

The issue arose when Gerald Dierman of Manchester questioned whether Home Depot was following state laws when the store charged him sales tax on his original purchase of a bag of grout and again when he returned it the next day for the same grout, but of a different color. Home Depot told him they could not give him a refund on his sales tax without a receipt.

After printing his issue, I received numerous complaints about other Home Depot stores, Wal-Mart and Babies "R" Us.

Home Depot officials conceded that their stores erred and said they would train their personnel to follow state laws consistently. They also gave gift certificates to those who were charged a second tax.

Wal-Mart, on the other hand, insisted its stores were doing nothing wrong.

"I believe I've answered your question already, but I'll gladly do it again. Walmart's policy is to satisfy the customer and follow the law. Thanks again," Wal-Mart spokeswoman Ashley Hardie wrote me Oct. 14 after I sent her additional complaints.

On Friday, Wal-Mart was singing a different tune.

"We thoroughly reviewed our practices and have taken steps to ensure that our associates are fully complying with Connecticut law when processing even exchanges," Hardie said in an e-mail.

  [back to top]

How did this happen?

Wal-Mart Watch                             [back to top] 

Like many of you, I was outraged and saddened when I heard about Jdimytai Damour, the Long Island Wal-Mart employee who was trampled to death by holiday shoppers. In a statement yesterday, I extended our sincere condolences to the family of Mr. Jdimytai Damour.

I want to know how and why this happened.

Yes, there is plenty of blame to go around - including the thousands of Wal-Mart shoppers who participated in the stampede.

The responsibility, however, lies with Wal-Mart. As Mr. Damour's employer, the company put him in that position and made all of the decisions that led to that moment. Wal-Mart's management did not have enough trained employees in place, nor did they use common sense policies to discourage the customers from rushing the store.

Why? It would have cost Wal-Mart money to take those precautions, and the workers had no voice in the decisions.

Take a moment to send an email to executives at Wal-Mart and demand that they take responsibility for Wal-Mart's refusal to take precautions to protect their employees:

http://www.walmartspeakout.com/accountable

Here at Wal-Mart Watch, we hear the stories of so many employees frightened to stand up for their basic rights, worried that they'll lose their jobs for speaking up.

Wal-Mart employees have been forced to work overtime without compensation, denied lunch and bathroom breaks, and threatened for requesting reasonable changes in their schedule.

Now more than ever, we need to stand up for Wal-Mart employees and give them the opportunity they need to fight for higher wages, better health care, and safer work conditions.

Please send an email to Wal-Mart's management to hold them accountable for Wal-Mart's failure to protect its employees and prevent this tragedy. Wal-Mart simply must change its ways and start treating its employees with the dignity and respect they deserve.

http://www.walmartspeakout.com/accountable

Our thoughts and prayers are with Jdimytai Damour's family this holiday season.

Thank you, and have a happy - and safe - holiday season.

David Nassar
Wal-Mart Watch

 [back to top]

Trampled man's family accuses Wal-Mart of inciting 'crowd craze'

The Associated Press
December 4th, 2008                            [back to top]

Reporting from Garden City, N.Y. -- The family of a worker trampled to death in a crush of bargain hunters Friday at a Long Island Wal-Mart store filed a wrongful-death lawsuit Wednesday, alleging store ads offering deep discounts "created an atmosphere of competition and anxiety" that led to "crowd craze."

The lawsuit alleges that besides failing to provide adequate security for a predawn crowd estimated at 2,000, Wal-Mart "engaged in specific marketing and advertising techniques to specifically attract a large crowd and create an environment of frenzy and mayhem and was otherwise careless, reckless and negligent."

Wal-Mart issued a statement saying it would cooperate with local law enforcement officials to develop stronger safety measures for the future.

"We consider Mr. Damour part of the Wal-Mart family and are saddened by his death," the statement said. "We have been in communication with members of his family to do what we can to help them through this difficult time. Our associates know that when incidents like this occur, we take care of our own."

In addition to the retailer, the adjacent Green Acres Mall, a realty company that manages the property and a security company hired to patrol the property were named as defendants. A spokeswoman for the realty company declined to comment on pending litigation; none of the other defendants immediately responded to phone and e-mail inquiries.

Jdimytai Damour, 34, had been hired by an employment agency as a temporary worker at the store in Valley Stream and had been on the job about a week when he died, said his family's lawyer, Jordan Hecht.

The 6-foot-5, 270-pound Damour died of asphyxiation after being crushed early Friday morning by the crowd, which broke down the store's doors in frantic pursuit of bargains. At least four other people were treated at hospitals, including a woman who was eight months pregnant.

Authorities suspect that, because of his size, Damour was stationed at the entrance of the store to assist with crowd control.

"Those hundreds of people who did make their way into the store, literally had to step over or around him or unfortunately on him to get in," Nassau County Police Commissioner Lawrence Mulvey said.

Police are reviewing store video to identify possible suspects in the death, but Mulvey conceded criminal charges were unlikely.

 [back to top]

Victim's kin file suit in Wal-Mart stampede death

By FRANK ELTMAN ,
The Associated Press
December 3rd, 2008                        [back to top]

GARDEN CITY, N.Y. (AP) — The family of a New York man who was trampled to death the day after Thanksgiving by a stampede of bargain hunting Wal-Mart shoppers has filed a wrongful death lawsuit.

The