|
Wal-Mart critics take campaign on road with national bus tour
The Associated Press
July 31, 2006
[back to top]
One of Wal-Mart Stores Inc.'s most
vociferous union-funded critics is taking its campaign against the
world's largest retailer on the road with a cross-country bus tour from
New York to Seattle with a stop in Connecticut.
The tour begins Tuesday and will
feature several Democratic politicians.
WakeUpWalMart.com, launched last year
by the United Food and Commercial Workers union, will visit 35 cities in
19 states for 35 days of rallies, town hall meetings and state fair
visits to back its calls on Wal-Mart for higher pay and better health
insurance for workers.
The tour plans to stop in Bridgeport
on Wednesday with a rally on the steps of the City Hall annex. Among
Connecticut Democratic politicians scheduled to appear are U.S. Rep.
Rosa DeLauro, U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman, U.S. Senate candidate Ned Lamont,
gubernatorial candidate John DeStefano and Diana Farrell, a candidate
for Congress.
Wal-Mart, based in Bentonville, Ark.,
dismissed the tour as a "political stunt" and said the group was
attacking the wrong company.
"Wal-Mart offers associates $23 per
month health plans, and in some places as low as $11 per month, creates
tens of thousands of jobs per year and is selling more organic and
environmentally friendly products," Wal-Mart spokesman David Tovar said.
Unions should let working families
decide for themselves where to shop, Tovar said.
WakeUpWalMart.com said Democratic
politicians appearing at some of the stops will include Lamont, Ohio
U.S. Senate candidate Sherrod Brown, Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack and former
vice presidential candidate John Edwards.
The group approached Republicans as
well but got no response, said Chris Kofinis, a spokesman for
WakeUpWalMart.
Both sides have been sparring since
WakeUpWalMart.com and Wal-Mart Watch launched separate campaigns last
year to pressure Wal-Mart for change after failing for years to organize
its stores. Wal-Mart Watch is backed by the Service Employees
International Union. Both groups say they want to pressure Wal-Mart into
becoming a better employer, not run it out of business.
In response, Wal-Mart hired a team of
about 35 consultants at Edelman, which bills itself as the world's
largest independently owned public relations company, as well as
lobbyists in Washington, D.C.
The company has also launched a raft
of initiatives, including adding more affordable health care plans for
employees, adopting ambitious environmental goals and boosting diversity
among employees and its suppliers.
Copyright (c) 2006, The Associated
Press
[back to top]
Wal-mart allows
trade union
Wang Ping
CCTV.com
07-30-2006
[back to top]
Retail giant Wal-mart has established
a trade union for its subsidiary in Jinjiang of southeastern China's
Quanzhou city. This is the chain store's first trade union in China.
A week ago, 30 Wal-mart employees
filed an application to the Trade Union of Quanzhou for membership and
for the organization of a trade union of their own. The application
conformed to China's trade union law and was approved.
Wal-mart China released a statement,
saying it respected its employees' will and that it would assume
relevant liabilities. The chained retailer entered the market of the
Chinese mainland in 1996. So far, it has set up 59 subsidiaries in 30
cities, with over 23000 employees.
[back to top]
What appalls
Wal-Mart will improve America
Dominic Rushe
The Sunday Times
July 30, 2006
[back to top]
AMERICANS used to say “What’s good for
General Motors (GM) is good for America”. These days Wal-Mart is the
corporate body against which the country’s health is most often
measured. The giant retailer is the largest single private employer in
the US. It employs 1.7m people and accounts for $8.90 of every $100
spent in an American retail store. Last year Wal-Mart had sales of $316
billion (€250 billion). What affects Wal-Mart, affects America.
But unlike GM in its heyday, Wal-Mart
is a divisive company. Millions love its low prices, millions hate the
way it gets them.
Last week the company lost its fight
against a proposal in Chicago to up the minimum wage that could have a
significant impact on a move to raise the wage across America.
The measure requires retailers with
more than $1 billion in annual sales and stores of at least 90,000 sq ft
to pay workers at least $10 an hour in wages plus $3 in fringe benefits
by mid-2010. The current minimum wage in Chicago’s state of Illinois is
$6.50 an hour and the federal minimum is $5.15.
The median hourly wage for a retail
salesperson in the Chicago metropolitan area in 2005 was $9.41,
according to the US Department of Labour’s Bureau of Labour Statistics.
So the proposal isn’t so far off base.
But Wal-Mart never gives up without a
fight. The company is appealing (pause for laughter).
“This vote sadly puts politics ahead
of Chicago’s working men and women. It sends a message that Chicago is
closed for business, closed for development and closed for job
creation,” said Wal-Mart.
But there are other cities with living
wage laws including San Francisco and Washington. Both look pretty much
open.
The Chicago bill is one of several
that Wal-Mart and other large retailers are fighting across the country.
So far none has passed into law. Earlier this month a federal judge
struck down a Maryland ruling that increased the minimum wage.
The Retail Industry Leaders
Association (RILA), a trade group that sued to overturn the Maryland
law, is fighting to overturn a similar law passed by Suffolk County on
Long Island, New York.
“The ordinance . . . is a clear
disincentive for more than a dozen retailers impacted by it to locate or
expand their operations in the city of Chicago,” the RILA president,
Sandy Kennedy, said in a statement last week.This is not a worry shared
by Wal-Mart rival Costco. The average hourly wage of employees of the
warehouse club operator is $16. After three years a typical full-time
Costco worker makes about $42,000. The company also picks up 92% of its
workers’ health insurance.
Costco is the largest warehouse club
operator in the US, beating the Wal-Mart-owned Sam’s Club into second
place. A 2004 Business Week study found Costco employees sell 50% more
per square foot of sales space, and contribute to profits almost 25%
higher than Sam’s Club.
If he’s watching, and he is, Lee
Scott, Wal-Mart’s chief executive seems unconvinced. In a speech last
year, the world’s most powerful retailer characteristically tackled the
GM analogy head on.
“Critics believe that Wal-Mart should
play the role General Motors played after the second world war . . .
[and] establish the post-world war middle class that the country is so
proud of. The facts are that retailing doesn’t perform that role in the
economy. Retailing doesn’t perform that role in any country,” he said.
That may have been true in the past,
but as the country’s largest employer does Wal-Mart have the clout to
destroy America’s middle class?
The tide may be turning against Scott.
Republicans anxious about midterm elections and their unpopular
president are warming to a rise in the minimum wage. The $5.15 minimum
has not been raised since 1997 and a $2 increase is being considered. If
passed it will further weaken Wal-Mart’s case.
What’s good for America may not be
good for Wal-Mart.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart workers
in China form first union
Servihoo
29 Jul 2006
[back to top]
US retail giant Wal-Mart Stores saw
its first trade union formed for workers at one its 60 shops in China
where it started doing business in 1996.
Establishment of the union was the
initiative of some 30 Wal-Mart employees in the southeast province of
Fujian, Xinhua news agency said Saturday.
For the past two years the world's
biggest retailer had resisted efforts to set up local unions, which are
all affiliated with the All-China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU)
which was established by the ruling Communist Party and claims some 150
million members.
Wal-Mart has always maintained its
employees were free to set up unions if they wished and insisted it was
"in total conformity with Chinese law".
But at the start of July, senior
Chinese official Wang Zhaoguo, who is also president of ACFTU, singled
out Wal-Mart for failing to establish unions at its stores while
proposing to make it compulsory for foreign firms to set up unions for
employees.
According to China's trade union law,
all employees have the right to join ACFTU, the country's only legal
trade union.
However joining the union offers no
guarantee for staff against exploitation, with the ACFTU often
criticised by international labor rights groups for favoring business
interests over workers' rights.
The nation's trade union law outlaws
workers from forming independent unions or organising collective
bargaining activities outside the ACFTU.
Since it arrived in China in 1996,
Wal-Mart has opened 60 stores in 29 cities and is said to employ more
than 30,000 people across the country.
China is a leading source of cheap
goods for Wal-Mart's US operations, with 18 billion dollars' worth of
merchandise procured in the country in 2004.
Wal-Mart is keen for a bigger slice of
foreign markets as it battles sluggish sales growth at home, lawsuits
over its labour practices and an image for brutal cost-cutting at the
expense of employees and suppliers.
Nowhere is more enticing for foreign
retailers than China, where booming consumer spending led by a growing
middle class accounted for one-third of the country's economic growth
last year.
Wal-Mart employs 1.7 million people
worldwide, including 1.3 million in the United States, making it easily
the world's largest retailer.
But in China, the group has lagged
behind Carrefour of France, which has 78 stores. Britain's Tesco group
has 31 stores in China and plans to open another 15 this year. German
group Metro is another major foreign player.
[back to top]
FRANKFURT, GERMANY: Wal-Mart will bail out, leaving it crying in its
bier
THE NEWS TRIBUNE
July 29th, 2006
[back to top]
Wal-Mart Stores, admitting defeat in
Germany’s giant but cutthroat retail market, announced Friday that it
would sell its 85 stores in the country to a German retailer, incurring
a loss of $1 billion. The decision to sell out to the Metro Group came
two months after Wal-Mart sold its stores in South Korea. It amounts to
a marked retreat by the world’s largest retailer from its breakneck
global expansion.
In Germany, analysts say, Wal-Mart
never got traction in a market characterized by unrelenting price
competition, well-established discounters and the cultural resistance of
shoppers to giant stores where vegetables and lawn mowers might be only
aisles apart.
[back to top]
Retailer Metro says it plans to buy out Wal-Mart's stores in Germany
MELISSA EDDY
July 28, 2006
[back to top]
BERLIN (AP) - Wal-Mart Stores Inc.
said Friday it will sell its 85 stores in Germany to Metro AG, a move
that effectively ends a nearly decade-long effort by the world's largest
retailer to crack the market in Europe's biggest economy.
It is the U.S.-based company's second
international withdrawal this year, after Wal-Mart pulled out of the
highly competitive South Korean market in May. The retailer is instead
concentrating its growth efforts on China and Central America.
"As we focus our efforts on where we
can have the greatest impact on our growth and return on investment
strategies, it has become increasingly clear that in Germany's business
environment it would be difficult for us to obtain the scale and results
we desire," Michael Duke, a vice-chairman of Bentonville, Ark.-based
Wal-Mart, said in a statement.
The deal with Metro, under which the
German retailer will take over 19 pieces of Wal-Mart real estate and
lease the rest of the other locations, remains subject to approval by
authorities. Financial terms were not disclosed.
Duesseldorf-based Metro said it would
book a one-time gain from the acquisition as the assets are worth more
than the purchase price. The stores, which had sales near two billion
euros ($2.55 billion US) in 2005, will be incorporated into Metro's Real
Hypermarket brand.
Wal-Mart, which has more than 6,500
stores in 14 other countries and serves 176 million customers per week,
expects to incur a pretax loss related to the transaction of
approximately $1 billion for the second quarter of fiscal year 2007.
The company entered the German market
in 1997 with the acquisition of the Wertkauf and Interspar hypermarket
chains. But Wal-Mart's German stores, which employ 11,000 people, have
struggled to break into the local market.
Sy Schlueter, chief executive of
investment house Copernicus in Hamburg, said Wal-Mart had trouble
winning over German consumers, who tend to be very price-focused and
would rather drive to a different store if they know they can buy
something cheaper.
National discounters such as Lidl GmbH
and Aldi Einkauf GmbH put the heat on Wal-Mart's sales, he said, by
having the same merchandise at prices that were often just as
competitive.
Furthermore, Schlueter said consumers
rejected some of Wal-Mart's signature features, like stores outside town
centres, employees required to smile and heartily greet customers, or
baggers at checkouts.
"These guys are businessmen,"
Schlueter said.
"The business had turnover, but if you
lose money for 10 years, you get out. Wal-Mart wasn't here to prove
their business model works, they were here to make money," Schlueter
said. "Apparently even their patience is not unlimited."
At its annual meeting last month,
Wal-Mart trumpeted its expansion abroad. Net sales for Wal-Mart last
year amounted to $312 billion, with its international division seeing
net sales and operating income rise 11.4 per cent.
But Germany is not the first foreign
country where Wal-Mart has struggled. Analysts said the sophistication
of South Korea's $26-billion discount market proved difficult for
Wal-Mart, as the company failed to attract customers to the stores and
housewives were dissatisfied with food and beverage offerings.
Wal-Mart also has struggled in Japan,
known for its finicky consumers, but has lately boosted its investment
there. In the last year, the company finished its push to gain a
majority share of Seiyu Ltd. in Japan, as well as acquiring stores in
Brazil and entering a partnership with a retail chain in Central
America.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart:
'Auf Wiedersehen' Germany, Hello India
Exiting Germany and
South Korea a 'brilliant' move that will allow the No. 1 retailer to
enter India and expand faster in China, analysts say.
By Parija B. Kavilanz,
CNNMoney.com
July 28 2006
[back to top]
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Wal-Mart, a
company that doesn't like to admit defeat, did so for the second time in
months when it announced Friday that it would exit the German market
where it's been hard-pressed to find success.
In May, Wal-Mart (Charts) announced it
was pulling out of another challenging market - South Korea - where it
operated 16 stores.
These setbacks may be humbling to the
world's largest retailer, but some retail industry watchers say Wal-Mart
is making some very clever moves at the same time.
"It's a brilliant decision by
Wal-Mart," said Love Goel, CEO of Growth Ventures Group, an investment
firm focused on retailers. "Korea and Germany's retail market is too
competitive. Secondly, consumers there really aren't aligned with
Wal-Mart's core value proposition of offering bottom-barrel prices."
Freed of having to worry about
cracking the difficult German and Korean markets, Wal-Mart will probably
now aggressively forge ahead with its plans to enter and expand into
more lucrative markets -- primarily India and China, Goel and others
think.
This is more a necessity than a
"would-like" for Wal-Mart given that the retailer is keen to capture
international growth opportunities as it faces market saturation in the
United States, where it already operates close to 4,000 stores.
In that regard, "Let's fish where the
fish are biting," is becoming Wal-Mart's modus operandi, said Craig
Johnson, president of retail consulting group Customer Growth Partners.
"Even for the largest retailer in the
world, you're not going to hit a home run everywhere you play," Johnson
said. "If it's not working in Germany and South Korea you have to
redeploy your resources to a faster-growing situation with more
opportunity."
India and China, he said, are the two
biggest growth engines of the future for Wal-Mart. "Leaving Germany is
smart. It takes just as much management attention to butt your head
against the wall in Germany and Korea as it does to crank up the engine
in China and India," he said, implying that Wal-Mart can't afford to do
both.
A retail nirvana in the east According
to Goel, China and India have among the world's most lucrative retail
markets, valued at $700 billion and $300 billion each.
China is ahead of India with 20
percent of its market characterized as "organized" with established
retail chains, versus only 3 percent for India. India's remaining 97
percent is comprised of 12 million mom-and-pop shops.
"The $1 trillion Indian and Chinese
retail sectors are much larger than Germany, Korea or even all of Europe
put together," Goel said. Further, he estimates the retail sector in
both countries will grow by at least 30 percent annually for the next
decade.
Wal-Mart already operates more than 55
stores in China and is ramping up its growth strategy in the face of
stiff competition from European supermarket operators such as French
supermarket chain Carrefour and Germany's largest retailer Metro, which
are expanding at a fast clip.
India plans The retailer isn't yet in
India, but it could be getting close.
India's complex foreign direct
investment, or FDI, regulations, currently bar international retailers
from directly entering the market. In other words, international
retailers who have set up shop in India have opted for franchising deals
with local partners or entered into joint-venture partnerships with
Indian companies.
The Indian government did somewhat
relax its FDI rules earlier this year, allowing "single-brand" retailers
such as Nike or Gucci to own 51 percent of their business operations in
India. However, this still precludes Wal-Mart, since the retailer sells
a variety of brands in its stores.
Wal-Mart spokeswoman Amy Wyatt told
CNNMoney that the company recently won approval to set up a "liaison"
office in Bangalore through which it plans to quickly study the India
market.
She also agreed that Wal-Mart's exit
from South Korea and Germany allowed the retailer to "focus on other
opportunities like China and India."
Media reports in the Indian press
earlier this month said Wal-Mart was in discussions with a leading
Indian real estate firm DLF Universal Ltd. for a franchise deal. The
reports suggested DLF plans to develop a number of malls around the
country over the next five years with Wal-Mart stores located in a
select number of locations.
A spokesman for Delhi-based DLF, who
did not want to be identified, told CNNMoney that the company was in
discussions with Wal-Mart but declined to offer details because the
company is in a "quiet period" ahead of its upcoming IPO.
Wyatt declined to comment on the
matter.
Given Wal-Mart's supply chain and
distribution expertise coupled with its extensive merchandise mix and
lack of competition in India, Goel said that if the retail behemoth gets
its business off the ground there, it could "easily sustain triple-digit
or high double-digit growth annually over the next 5 to 10 years."
Moreover, he also has an idea about
how Wal-Mart could potentially bypass India's FDI roadblock.
"There is nothing stopping
multi-brand, multi-channel retailers like Wal-Mart, Target, J.C. Penney,
Best Buy or Home Depot from entering India tomorrow," he said.
How?
"The most optimal, capital-efficient
way to enter the India retail market is through a multi-channel,
direct-to-consumer model involving the Internet, TV, catalogs and mobile
phones supported by warehouses to stock inventory and fulfill orders,"
he said. "This eschews the high real-estate costs for retail stores.
India is also one of the largest Internet user populations in the world
and twice as many cellphones as landlines."
"Best of all, this model circumvents
current FDI regulations," he said.
[back to top]
FDIC delays
decision on Wal-Mart banking rules
India Daily
Jul. 28, 2006
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. on
Friday said it was placing a six-month moratorium on applications for
ownership changes for industrial loan companies, more commonly known as
the Wal-Mart Stores Inc. case.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart a victim of
its own success
Stephen Ellis
GREENBACK
July 27, 2006
[back to top]
WHEN you are five times the size of
your nearest rival, dominate the market and have annual sales of $US321
billion ($425 billion), where is there left to go? That is what Wall
Street is asking about Wal-Mart, despite the retailer's buoyant
financial results. Over the past year, Wal-Mart has tried to
reinvigorate its share price by paring its famously low inventories even
further, cutting labour costs, and depending less heavily on price
competition by edging up its market. All this has lifted gross margins,
which previously had been falling as sales grew too slowly to keep pace
with operating costs. Yet, Wal-Mart's share price has recently drifted
back down towards five-year lows touched last September.
International expansion remains the
most plausible growth story that the world's largest retailer (and
second-largest company, by revenue) can tell investors. Despite
struggles in markets such as Germany and more recently Britain, foreign
sales are growing at 30 per cent and now account for a fifth of
Wal-Mart's revenues.
But it is the other four-fifths of the
business that has Wall Street fretting, and where Wal-Mart is under most
pressure to tinker with its winning formula - low prices, superb
logistics and inventory management, a cheap non-union workforce and use
of its buying power to crunch suppliers.
Wal-Mart's US same-store sales growth
slowed to about 3 per cent in each of the past two years, half the level
of the 1990s and lagging growth in US consumer spending.
During that period, smaller rivals
such as Target were more successful at broadening their appeal beyond
basic wares and attracting more affluent consumers. Meanwhile, "dollar
store" retailers at the low end of the market also managed to grow
faster than Wal-Mart by specialising in that niche.
Given its vast size compared to its
rivals, more sluggish growth prompted investors to question whether
Wal-Mart had maxed-out its "share of wallet" among the low and moderate
income earners it largely serves.
Wal-Mart responded almost a year ago
by launching its campaign to trim inventories and costs, and to lift
sales by offering a smaller number of items per store, and focusing more
space and attention on better-selling goods tailored for that store.
It also launched an ambitious 18-month
program to remodel 1800 of its US stores to make them more physically
attractive and hopefully induce affluent customers to stay longer and
buy items such as clothing or electrical goods as well as basic
groceries.
While the firm's efforts to cut costs
appear to have paid off, and boosted gross margins and its bottom line,
the strategy to lift top-line revenues in the US has been less
successful - monthly same-store sales are still growing only half as
fast as those at competitors.
Ironically, the store remodelling
program itself is now seen by many as yet another factor holding back
revenue growth, although it may pay off down the line.
As it attempts to regain momentum,
Wal-Mart also faces political distractions that its rivals do not -
ranging from an attempt in Maryland to pass a law forcing it to spend 8
per cent of its wages bill on worker health insurance, to skirmishes
with unions in the US and Canada, and the ceaseless battle against
reflexive local opposition whenever it tries to build a new store.
The firm also ran into
well-orchestrated opposition from US banks to its recent bid to gain
regulatory approval to offer a broader range of financial services, the
outcome of which is still pending. Wal-Mart already has a large business
offering services such as cheque cashing to the "underbanked" -
low-income groups without bank relationships. While it denies plans to
offer anything resembling "branch banking", financial services is
potentially an important growth area - if it can gain approval.
Its struggle with the banks is
symptomatic of a larger and puzzling problem for Wal-Mart - largely
because of its immense success, it has become a focal point for whining
from all sorts of US interests, some of it well-organised and
well-funded. Unions moan over its employment practices and skimpy
benefits, small and mid-size retailers complain over unfair prices,
local politicians and self-proclaimed resident action groups vehemently
oppose its new stores, and even upstream suppliers mutter about the
tough deals they are forced into.
Media coverage of all this has rubbed
off. Polling suggests around a third of Americans have a negative view
of Wal-Mart. Investors fear that this too may harm growth, given the
more affluent consumers it must attract to broaden its market may be
among those most attuned to its critics.
Wal-Mart is undeniably competitive and
ruthless, but most of the complaints against it are tenuous. In
particular, the idea that it destroys good jobs and actually increases
prices over time are likely wrong.
Studies by neutral economists suggest
Wal-Mart creates about three jobs for each one it destroys, and its
arrival in a market leads to a long-term fall of roughly 10 per cent in
the prices of packaged consumer goods, such as toothpaste or laundry
detergent, as high prices at the businesses so loudly opposed to its
entry are forced down.
And while the firm clearly relies upon
fairly inexpensive labour, it also generates a lot of jobs - globally,
it employs 1.4 million people. Even the griping about benefits has
become less true, as Wal-Mart attempts to offer more health coverage.
All this, if understood and accepted,
may therefore silence the politicians and gladden the economists - but
it doesn't do much for Wal-Mart's shareholders. While China, Brazil and
India are great prospects in the long-term, investors will continue to
ask a tougher question: where is US sales growth going to come from in
the near-term?
[back to top]
Wal-Mart loses
battle in labour dispute
GlobeandMail
[back to top]
Wal-Mart Canada Corp. has lost its
battle to have the Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board prohibited from
hearing cases related to efforts to unionize stores in the province. In
a written decision, Court of Queen's Bench Mr. Justice Frank Gerein said
there was "absolutely no evidence" of attempts to interfere with the
operations of the labour board or to require members of the board to
read certain union documents that were highly critical of Wal-Mart.
Wal-Mart had tried to argue the board is biased and should be prohibited
from dealing with cases related to the chain. The United Food and
Commercial Workers Union has applied to the labour relations board for
certification to represent workers at Wal-Mart stores in Weyburn, North
Battleford and Moose Jaw. Andrew Pelletier, vice-president of corporate
affairs with Wal-Mart Canada, said the company is reviewing the
decision. CP
[back to top]
Organic for everyone,
the Wal-Mart way
America's biggest
company is also the world's biggest purchaser of organic cotton.
By Marc Gunther
Fortune
[back to top]
NEW YORK (Fortune) -- The $300-billion
global cotton industry uses more pesticides and synthetic fertilizers
than any other crop. Cotton Inc., the industry trade group, says that's
nothing to worry about, but you don't have to be a scientist to know
that applying tons and tons of pesticides to the soil - more than 50
million pounds in the United States alone - probably isn't a good thing.
Just ask H. Lee Scott, the chief
executive of Wal-Mart Stores (Charts), which in the last couple of years
has become the world's biggest purchaser of organic cotton.
"We will not be measured by our
aspirations," says Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott. "We will be measured by our
actions."
Wal-Mart saves the planet Well, not
quite. But CEO Lee Scott's green campaign, which started as PR, is
becoming a force of nature. (Read the story from Fortune.) Wal-Mart's
unsentimental reasons for promoting sustainable fishing
"Those toxins don't stop at the field,
but can leach into the waterways, and may eventually find their way into
animals, food and children," Scott said in a speech last year.
You probably know by now that Wal-Mart
has launched a sweeping drive to adopt business practices that are good
for the environment. You may have heard that Wal-Mart has been selling
organic cotton. This is the story behind the story - how and why the
company got involved, and how it's changing an industry.
The story begins, not with Scott, but
with a woman named Coral Rose. A native of southern California, Rose
buys organic food, wears organic clothes and uses all-natural cleaning
products for her home.
"I've lived an organic lifestyle for
about 15 years," says Rose. Both her parents died of cancer; that'll get
you thinking about chemicals in the air, water and food supply. Rose
worked for the clothing chain Wet Seal before joining Sams Club, a
division of Wal-Mart, as a ladies apparel buyer.
In the spring of 2004 - before
Wal-Mart launched its sustainability initiative - she placed an order
for organic cotton yoga outfits for Sams Club.
Although Sams Club is aimed at owners
of small businesses, the stores stock a limited selection of women's
clothes, as a "pick-me-up" for customers who are there to buy other
stuff, Rose explains.
The pastel-colored yoga tops sold for
less than $10, the loose-fitting pants for less than $14. They were a
big hit - about 190,000 units sold out in 10 weeks.
That got Lee Scott's attention. "We
gave our customers something they wanted, but something they might not
have been able to afford at specialty stores," he said. It was an early
sign that Wal-Mart's working-class and middle-income customers would be
willing to buy "green" products, so long as they were affordable.
Wal-Mart began working with a
nonprofit trade group called the Organic Exchange, which has been
promoting the use of organic cotton around the world since 2002.
The company's buyers and suppliers
toured organic cotton farms in Texas, California and Turkey, which is
the world's biggest grower of organic cotton. One trip, to a farm near
the town of Firebaugh, Ca., was especially memorable. They visited
organic fields and then looked at a crop-dusting facility, to learn
about chemicals and pesticides.
"There were crop dusters in the air
the whole day. It was pretty intense," said Rebecca Calahan Klein, the
founder and director of the Organic Exchange.
Today, Wal-Mart and Sams Club stock a
range of organic cotton products - baby clothes under the Baby George
brand, teenage fashion, and a line of bedsheets and towels. They've sold
5 million units of organic cotton ladies apparel in the last two years,
insiders say.
In none of this was Wal-Mart an
innovator. Patagonia converted its entire sportswear line to organic 10
years ago. Nike (Charts) promoted organic cotton, as did others, like
Eileen Fisher and Timberland (Charts). Retail sales of organic cotton
have doubled, from $245 million in 2001 to $583 million in 2005.
But the global supply was growing
rapidly too, and some farmers who converted to organic methods, which
can cost more, could not find buyers willing to pay a premium. They were
forced to sell their crop into the conventional cotton market at lower
prices.
Wal-Mart's entry has changed the game.
Five years ago, global production of organic cotton amounted to about
6,400 metric tons. In 2006, Wal-Mart and Sams Club will use about 6,800
metric tons. "They will be the largest buyer, by far," says Klein.
Just as important, Wal-Mart has made a
verbal five-year commitment to buy organic cotton, giving farmers the
assurance they need to produce it.
Beyond that, Wal-Mart will bring
visibility to organic cotton. "Wal-Mart has the biggest megaphone of
every company in the world," Klein says. "As they have more organic
products on their shelves, it will affect what consumers expect to see."
The Wal-Mart effect extends to the
cotton-growing regions of Turkey. Kees Maris, a Dutchman who oversees a
private organic cooperative of about 2,000 farmers called Mavideniz flew
all the way to Wal-Mart's home office in Bentonville a couple of weeks
ago to talk about organic cotton.
While other companies are also driving
demand for organics - his farmers grow figs and apricots along with
cotton - Wal-Mart is one of the few to get directly involved with the
farmers. "Their approach is very positive," he told me.
To be sure, the organic cotton
business remains small - less than 1 percent of the global cotton
industry. Cotton Inc., by the way, argues that too much fuss is being
made about pesticides and herbicides used by conventional methods.
"Farmers who live and work on their
land have every personal and economic incentive to use fewer chemicals
in production, not more," the organization says. You can find their
point of view here.
The environmental case is put forth by
the Organic Exchange and by an activist group called PANNA.
Make up your own mind, but know that
the next time you shop, you are doing more than buying a T-shirt or a
dress. You're voting with your dollars for one way of doing business, or
another.
[back to top]
Walmart to
source up $30 million a year from India
NetIndia123
July 26, 2006
[back to top]
The global food chain Walmart has
assured the government that it would source up to 30 billion dollar a
year from India for its global supply, Minister of State (Independent
Charge) of Food Processing Industries Subodh Kant Sahai said today.
However, Mr Sahai said FDI in retail
sectors remained a political question. The government did not want to
eliminate small players but to create a world market for the products.
''The government will table the Food
and Safety Standards Bill 2005 in Parliament today in order to give a
boost to the food processing and packaging sector,'' he said at a
National Seminar on Packaging organised by the Confederation of Indian
Industry (CII) here.
Mr Sahai said the proposed Bill would
not cover street food vendors. They needed to be motivated to improve
their quality with better packaging techniques and material to upgrade
their quality and services.
He said the Bill would consolidate
laws relating to food and establish standards of food and safety.
Meanwhile, the government had
recommended lower VAT rates to states of zero percent for perishable
food and 4 per cent for non-perishable food, respectively.
However, the government had reduced
excise duty to 16 per cent on packaging paper and 5 per cent for
machinery, Mr Sahai said.
He said government was planning 60 new
millennium cities that would usher in a new culture where housewives
would not cook whole meals but buy pre-cooked food, with 5,000 new
retails outlets to be opened in the next two to three years.
Mr Sahai said packaging needed to
adhere to strict health standards because of its prolonged contact with
food, adding that packaging remained expensive in India resulting higher
prices of processed food. This needed to be reduced through new
technology and better materials.
''Packaged food appeared to be more
hygienic, standardized and longer-lasting than food bought from
street-side vendors. The packaging industry needed to build this
perception among consumers in order increase the sales of processed
food,'' he said.
Speaking at the occasion, Chairman,
CII National Committee on Packaging, Gaurav Swarup said food stuff worth
Rs 7,000 crore was being wasted annually as the agriculture had not
invested in packaging facilities.
Food prcessing growth had enabled the
packaging industry to grow at 20-25 per cent annually, he informed.
Nearly 100 participants from the
packaging and food processing industry attended the workshop.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart runs on
ground in Canadian courts
by: jensonj
Wednesday, July 26 2006
[back to top]
Wal-Mart runs on ground in Canadian
courts, mercilessly exposed for bad behaviour - Labour news from UNI
global union - for trade unions in a global services economy. -
The Canadian legal system does not
play Wal-Mart's game, if the company now thought they would. In two
recent court decisions, the retail giant has been mercilessly exposed
for its repressive and anti-social behaviour. Workers that were fired in
Jonquičre, Quebec, for their union activities, have to be compensated.
In a Saskatchewan court, Wal-Mart's efforts to disqualify the Labour
Relations Board from dealing with unionisation issues in Wal-Mart ran on
ground.
Do you remember Jonquičre, the small
town in Quebec, Canada, some 500 kilometres from Montreal? Here, the
Wal-Mart workers wanted their union UFCW to represent them and to
negotiate a collective agreement. The Bentonville-based company was of
another opinion, so they just closed the store and sent their workers
out on the street. Rather than accepting a collective agreement, they
took away the jobs from their workers and the means of living from their
families.
Norwegian sideline
No wonder that the Norwegian
government - and a growing number of other socially conscious investors
- choose to get rid of their Wal-Mart stock. As the Norwegians say, they
don't want to be accomplices in Wal-Mart's human rights violations.
In a sideline which many in Norway,
and outside as well, saw as rather ridiculous, the US Ambassador
intervened and threatened that there would be a reaction against the
Norwegian government. So the close ties between the Bush administration
and Wal-Mart seem to stretch also far beyond the Washington-Bentonville
axis.
[back to top]
Chicago City Council
OKs 'Living Wage'
Associated Press
July 26, 2006
[back to top]
CHICAGO (AP) - Brushing aside warnings
from Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the City Council approved an ordinance
Wednesday that makes Chicago the biggest city in the nation to require
big-box retailers to pay a "living wage." "It's trying to get the
largest companies in America to pay decent wages," said Alderman Toni
Preckwinkle.
The ordinance passed 35-14 after three
hours of impassioned debate.
The measure requires mega-retailers
with more than $1 billion in annual sales and stores of at least 90,000
square feet to pay workers at least $10 an hour in wages plus $3 in
fringe benefits by mid-2010. The current minimum wage in Illinois is
$6.50 an hour and the federal minimum is $5.15.
Mayor Richard M. Daley and others
warned the living wage proposal would drive jobs and desperately needed
development from some of the city's poorest neighborhoods and lead
giants like Wal-Mart to abandon the city.
"This (ordinance) imposes special
interest mandates that will unfairly deny savings and job opportunities
to those who need them most," Michael Lewis, Wal-Mart's senior vice
president of store operations, said in a statement. "It's wrong for the
City Council to tell the people of Chicago where to shop and to make it
harder for inner-city residents to find jobs."
Wal-Mart spokesman John Bisio said
earlier that if the measure passed, "We'd redirect our focus on our
suburban strategy and see how we could better serve our city of Chicago
residents from suburban Chicagoland."
Some aldermen also warned that Target
Corp. might rethink its presence in the city -- though the
Minneapolis-based company has not discussed the issue.
"It's going to hurt our economy," said
Alderman Bernard Stone, who voted against the measure.
Other cities with living-wage laws
include Santa Fe and Albuquerque in New Mexico; San Francisco; and
Washington.
Chicago has been at the center of the
debate about the wages at big retailers ever since the city's rejection
of a proposal by Wal-Mart to open a store on the South Side prompted the
company to open a store just outside the city limits.
The first Wal-Mart in Chicago itself
is set to open in September, and the Bentonville, Ark.-based company has
more than 40 other stores within 50 miles of the city.
Wal-Mart said that its average hourly
wage is almost $11 an hour in the Chicago area and that the lowest wage
that will be paid at the new West Side store will be $7.25 an hour.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart statement on Chicago's approval of minimum wage
Associated Press
Posted on Wed, Jul. 26, 2006
[back to top]
The following is the text of a
statement issued by Wal-Mart Stores Inc. after the Chicago City Council
approved an ordinance Wednesday that sets a minimum wage for employees
at so-called "big box" stores:
"This vote sadly puts politics ahead
of Chicago's working men and women. It sends a message that Chicago is
closed for business, closed for development, and closed for job
creation.
"This imposes special interest
mandates that will unfairly deny savings and job opportunities to those
who need them most. It's wrong for the City Council to tell the people
of Chicago where to shop and to make it harder for inner-city residents
to find jobs.
"Our preference is to serve the people
of Chicago in their communities, and we will do what we can to keep up
with significant consumer demand from city residents.
"Just as every business weighs the
costs and complications associated with each potential location, we will
try to provide Chicago residents with the savings, choices and jobs they
clearly want, without subjecting ourselves to a discriminatory
marketplace and a competitive disadvantage.
"Dozens of communities around the City
of Chicago already welcome the savings, job opportunities and tax
revenue we bring with each store opening. It's sad to see the City
Council make this unfortunate choice to stand in the way of these
benefits for Chicago's working families."
_Michael Lewis, senior vice president,
store operations
© 2006 AP Wire and wire service
sources. All Rights Reserved.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart in fight for
China's market
China Economic Net
Jul 26 2006
[back to top]
In this remote region along the old
Silk Road, Carrefour is on the march.
The Paris-based retailer has already
opened two stores in Urumqi, one in the northern end where many ethnic
Chinese live and another next to a mosque in the Muslim section
populated by Uighurs. This fall, Carrefour will open a third mega-store
in the city of 2 million, selling groceries alongside its other goods.
What about Wal-Mart Stores?
"I can't imagine they will come here,"
Christian Roquigny, who manages Carrefour's Uighur store, said as he
walked past a golden-domed mosque.
Roquigny boasted that his store sold
no pork and was certified as halal, or permissible under Islamic dietary
law. Wal-Mart managers, he said, aren't given the same flexibility to
adapt.
As the world's leading retailers
battle for new markets around the globe, they are increasingly setting
up in places like Urumqi, where Carrefour's average checkout total is
just over $5.
Wal-Mart and Carrefour, the world's
No. 1 and No. 2 retailers, have stepped up their expansion in China in
recent years, virtually matching each other, store for store, in many
locales.
Carrefour's operation in this western
city demonstrates why the French company has raced ahead of its
multinational rivals in the world's most-populous nation. By joining
with Chinese partners, adapting to local culture and employing a supply
chain that includes 18-wheel trucks and three-wheel bicycles, Carrefour
has become the biggest foreign retailer operating in China.
It operates 79 stores in 32 Chinese
cities compared with 60 locations in 30 cities for Wal-Mart. Last year,
Carrefour's sales in China totaled $2.2 billion, compared with $1.2
billion for Wal-Mart, according to the Commerce Ministry in Beijing.
Wal-Mart is accelerating its store
openings in China -- it plans to open at least 18 this year, six more
than Carrefour -- and analysts are reluctant to bet against the
Bentonville, Ark.-based discount retailer given its enormous resources.
Its global sales last year reached $285 billion, triple that of
Carrefour's. Wal-Mart bought $18 billion in goods from Chinese
manufacturers last year.
But as a retailer in China, Wal-Mart
is a small fish. Its strategy of offering tian tian ping jia, or
``everyday low prices,'' hasn't had a big effect on Chinese mom-and-pop
shops that are used to cutthroat pricing. Wal-Mart has been unable to
replicate its super-efficient logistics system in China largely because
it lacks scale.
Even Wal-Mart's staunch anti-union
stance is being challenged, ironically, in a country where unions have
little power. Government-backed trade union officials in China have been
trying to organize workers at foreign enterprises and have been
especially critical of Wal-Mart's resistance to the idea.
Carrefour has more international
experience than Wal-Mart. The French company operates in 29 countries,
about double the number for Wal-Mart. Both chains have struggled in
Asia, however, pulling out of countries such as South Korea. And despite
their push in China, Chinese retailers dominate.
The more stores it can open, the
better chance Wal-Mart can leverage its mass scale to squeeze prices
lower and drive efficiencies in purchasing, inventory management and
distribution.
(Source: Los Angeles Times)
@ China Economic Net All rights
reserved
[back to top]
Saskatchewan court rules against Wal-Mart in labour battle
Canadian Press
[back to top]
SASKATOON — Retail giant Wal-Mart has
lost its battle to have the Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board
prohibited from hearing cases related to efforts to unionize stores in
the province.
In a written decision, Queen's Bench
Justice Frank Gerein said there was “absolutely no evidence” of attempts
to interfere with the operations of the labour board or to require
members of the board to read certain union documents that were highly
critical of Wal-Mart.
“It is impossible to conclude that
bias exists within the Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board,” Judge
Gerein said.
Wal-Mart had tried to argue the board
was biased and should be prohibited from dealing with cases related to
the chain.
The United Food and Commercial Workers
Union has applied to the labour relations board for certification to
represent workers at Wal-Mart stores in Weyburn, North Battleford and
Moose Jaw.
But those applications have been
delayed by legal wrangling.
Andrew Pelletier, vice-president of
corporate affairs with Wal-Mart Canada, said the company is “reviewing
the [Gerein] decision and considering possibly appealing to the
Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.”
[back to top]
Wal-Mart Adopts Tougher
Defense
By MARCUS KABEL
AP Business
Jul 26
[back to top]
BENTONVILLE, Ark. (AP) -- Wal-Mart
Stores Inc. signaled a more aggressive defense against its union-backed
critics by naming Democratic Party insider Leslie Dach its new chief of
public relations this week.
Experts said Tuesday that, by hiring
the former Clinton White House adviser, Wal-Mart is endorsing a
proactive defense strategy that Dach authored as a consultant for the
world's largest retailer. For the past year, Dach headed a 35-member
team from global public relations firm Edelman, which Wal-Mart hired
last year as it came under fire from unions and others.
Wal-Mart on Monday named Dach its
executive vice president for corporate affairs and government relations.
For the first time in Wal-Mart history, the head of communications will
be a member of its top executive team and report to the CEO.
"I think they are institutionalizing a
more pro-active approach to public relations," said corporate reputation
management expert Steven Silvers, who has worked for 25 years advising
public and private companies.
"Edelman did a very good job of
bringing Wal-Mart into the 21st century in terms of using
communications," said Silvers, whose Denver-based firm GBSM, Inc. does
no work for Wal-Mart or its critics.
The company has opened local
communications offices around the country to smooth relations with
communities that have often opposed new Wal-Mart stores. It has also
asked environmental groups to help draft plans for reducing energy use,
greenhouse gas emissions and packaging waste.
Dach himself said he believes he can
help the company continue a transformation that has included adopting
ambitious environmental goals.
"I think that on issues like
sustainability, the company is going to make a big difference, and do
things the government can't or won't do," Dach wrote to friends,
explaining his decision in an e-mail that was then circulated to
reporters and others.
With Edelman's help, Wal-Mart has
become much more assertive after years of stonily ignoring critics. The
change came under pressure from two union-funded campaign groups using
public pressure to end what they call low pay and skimpy benefits at
America's largest employer.
Wal-Mart now touts changes such as new
lower-cost health plans for employees, has reached out to selected
critics including environmentalists, and started an outside support
group called Working Families for Wal-Mart - chaired by former civil
rights leader Andrew Young.
It has also adopted political
campaign-style tactics including a rapid response "war room" and an
attack Web site, paidcritics.com.
Retail analyst Don Gher at Coldstream
Capital Management in Bellevue, Wash., which manages about $1 billion in
assets, including Wal-Mart shares, said hiring Dach was an effective way
to counter union efforts to make Wal-Mart's business practices a
political issue for Democrats.
"Here's an individual who is very
entrenched in the Democratic Party. By bringing him on board, you have
brought in somebody who is hopefully very adept at dealing with issues
that are near and dear to Democratic hearts, like health care and
unions," Gher said.
Clinton administration officials
praised Dach as an experienced communicator with an interest in genuine
change rather than in just spinning the news.
"He is not interested in putting some
wash on an issue. He is about finding a real solution to a problem,"
said former Environmental Protection Agency head Carol Browner, who said
she has known Dach since they both worked in the environmental movement
in the 1980s.
Former Clinton chief of staff Mack
McLarty said Dach's reputation "is sterling in both a personal and
professional sense." McLarty's advisory firm Kissinger McLarty
Associates consults for Wal-Mart on international issues.
Wal-Mart's union-backed opponents said
Dach's hiring would not defuse their criticism.
"Our advice to (Chief Executive) Lee
Scott is to save the PR money and realize that only real change, like
providing affordable health care and a living wage to all your workers,
will set Wal-Mart free from fast becoming the nation's greatest poster
boy for corporate greed and irresponsibility," said Chris Kofinis from
WakeUpWalMart.com.
© 2006 The Associated Press. All
rights reserved.
[back to top]
Public Relations
Consultant Joins Wal-Mart
By MICHAEL BARBARO
July 25, 2006
[back to top]
Wal-Mart Stores, which has long
cultivated a folksy, outside-the-beltway image, has hired the ultimate
Washington insider as its next head of public relations and government
affairs.
The giant retailer said yesterday that
Leslie Dach, a prominent Democratic operative who advised President Bill
Clinton during the impeachment process, would join the company in
August..
The appointment indicated that
Wal-Mart, which is the subject of a broad assault from union-backed
groups, would push ahead with an aggressive political-style response to
its critics.
That response has been heavily shaped
by Mr. Dach himself, who runs the Washington office of the public
relations firm Edelman.
Wal-Mart hired Edelman last year and,
since then, the firm has developed a number of new public relations
initiatives for the retailer, including a rapid-response war room at its
headquarters in Bentonville, Ark, and an outside advocacy group called
Working Families for Wal-Mart.
Mr. Dach has also bolstered Wal-Mart’s
once-sedate public relations team, adding dozens of Edelman consultants
to its ranks.
While heading up the Wal-Mart account
for Edelman, Mr. Dach has become a close adviser to Wal-Mart’s chief
executive, H. Lee Scott Jr., often tweaking his speeches and
accompanying him to major company events.
Immediately after Mr. Scott delivered
a speech about health care to the nation’s governors this year in
Washington, he gave Mr. Dach a bear hug in the corridor of the Marriott
Hotel.
To reflect that close relationship,
Mr. Dach will be given the title executive vice president for corporate
affairs, will serve on the executive committee and will report directly
to Mr. Scott. Mr. Dach’s predecessor at Wal-Mart, Jay Allen, who has
retired, held the title senior vice president and reported to a
lower-ranking executive.
Mr. Dach, who lives in the Washington
area, said he would split his time between Washington and Bentonville.
In an interview, Mr. Dach said he was
impressed with the changes under way at Wal-Mart, like sweeping
commitments to lower its energy use and carbon dioxide emissions and its
efforts to expand health care coverage to its 1.3 million American
workers.
“I believe that change is happening
and the change is real,” he said. Explaining his decision to leave his
role as an outside consultant, he added, “The changes come from the
inside.”
Copyright 2006 The New York Times
Company
[back to top]
Wal-Mart in fight for
China's market
By Don Lee
Los Angeles Times
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
[back to top]
URUMQI, China - In this remote region
along the old Silk Road, Carrefour is on the march.
The Paris-based retailer has already
opened two stores in Urumqi, one in the northern end where many ethnic
Chinese live and another next to a mosque in the Muslim section
populated by Uighurs. This fall, Carrefour will open a third mega-store
in the city of 2 million, selling groceries alongside its other goods.
What about Wal-Mart Stores?
``I can't imagine they will come
here,'' Christian Roquigny, who manages Carrefour's Uighur store, said
as he walked past a golden-domed mosque.
Roquigny boasted that his store sold
no pork and was certified as halal, or permissible under Islamic dietary
law. Wal-Mart managers, he said, aren't given the same flexibility to
adapt.
As the world's leading retailers
battle for new markets around the globe, they are increasingly setting
up in places like Urumqi, where Carrefour's average checkout total is
just over $5.
Wal-Mart and Carrefour, the world's
No. 1 and No. 2 retailers, have stepped up their expansion in China in
recent years, virtually matching each other, store for store, in many
locales.
Carrefour's operation in this western
city demonstrates why the French company has raced ahead of its
multinational rivals in the world's most-populous nation. By joining
with Chinese partners, adapting to local culture and employing a supply
chain that includes 18-wheel trucks and three-wheel bicycles, Carrefour
has become the biggest foreign retailer operating in China.
It operates 79 stores in 32 Chinese
cities compared with 60 locations in 30 cities for Wal-Mart. Last year,
Carrefour's sales in China totaled $2.2 billion, compared with $1.2
billion for Wal-Mart, according to the Commerce Ministry in Beijing.
Wal-Mart is accelerating its store
openings in China -- it plans to open at least 18 this year, six more
than Carrefour -- and analysts are reluctant to bet against the
Bentonville, Ark.-based discount retailer given its enormous resources.
Its global sales last year reached $285 billion, triple that of
Carrefour's. Wal-Mart bought $18 billion in goods from Chinese
manufacturers last year.
But as a retailer in China, Wal-Mart
is a small fish. Its strategy of offering tian tian ping jia, or
``everyday low prices,'' hasn't had a big effect on Chinese mom-and-pop
shops that are used to cutthroat pricing. Wal-Mart has been unable to
replicate its super-efficient logistics system in China largely because
it lacks scale.
Even Wal-Mart's staunch anti-union
stance is being challenged, ironically, in a country where unions have
little power. Government-backed trade union officials in China have been
trying to organize workers at foreign enterprises and have been
especially critical of Wal-Mart's resistance to the idea.
Carrefour has more international
experience than Wal-Mart. The French company operates in 29 countries,
about double the number for Wal-Mart. Both chains have struggled in
Asia, however, pulling out of countries such as South Korea. And despite
their push in China, Chinese retailers dominate.
The more stores it can open, the
better chance Wal-Mart can leverage its mass scale to squeeze prices
lower and drive efficiencies in purchasing, inventory management and
distribution.
[back to top]
City puts off vote on
super Wal-Mart
Residents question
impact of project
Thomasi McDonald
The News & Observer
[back to top]
RALEIGH - For Southeast Raleigh
residents, the issue of a Wal-Mart Supercenter in the community boils
down to one question. Are they willing to accept more traffic in
exchange for low, low prices?
A city council committee delayed a
vote Monday morning on a 220,000-square-foot store at the corner of Rock
Quarry and Sunnybrook roads to give the developer a chance to answer the
public's questions. Raleigh's comprehensive planning committee agreed to
a 30-day delay.
"We anticipated there would be
questions, and we wanted to make sure we answered everyone's questions,"
said Grady Matthews, a principal with Granite Development, the Raleigh
company building the shopping center.
The proposed store has given Southeast
Raleigh some its first cases of growing pains. Residents have long
complained of limited shopping options, but they now worry about the
traffic, environmental impact and community change commercial
development could bring.
Joyner Brooks, 71, of Cary was among
those in favor of the superstore that would sit across from the Walnut
Creek Amphitheater and less than a mile from a busy charter school and a
planned 2,405 home subdivision.
"It's great for the economic
development of Southeast Raleigh," said Brooks, who moved to the area in
1933 and can remember when Rock Quarry and Sunnybrook roads were
unpaved.
"It appears to be a great jump start
for Southeast Raleigh and convenient shopping in the area," said Brooks,
who added that Sunnybrook Road was named after his father.
Developers say the new store would
create 350 new jobs and add a projected $1 million to Wake County's tax
base.
But most of the citizens who spoke
were not impressed.
Isaiah Green Jr., a clergyman and
Southeast Raleigh resident, presented a petition signed by 24 Southeast
Raleigh residents.
"A project of this magnitude is not
proper for this residential setting and should be considered for an area
where major roads are adequate to accommodate such a construction plan,"
Green said about the shopping center, which is expected to bring more
than 7,200 cars to the area each day.
Tryon Ridge resident T. Renee Watkins
wondered how stormwater runoff from the site would affect flood-prone
areas.
"There's already a drainage problem on
Old Williams Road," Watkins said.
Matthews said the developers would
make several road improvements if the shopping center is built, and he
noted that the Raleigh Planning Commission and the city staff both
support the project and that it is in compliance with city regulations.
Real estate broker Tyler Toulon said
the the proposed superstore would be about 141,631 square feet larger
than the city's development guidelines. "If it don't fit, then don't
permit," Toulon said.
© Copyright 2006, The News & Observer
Publishing Company
[back to top]
The Case For Breaking Up
Wal-Mart
Disinformation
Tuesday, July 25
[back to top]
'There is an undeniable beauty to
laissez-faire theory, with its promise that by struggling against one
another, by grasping and elbowing and shouting and shoving, we create
efficiency and satisfaction and progress for all. This concept has
shaped, at the most fundamental levels, how we understand and engineer
our basic freedoms -- economic, political, and moral. Until recently,
however, most politicians and economists accepted that freedom within
the marketplace had to be limited, at least to some degree, by rules
designed to ensure general economic and social outcomes.
'From Adam Smith onward, almost all
the great preachers of laissez-faire were tempered by a strain of deep
realism. Most accepted that a national economy ultimately served a
nation that had to survive in an often brutal world. So, too, did most
accept that all economies are characterized by struggles for power and
precedence among men and institutions run by men; in other words, that
all economies are fundamentally political in nature. And so most
accepted the need to use the power of the state -- most dramatically in
the form of antitrust law -- to prevent any one man or firm from
consolidating so much power as to throw off basic balances. The
invisible hand of the marketplace, and all that derives from it, had to
be protected by the visible hand of government.' (AlterNet article).
[For more reasons see Robert Greenwald's DVD Wal-Mart: The High Cost Of
Low Price and Greg Spotts' companion book.]
[back to top]
Wal-Mart hits another
obstacle
By Chuck Terrill
[back to top]
A controversial proposal to
commercialize about 80 acres of farmland south of Valley Center will
have to wait a few more days, thanks to a vote Tuesday by the Wichita
City Council.
Council member Sharon Fearey asked the
council to defer for two weeks a decision on the rezoning request at
53rd North and Meridian. Developers want the area rezoned from
residential to light commercial so they can begin a large commercial
project that would include a Wal-Mart Supercenter, at least two other
large commercial retailers and a handful of smaller businesses.
After saying she was against the
so-called Northgate Commercial Park proposal, Fearey, who represents the
affected area, said she wanted more time to talk to the developers about
some of her concerns.
“Fifty percent of the people up there
just hate this,” Fearey said.
She said she plans to meet with some
of her constituents and then meet with the developers to try and make
the development more agreeable to those who oppose it.
The plan has been about a year in the
making.
“We’ll sit down, talk to Sharon and
see what she has to say,” developer Jay Russell told the News after
Tuesday’s meeting.
Though most spoke in favor of the
proposal, a majority of the council (4-3) supported Fearey’s request for
an extension. A vote on the proposal is expected at the council’s Aug. 1
meeting.
“I do not think that I have much of a
chance in getting this denied,” Fearey told the News Tuesday evening.
“The indication from the rest of the council was that they would pass it
today, but some voted with me for the deferral out of respect for the
district’s citizens. I do not think any of the other council members
will change their minds before Aug. 1.”
The proposal has gone through the
usual channels, starting with a public meeting in late May, where some
residents spoke against it while others were equally passionate in their
support.
The district’s advisory board voted to
deny the request in early June. The Metropolitan Area Planning
Commission approved the request later that month.
Some feared the increase in traffic
the development would cause. Others said it would be detrimental to area
residential properties.
Developers agreed to provide
improvements to the surrounding roads and intersections.
Wichita Vice Mayor Paul Gray said
developers “have bent over backwards” to address concerns of area
residents.
Fearey said the plan is too large for
that area, placing a burden on sewer and water systems as well as the
roads.
She said there are other areas of
Wichita that should receive attention, such as 21st and Amidon.
Russell said Wal-Mart likes the
location because of the trends the retailer has seen at its 21st and
Maize location, where a large chunk of its customers are from the
northwest part of the county.
To the north of the commercial
project, developers are planning a residential subdivision.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart
Web site seems to try too hard to be hip
Arizona Republic
Monday, July 24, 2006
[back to top]
Wal-Mart has started the Hub, which
bears some of the features of a My-Space-like social network, but
appears to be essentially an advertising vehicle that encourages teens
to create commercials for the retail chain and post them to the site.
The Hub allows users to create pages and videos, somewhat like MySpace.
It tells them to express "individuality," but screens their posts and
doesn't allow them to e-mail each other. The site is running a contest
for the best video submissions about how much the submitter likes
Wal-Mart (schoolyourway.walmart.com).
The Hub is a big part of Wal-Mart's
effort to appeal to fashion-conscious teens, but it's not clear how many
"Hubsters" have joined. The pages and videos featured on the home page
have a highly produced quality, leading one teenager to wonder on
adage.com, "Are these real kids?"
[back to top]
Spare
Goliath
Maryland's
"Wal-Mart law" is a bad idea that doesn't deserve a second chance.
The Washington Post Company
Monday, July 24
[back to top]
MARYLAND'S state lawmakers thought
they were David fighting Goliath this year when they passed a law aimed
at Wal-Mart Stores' employment policies. But a federal judge found last
week that David missed his shot. The Maryland legislature's law, which
required the mega-merchandiser to spend at least 8 percent of its
payroll on health care for its workers, conflicted with federal statute,
the court ruled.
State Senate President Thomas V. Mike
Miller (D-Calvert), who described the legislature's election-year battle
against Wal-Mart as a fight between good and evil, is promising to
redraft the legislation and pass it again. He should spare the state
another round of his ill-advised battle with this corporate giant.
According to U.S. District Judge J. Frederick Motz, the legislation
contravened the federal Employment Retirement Income Security Act, which
prohibits states from setting employee health and pensions standards
that would keep multi-state companies from maintaining uniform benefits
programs across state borders. But even if Mr. Miller could find a way
to draft a legally viable version of the law, he still shouldn't
reintroduce the measure.
Targeting a single company because
it's unpopular -- or, as Mr. Miller implied, because it's buying
political protection with "contributions to the Republican Party" -- is
a misuse of governmental power. And repassing the law would have nothing
to do with solving the problem of rising state health-care costs.
Compared to the national average, Wal-Mart employees are only a tad more
likely to collect state-sponsored Medicaid benefits, and many other
employers in Maryland keep their health benefits similarly low. About
800,000 Marylanders don't have health insurance, and most of them don't
work at Wal-Mart. Massachusetts, a state that is trying to responsibly
address rising health-care costs, hasn't resorted to preying selectively
on its large employers. Neither should Maryland.
© 2006 The Washington Post Company
[back to top]
Opinion Maryland Lawmakers Should Not Reintroduce Wal-Mart Legislation
Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report
Monday, July 24, 2006
[back to top]
Editorial Says Maryland lawmakers
"should spare the state another round of ... [an] ill-advised battle"
with Wal-Mart Stores through the reintroduction of legislation that
would require the company to increase spending on health care for
employees, a Washington Post editorial states (Washington Post, 7/24).
The law, enacted on Jan. 12, would have required employers in Maryland
with 10,000 or more employees to spend at least 8% of payroll costs on
health care or contribute to a state fund for the uninsured. Wal-Mart
was the only employer in Maryland affected by the law. Last week, U.S.
District Judge J. Frederick Motz ruled that the Maryland law violated
the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (Kaiser Daily Health
Policy Report, 7/21). According to the editorial, "Maryland's state
lawmakers thought they were David fighting Goliath this year when they
passed a law aimed at Wal-Mart's Stores' employment polices," but Motz
ruled that "David missed his shot." The editorial adds that Maryland
lawmakers should not reintroduce the legislation, regardless of whether
they can draft a legally viable version, because legislation that
targets one company "is a misuse of governmental power" and has "nothing
to do with solving the problem of rising state health care costs."
Maryland lawmakers should "responsibly address rising health care
costs," rather than "preying selectively on its large employers," the
editorial states (Washington Post, 7/24
[back to top]
High Springs
to Wal-Mart: protect water or else
By Christa Jenkins-Desrets
Herald
[back to top]
HIGH SPRINGS -- High Springs City
Commissioners again have taken steps to challenge a proposed Wal-Mart
Supercenter in Alachua near the Interstate 75 interchange, saying that
the site could potentially damage their city’s water supply if too few
precautions are taken.
High Springs officials submitted a
letter last Friday, July 14, challenging Wal-Mart’s stormwater permit
through the Suwannee River Water Management District.
And if the water district officials do
not accept that challenge, High Springs officials also are taking
measures to bring the matter before the Florida Division of
Administrative Hearings, a body that hears cases involving governmental
entities.
Alachua County commissioners had
challenged the permit just a week before but accepted an agreement with
Wal-Mart officials who said they would participate in some practices
that would decrease chances of damaging the water supply but would only
consider participating in a comprehensive water study.
This study would ask Wal-Mart to test
the water for quality and biological life before development, then on a
regular basis afterward. Wal-Mart would not commit to the study, with
officials saying they would only consider it in the future.
But High Springs officials decided at
their July 13 meeting that that was not good enough.
“I don’t think this document goes
anywhere near where it needs to go,” Commissioner Kirk Eppenstein said,
referring to the Wal-Mart-County agreement. “It puts the level of
participation solely at the discretion of the applicant.”
Mayor Byran Williams had previously
issued letters on March 27 and June 23 expressing concerns about the
site and asking the water district to use extra scrutiny when issuing
permits for the site since it was particularly vulnerable to water
issues.
But that permit was issued anyway
after a public hearing on June 13, the same day that Tropical Storm
Alberto hit the area.
Williams asserts in a July 14 letter
that the original public hearing for the water permit was not sufficient
because of the state of emergency at the time, plus the fact that High
Springs officials were not notified of the meeting even though they had
previously indicated their concern.
City Manager Jim Drumm echoed similar
comments.
“The day they held their public
hearing, all the emergency management personnel came out and said ‘stay
home,’” City Manager Jim Drumm said. “…It’s a shame we weren’t invited
to those discussions.”
If the Suwannee River Water Management
District decides not to hold another public meeting, Drumm said, the
city has already began the filing process for an administrative hearing
through the state.
Such a hearing would be much like a
court hearing, according to City Attorney Jim Pendland, and each side
would present evidence to support their case.
One of the most important pieces of
evidence supporting the idea that additional safeguards need to be in
place, said Pete Butt, of Karst Environmental Services, is a set of dye
tests that he managed last year.
In those tests, a series of colored
dyes were released into Mill Creek Sink, which is near the proposed
Wal-Mart, and found that after only 12 days, that dye had traveled six
miles through the underwater cave system to Hornsby Spring in High
Springs.
These results, Butt said, are
conclusive evidence that underwater caves connect the area around
Wal-Mart to water supplies in High Springs.
Without the proper safeguards to
prevent runoff from Wal-Mart into the nearby sinkholes, Butt said, the
aquifer water could begin to degrade.
Eppenstein said that this possible
result is what makes the matter pertinent to High Springs.
“The goal is not what is going to be
placed there, but how it will be placed there,” Eppenstein said. “Water
and air do not have jurisdictional boundaries.”
And if the water did get contaminated,
Drumm said, the city would have to initiate a purification system, which
could take years.
In the meantime, he said, supplying
water to residents could mean installing underground pipes to pump it
from as far away as Lake City. This process would likely cost more than
fees for an administrative hearing, he said.
“They (Wal-Mart) probably have deeper
pockets, but then what will we do if our drinking water is
contaminated,” he said. “…The cost (of pumping water) would be
unbelievable.”
Williams submitted his latest letter
to the water district July 14, and as of Wednesday, commissioners were
still awaiting a response.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart
knocks on Mukesh’s door for an alliance
US retail giant
also in talks with other industrial houses
Sindhu Bhattacharya
Friday, July 21, 2006
[back to top]
NEW DELHI: Guess who’s among the
companies that Wal-Mart is in talks with for its India foray? Topping
the list is Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL), which itself is giving the
finishing touches to its own retail juggernaut likely to be rolled out
next month.
Also a surprise since RIL is planning
to give India a Wal-Mart like presence in scale and size of operations
and could well be a future competitor to the US giant.
An industry source pointed out that
Wal-Mart is interested in partnering RIL in the area of logistics -
which means sourcing items such as fresh fruits and vegetables, besides
their transportation to the length and breadth of the country. RIL is
readying a 40-plane air cargo fleet for its own logistical needs and
this could serve Wal-Mart’s purpose as well! When contacted, Reliance
officials declined to comment on the matter.
Wal-Mart has appointed management
consultant McKinsey & Co to help find a suitable partner or several of
them for its India operations. Despite several attempts, Wal-Mart India
representative Lance Retigg could not be reached.
And it’s not just RIL. Wal-Mart is
also believed to have approached other large industrial houses, despite
the stringent foreign direct investment (FDI) norms. The companies that
Wal-Mart is in talks with include vehicle maker Mahindra & Mahindra and
Sunil Mittal’s Bharti Group.
While M&M is not known to nurse any
retail ambitions till now, Bharti has already selected British major
Tesco for its retail initiative.
But even as Wal-Mart has been holding
preliminary discussions with big business houses, it is believed to be
snaring real estate major DLF as a franchisee.
Industry sources pointed out that in
this arrangement, while the retail outlets will be owned by DLF,
back-end distribution and logistics will be handled by Wal-Mart. A DLF
spokeswoman declined to make comment.
[back to top]
South Oshawa
Wal-Mart approved amid controversy
By Jillian Follert
Jul 21, 2006
[back to top]
OSHAWA -- They're known as the "store
wars." As cities grow and new retailers push to get in on the action,
existing malls, downtowns and stores push back, fearing for their
livelihoods.
It's a story that played out in Oshawa
this year, as retail developer SmartCentres spent months fighting for
permission to build a new Wal-Mart plaza near Stevenson Road and Hwy.
401. Approval was granted July 17 at the last council until the fall.
Neighbours like the Oshawa Centre,
Zellers Inc., Loblaws Properties and Canadian Tire tried to block the
attempt, claiming the competition would be too intense. Now, they will
likely continue the fight at the Ontario Municipal Board.
In a letter to council opposing the
plaza, David Baffa, director of development for Oshawa Centre owner
Ivanhoe Cambridge, said the plaza would "generate significant negative
consequences for the Oshawa Centre, for other Central Area stores and
for other planned retail developments in Oshawa."
He points out the City has been
encouraging the "re-urbanization" of the Oshawa Centre in recent years,
and stresses that a Wal-Mart development would derail those efforts.
Ornella Richichi, vice-president of
land development for SmartCentres, wasn't surprised by these concerns.
"These are purely competitive
arguments. All the entities raising objections have been the only game
in town for a while now and they want to stay that way," she said.
"South Oshawa has been underserviced for a while, and from a land
development perspective this is the perfect place for this."
She added the new Hwy. 401 interchange
being constructed at Stevenson Road, makes the location even better.
As chairwoman of the City's
development services committee, Councillor Louise Parkes has watched the
back and forth between these parties for months. She said this week she
is pleased with the final outcome, noting there was no way to make
everyone happy.
"The stores have concerns about losing
market share, but as a City council we're not in the business of
regulating competition for private enterprise," she said. "You've got to
build the city."
Several councillors have underscored
the need for a new retail development in south Oshawa, saying seniors
and residents who don't drive find it difficult to access the Wal-Mart
plaza at Harmony Road and Taunton Road -- which SmartCentres also owns.
According to two retail market studies
submitted by SmartCentres, the market demand is there. The studies
indicate the new plaza will not duplicate services already available in
the area -- however it says under performing stores like the Zellers at
Kingsway Plaza and the A and P supermarket at Midtown Mall -- could fold
under the new competition.
Pre-leasing is already underway for
the new site, dubbed First Pro Oshawa South. At 520,000 square feet, it
will be anchored by a Wal-Mart store that includes a grocery section.
Several smaller retail stores will fill out the plaza.
According to Ms. Richichi,
pre-construction -- such as road work -- will begin this year, followed
by shovels in the ground next year.
[back to top]
Ex-Nun To Guide Wal-Mart
Policies
NamNews
[back to top]
Wal-Mart has hired Harriet Hentges, a former nun and foreign conflict
mediator, to manage company policies on the environment, health care and
labour relations. Hentges has assumed the newly created position of
Senior Director of Stakeholder Engagement. She will work with nonprofit
organizations, academic groups and government agencies to "lead the
company's sustainability efforts", said a Wal-Mart spokeswoman.
In 1958, Hentges joined the order of
the Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet, a group known for its work in
education and health care, but left in 1972 for unknown reasons. Hentges
served as COO of the League of Women Voters before joining the United
States Institute of Peace, where she led mediation and reconstruction
efforts in Iraq and the Balkans. She earned a PhD in international
economics from Johns Hopkins.
[back to top]
Behind the
greeting, a troubled, tired spirit
By Saundra Amrhein
Brandon Times
Thursday, July 20, 2006
[back to top]
During her lunch hour, Ellen Stanton
walks stiffly back through aisles of discount clothes and frozen foods.
She wobbles into the employee break
room on the artificial knee that makes her leg throb, on the foot
rendered painful from diabetes.
She sits down and takes off her shoes.
Hours on her feet greeting Wal-Mart shoppers take their toll.
Stanton worked almost her whole life,
but she never thought she'd be working this long, at the age of 74.
She grew up one of 10 kids, the
children of a coal miner in southwest Pennsylvania. They lived in the
company town, slept across one bed in their two-bedroom company home,
and shopped at the company store.
She married a steel mill worker and
moved to Ohio. They lived in a house made of grape crates and tar paper
until their 5-year-old son died of leukemia. The neighbors, to ease
their sorrow, came over to build up the house in bricks.
She raised their four remaining
children, babysitting and taking in laundry. After a divorce, she raised
her children alone, working in grocery stores. One day she became
manager, but managers of little grocery stores in Ohio steel mill towns
don't get pension plans or 401(k) retirement accounts.
When she moved to Florida to follow
her adult sons, she took a job slopping lunches at school cafeterias in
Hillsborough County.
Then there was the 7-Eleven and, two
years ago, the Wal-Mart Supercenter on Causeway Boulevard.
Stanton gets $1,100 a month from
Social Security and $7.75 an hour at Wal-Mart, not enough to pay for
rent, bills and all her prescription drugs, she says.
She moved in with her 44-year-old
daughter, whose daughter Karla died several years ago from heart failure
at the age of 21.
They share the $900 rent for the
Valrico home, along with their sorrow. Many days, Stanton hides hers.
She's the one lifting her daughter out
of depression, talking her out of panic attacks.
Her daughter worries about her mom's
health, the frequent colds, the high blood-sugar levels, the fact that
she doesn't have time to eat as often as she should on her occasional
breaks.
That she sleeps so much.
Her daughter won't even go into her
bedroom anymore to wake her up for work, afraid that Stanton haspassed
away in her sleep.
At Wal-Mart, Stanton hides her
frustration by heading to the restroom whenever she can, outside the
gaze of the shoppers she must welcome.
She stands in front of strangers for
hours repeating:
Hello.
Welcome to Wal-Mart.
Would you like a cart?
[back to top]
Wal-Mart's Lee Scott, top critic spar on live radio
By Marcus Kabel
Associated Press
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
[back to top]
In a first-time appearance on a live
radio call-in show, Wal-Mart Chief Executive Lee Scott staunchly
defended his company's labor relations and health care policies while
taking telephone calls that included one from the head of a union-backed
group campaigning against the nation's largest employer.
Scott spent more than a half-hour on
Rev. Al Sharpton's syndicated talk show, which a company spokesman said
was the first time he has ever been a show that takes live calls from
listeners. The New York-based show airs live on stations in 16 cities
from Boston to Seattle, according to its Web site.
A terse exchange developed with Paul
Blank, who as campaign director of union-funded group WakeUpWalMart.com
is one of Wal-Mart's most vociferous critics.
Blank urged Wal-Mart to work with his
group to improve labor conditions and said Americans "can't understand
why a company with $11 billion in annual profit doesn't want to pay its
workers a living wage and provide them with affordable health care".
Scott dismissed Blank's arguments that
too many Wal-Mart employees are uninsured, saying, "You can skew those
numbers however you like to skew them."
Wal-Mart's newer low-premium health
plans are attractive, Scott said, and the company is working with
outside advisers to make Wal-Mart jobs "even better".
"We think it is our right to be
selective on who we allow to participate in that process, and making
sure that the people who do participate are the kind of people who do
want Wal-Mart to be a better company," Scott said.
Wal-Mart accuses its union critics of
aiming to ruin the company, while the critics say they want to improve
it.
Sharpton praised Wal-Mart's moves in
the past year to boost diversity but pressed Scott about criticism that
it pays low wages, pushes people into part-time work and skimps on
health benefits.
"It's not very difficult to respond
to" that criticism, Scott said.
He said Wal-Mart has expanded
lower-cost plans with premiums of $23 a month for its 1.3 million-plus
employees. A majority of Wal-Mart workers are full-time, more than at
most other major retailers, he said, and the company creates good-paying
jobs while saving working families money with low prices.
"We believe that there ought to be
affordable, accessible health care for everyone," he said, adding
company insurance covers over 1 million Wal-Mart employees and family
members.
Scott said Wal-Mart, which keeps
unions out of its stores, has good relations between management and
workers and an open-door policy for complaints that makes unions
unnecessary.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart's Growing PR Machine Sends A Few Mixed Signals
By James Covert
Dow Jones Newswires
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
[back to top]
NEW YORK - Wal-Mart Stores Inc.'s (WMT)
growing public-relations machine has been sending a few mixed signals
lately.
Earlier this month, Arizona's attorney
general sued Wal-Mart for consumer fraud, accusing the world's largest
retailer of consistently overcharging customers and failing to post
prices on its shelves.
Immediately after the lawsuit was
filed July 6, Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley sounded a conciliatory
note, saying the company was "committed to working with the attorney
general to resolve this issue."
Last week, however, a Wal-Mart-funded
group called "Working Families for Wal-Mart" took a distinctly different
tone on its Web site, paidcritics.com. In a blog entry, the group called
Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard a "career politician and
twice-failed candidate for governor," and quoted an editorial in a
Phoenix-area newspaper that warned Goddard "better have his facts
straight."
Looking to defend itself against
union-backed critics that have attacked its labor practices, Wal-Mart is
beefing up its public-relations efforts. The Bentonville, Ark., retailer
isn't just hiring more corporate spokespeople. In addition to building a
lobbying team in Washington, Wal-Mart over the past year has assembled a
"war room" staffed with political campaign veterans. This week, the
company hired a former nun who has helped mediate conflicts in the
Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq.
Wal-Mart has strong incentives to
boost its media savvy. A 2004 study for Wal-Mart by McKinsey & Co. found
that as much as 8% of Wal-Mart customers no longer shopped there because
of "negative press they have heard." But for all of its growing
sophistication, Wal-Mart has made a few awkward stumbles in its recent
communications, and some feel they've been getting conflicting messages
from the different arms of Wal-Mart's growing apparatus.
"I did find it surprising," Arizona
Attorney General Goddard told Dow Jones Newswires, having learned of the
blog posting last week. Occasionally in the past, Goddard said he has
been hit with candid barbs from criminal defendants amid the genteel
protests of their attorneys. But Goddard said he's never seen such a
mixed public message from a corporate defendant.
It's not the only recent example of
Wal-Mart getting its signals crossed. Last October, President and Chief
Executive Lee Scott said in a speech to Wal-Mart executives and
directors that Congress should "take a look at" increasing the federal
minimum wage. Since then Wal-Mart, which employs more than 1.3 million
people in the U.S., hasn't lobbied for an increase. When asked why late
last month, Lee Culpepper, Wal-Mart's chief lobbyist in Washington, was
quoted as saying that Scott was actually neutral on the minimum-wage
issue.
"He said Congress should take a look
at it," Culpepper told the Washington-based publication Roll Call. "If
reporters want to report differently from that, I can't speak to that."
Shortly thereafter, however, Wal-Mart
issued a written statement by Scott that the federal minimum wage of
$5.15 an hour was indeed "out of date with the times."
Wal-Mart's multi-pronged strategy for
public relations increasingly is beginning to resemble past efforts by
other notably embattled corporations, said Adam Hanft, chief executive
of Hanft Unlimited, a New York branding and marketing agency. Before
many big oil companies "flipped and embraced that global warming was a
threat," they had funded plenty of third-party "research" to the
contrary. In addition to formidable lobbying efforts in Washington, Big
Tobacco funded "free speech" organizations as it fought legal curbs on
its advertising.
"All of these companies have tried to
insulate themselves from criticism by creating third-party entities that
have the appearance of independence," Hanft said. "But they're so
transparent they come off as desperate. Anything that a proxy group is
saying, you should be saying yourself."
Nu Wexler, a spokesman for Wal-Mart
Watch - a gadfly group whose backers include the Sierra Club and the
Service Employees International Union - said that while the group
"Working Families for Wal-Mart" calls itself a "grassroots"
organization, it's operated by executives from Edelman, a global
public-relations firm hired by Wal-Mart last year.
"They're just outsourcing their
mudslinging," Wexler said. Kevin Sheridan, a spokesman for Working
Families For Wal-Mart, deferred to the company for a response.
Simley, the Wal-Mart spokesman, said
that "we agree with an awful lot of what 'Working Families' does and
what they stand for, and we support it. But it's not a mouthpiece for
Wal-Mart."
He added that the company has "no
position" on possible motivations behind the Arizona Attorney General's
lawsuit. Likewise, Wal-Mart has no position on the group's recent blog
entry that questioned the Attorney General's motivations, he said.
"We've had some discussion on it, but
I can't say that anybody has any response at all," Simley said. "It is
what it is."
[back to top]
Wal-Mart's
Bid to remake itself weighs on sales
By Julie Appleby
Wall Street Journal
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
[back to top]
A federal judge Wednesday overturned a
Maryland law aimed at Wal-Mart (WMT) that would have required the
nation's largest retailer to spend more on health care for its workers.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge
Frederick Motz will be appealed, says a spokesman for the Maryland
attorney general.
Motz ruled the Maryland law was
pre-empted by a federal pension law, which limits states' ability to
regulate benefits offered by large, multistate employers.
The Maryland law, approved over a veto
by the state's governor, required employers with more than 10,000
workers to spend at least 8% of payroll on health benefits, or pay into
a fund for the uninsured. Wal-Mart was the only employer affected.
Lawmakers approved the bill after
hearing from supporters that many of the state's Medicaid enrollees had
jobs at Wal-Mart but could not qualify or afford to sign up for its
health benefits. Maryland, like other states, is seeking ways to slow
the growth of its $4.6 billion Medicaid program, which provides health
care to the poor and to many nursing-home residents.
Wednesday's ruling pleased the
retailer but angered supporters of the law, many of whom are trying to
get similar bills passed in other states.
"We are very pleased. That law did
nothing to control the cost of health care," says Sarah Clark, a
spokeswoman with Wal-Mart, adding that Wal-Mart is offering new health
care solutions such as insurance for children of part-time employees and
a reduced waiting period for those eligible for health care coverage.
But Wal-Mart Watch, a union-backed
group that supported the law, says many of the company's workers still
cannot afford its coverage. "This setback does not change the fact that
Wal-Mart's health care plan is unaffordable and inaccessible for its
employees," says Nu Wexler, spokesman for Wal-Mart Watch.
Both sides said something needs to be
done to control rising health care costs.
"This is a national issue. The
solution isn't going to be on the back of one industry," says Sandy
Kennedy, president of the Retail Industry Leaders Association. "This
decision is a significant victory for all businesses that offer health
care to their employees."
But Paul Blank, campaign director at
WakeUpWalMart, another union-backed group, says, "The fight to provide
better health care and to reduce Wal-Mart's tax burden on American
taxpayers will continue."
[back to top]
Walmart Tries to Emulate
MySpace
ScuttleMonkey
Wednesday July 19
[back to top]
from the trying-way-to-hard dept.
mattsucks writes to tell us that according to AdAge, retail behemoth
WalMart is trying desperately to target the MySpace demographic with a
new, and highly sanitized, site designed to appeal to teens. From the
article: "It's a quasi-social-networking site for teens designed to
allow them to 'express their individuality,' yet it screens all content,
tells parents their kids have joined and forbids users to e-mail one
another. Oh, and it calls users 'hubsters' -- a twist on hipsters that
proves just how painfully uncool it is to try to be cool."
[back to top]
Rollback Ruling Favors
Wal-Mart
By Pallavi Gogoi
JULY 19, 2006
[back to top]
The retail giant scores a massive
victory when a judge overturns a Maryland law that required more
health-care coverage for its employees
In a clear victory for Wal-Mart Stores
(WMT ), a federal judge on July 19 struck down a Maryland law that
required the world's largest retailer to provide more health-care
coverage for its employees in the state. The decision marks a
significant setback for government officials and others who have been
pressing Wal-Mart to boost the benefits and wages that it pays to its
1.3 million U.S. employees.
The Maryland state law was passed in
January and was scheduled to become effective on Jan. 1, 2007. It
required nongovernment employers with more than 10,000 workers to spend
at least 8% of their payroll on health benefits. While other large
employers in the state, such as Giant Foods, met that threshold,
Wal-Mart did not.
Wal-Mart battled against the
legislation for months, first through lobbyists and then via a lawsuit
against the state filed in February. The suit was filed by the Retail
Industry Leaders Assn., a trade group representing Wal-Mart and other
big retailers. In his decision on July 19, Judge J. Frederick Motz of
U.S. District Court in Baltimore found that the law violated federal law
regulating employee benefits, specifically the Federal Employment
Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). "The act violates ERISA's
fundamental purpose of permitting multi-state employers to maintain
nationwide health and welfare plans, providing uniform nationwide
benefits and permitting uniform national administration," he wrote in
the decision.
LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS IN DANGER. The
retail group was thrilled with the ruling. "The decision sends a clear
signal that employer health plans are governed by federal law, not a
patchwork of state and local laws. It also is a clear message that
similar bills under consideration in other states and municipalities
violate federal law, as well," said Sandy Kennedy, president of the
association. Investors cheered too, sending the stock up $1.03, or
2.39%, to end the day at $44.20.
Motz's decision, however, is a huge
blow to retail employees, many of whom would have been automatically
eligible for health benefits. It also undercuts similar moves around the
country. Just this year, at least 30 state and local governments have
considered rules similar to the Maryland law, but the retail association
has worked hard at creating enough dissenting voices in legislatures and
has even challenged the proposed laws in court.
Unions that represent employees were
deeply disappointed. "The District Court's decision, unfortunately,
ignores the strong public support for requiring large, profitable
corporations to pay their fair share for health care," said Chris
Kofinis, communications director at WakeupWalmart.com, a movement
started by the United Food and Commercial Workers, the largest union in
the U.S.
HEALTH-CARE HOT BUTTON. While the
Maryland ruling is a clear legal victory, it may be a setback in the
court of public opinion. Wal-Mart has been working hard to improve its
image, after withering public criticism over the way it treats its
employees. On April 17, the company publicly touted changes to its
benefits plan, which would allow employees to be eligible for
health-care benefits a year after being employed, compared with two
years previously, and part-timers will be able to add their children to
their coverage. "We think this is a really big deal," Susan Chambers,
Wal-Mart Stores executive vice-president of human resources, said at the
time (see BusinessWeek.com, 4/19/06, "Wal-Mart Puts on a Happy Face").
Health care has been a particularly
sensitive issue for the company. A memo leaked to the public earlier
this year showed that Wal-Mart's employees—who make an average of
$20,000 a year—spend 8% of their income on health care, nearly twice the
national average. Some 46% of employees' children are either uninsured
or on Medicaid, the memo said. Many workers and their dependents end up
costing state governments, via their Medicaid programs.
Yet Wal-Mart has fought hard to stop
local and state governments from dictating changes to its benefits. It
has hired several public relations firms, while at the same time
boosting the number of lobbyists in Washington who work with
policymakers on laws that protect Wal-Mart, the corporation, not
necessarily its employees. In February, CEO Lee Scott met with state
governors at a meeting of the National Governors Assn. and urged them
not to pass legislation that would burden the retailer, and pledged to
work with the governors to move workers off state Medicaid rolls.
[back to top]
The Writing on the Wal-Mart
Al Gore takes his
green message to Wal-Mart headquarters
By Amanda Griscom Little
19 Jul 2006
[back to top]
Picture Al Gore standing in a modest
auditorium deep in America's heartland before an exultant crowd of
Wal-Mart employees, comparing their campaign to lighten the company's
environmental footprint to the Allies' righteous struggle in World War
II. This after Rev. Jim Ball, head of the Evangelical Environmental
Network, likened the giant retailer's greening efforts to the work of
Jesus Christ.
This strange scene unfolded last week
in Bentonville, Ark., and Muckraker was there to witness it. The
occasion was an environmental strategy meeting of some 800 Wal-Mart
execs, managers, suppliers, and partners, where the heads of the
corporation's various divisions -- from seafood and textiles to
transportation and packaging -- outlined their respective green agendas.
The assembled employees did
high-energy renditions of the Wal-Mart cheer, complete with
fist-raising, grunting, and even a group wiggle. "Gimme a W! Gimme an A!
Gimme an L! ... Whose Wal-Mart is it? Who's No. 1?" CEO H. Lee Scott
pumped his team up further by calling Wal-Mart's newfound environmental
focus a "higher purpose." There was also a rare appearance from company
chair Rob Walton Jr. -- son of Wal-Mart's legendary founder and, as it
happens, a member of Conservation International's board -- who beamed,
"I love, love hearing the progress that is being made."
Mid-afternoon brought a screening of
An Inconvenient Truth; more than a few audience members could be seen
dabbing teary eyes as the documentary drew to a close. Then the entire
crowd erupted into a standing ovation when the lights came back on and
Gore trotted up to the stage, Tipper in tow.
"That's a larger round of applause
than we gave for Wayne Newton!" joked Scott while introducing Gore, who,
in turn, showered the audience with reciprocal cheer: "Doesn't it feel
good to have this kind of [environmental] commitment? Don't you feel
proud?"
Sporting a curiously thick Southern
drawl, Gore heaped praise on Wal-Mart's green goal-setting. His Allies
analogy was particularly striking: "Look at what [the Allies] did with
their victory. They found after winning that they had gained the moral
authority and vision to lift up from their knees our defeated
adversaries ... And by taking this climate crisis on frontally and
making this commitment, you will gain the moral authority and vision as
an organization to take on many great challenges."
Keenly aware of his Arkansas
audience's Christian inclinations, Gore peppered his hour-long
commentary with religious references. He quoted scripture, told a Bible
story, and then offered a non-apologetic apology for the sermonizing: "I
don't mean to proselytize here on my religious faith ... If you're an
atheist or agnostic" -- dramatic pause -- "God bless you!"
Gore also waded into politics. He
called the partisan bickering in Washington "pitiful, seriously
pitiful," and mocked national leaders for "borrowing a ton of money from
China to buy a ton of oil from Saudi Arabia to burn it in ways that
destroy the inhabitability of the planet -- not a good pattern!" He also
called for a radical overhaul of the American tax system: "We should
sharply reduce payroll taxes and make it all up in CO2 taxes so the low-
and middle-income people don't bear the cost burden of this big
transition in energy sources."
His whole spiel sounded like a dry run
for red-state campaigning in 2008. So it only made sense when, in
bidding Gore adieu, Scott asked the big question: "Are you going to run
for president?" Wild applause ensued, but Gore's response was
predictably understated: "There's a lot about the political system that
I think is really toxic ... [and] that I don't think I'm good at," he
said. "I really believe that the highest and best use of my experience
and skills may be to concentrate all-out on changing the minds of the
American people about the [climate] crisis. That way, whoever does run
for president faces an electorate that flat-out demands that they make
this their priority."
The Odd Couple
The pairing up of Gore, this season's
It Boy in Hollywood and other left-leaning circles, and Wal-Mart, the
goliath retailer loved in red states and loathed in blue cities, seems
bizarre on its face -- and couldn't have happened before this year. But
now, with Gore trying to spread climate awareness beyond the choir and
Scott trying to give Wal-Mart a high-profile green makeover, the match
actually makes sense.
Last October, Scott pledged to
transform his sprawling company, which employs 1.8 million people
worldwide and ranks No. 2 on the Fortune 500 list, into a lean green
machine powered exclusively by renewable energy, producing zero waste,
and selling sustainable products. Those goals are so lofty they sound
downright deluded, but Scott has followed them up with specific,
seemingly achievable commitments and timetables. He aims, for example,
to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions at Wal-Mart's existing stores and
distribution centers 20 percent by 2012, and invest $500 million in
environmental improvements each year.
Andy Ruben, Wal-Mart's vice president
for corporate strategy and sustainability, reasons that the 100 percent
renewable-energy goal could be met largely with greater efficiencies.
"We can use 70 percent less energy to do what we're doing today, and
supply the rest with renewables," Ruben suggested at last week's
meeting.
The gathering brought forth more green
goals from divisions throughout the company. In the area of seafood,
Wal-Mart is working with the World Wildlife Fund to identify, and
purchase exclusively from, sustainable fisheries. It's moving toward
organic cottons in its apparel and bedding lines. The jewelry division
is developing a sustainable certification program for the gold mines it
works with, and exploring outlets for recycled gold. The transportation
division is planning to double the efficiency of its truck fleet, one of
the largest in the U.S., within a decade. The construction division is
developing prototype stores that are 30 percent more energy-efficient
than current stores, and the company also aims to improve efficiency at
existing stores by 20 percent. The packaging department is working to
eliminate its waste stream by 2015, using reusable, recycled, and
biodegradable containers.
The produce division is ramping up its
organic offerings, and plans to move toward more local farm purchases in
order to save money on truck fuel costs and refrigeration. Ron
McCormick, an executive in Wal-Mart's produce division, said he plans to
purchase a broader variety of produce based on what's available in each
region, rather than insisting on a "monoculture" of produce at stores
nationwide. "Our whole focus is: How can we reduce food-miles?"
These internal aims aside, Scott said
Wal-Mart's most meaningful environmental impact will be in nudging its
60,000 suppliers toward more eco-friendly practices -- working with
them, for instance, to reduce packaging, which in turn would mean fewer
raw materials consumed, less energy expended in transit, and, in the
end, lower prices for consumers. "Ninety percent of the impact Wal-Mart
can have is on the supply chain," he said.
Wal-Mart's Ruben, who this spring
testified before a Senate committee in favor of federal greenhouse-gas
regulations, also acknowledged that in addition to the 23 million tons
of CO2 equivalent that Wal-Mart emits each year, there are an estimated
220 million tons of annual greenhouse-gas emissions in the company's
supply chain.
Scott's grand goal, as he explained it
in an interview with Grist this spring, is to "democratize
sustainability." To wit: He wants to use Wal-Mart's unparalleled
economies of scale to put everything from organic T-shirts to compact
fluorescent light bulbs to pesticide-free foods within reach of the
masses.
Of course, he believes this green push
will make the company money. "The benefits of the strategy are
undeniable, whether you look through the lens of greenhouse-gas
reduction or the lens of cost savings. What has become so obvious is
that [a green strategy] provides better value for our customers."
Another unspoken effect is likely a
boost to employee morale. In recent years, the company seemed beset from
all sides by impassioned detractors and bad publicity -- the 2005
documentary Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price, sexual-harassment
lawsuits filed in 2004 and 2005, ubiquitous union campaigns protesting
poor worker treatment, and fights against proposed stores in communities
from California to Maine.
Now, Wal-Mart bigwigs -- and maybe
even lowly "associates" -- finally have something they can feel good
about: being part of the biggest corporate greening in history. If the
energy in the room at last week's meeting was any indication, Wal-Mart
managers these days are feeling right fine about their jobs.
Many of Wal-Mart's multitudinous
critics aren't mollified, of course. The company's environmental goals
are not being accompanied by notable progress in other areas like labor
standards and gender equity. And so far the green talk is largely just
that -- talk.
But some environmentalists are
hopeful. "If they do even half what they say they want to do, it will
make a huge difference for the planet," said Ashok Gupta of the Natural
Resources Defense Council, who attended the meeting. "It definitely
seems that Wal-Mart is really serious."
Former Sierra Club President Adam
Werbach, who's reportedly signed on to work as a consultant for
Wal-Mart, has also lent his cred to the retailer's green goals.
Environmental Defense is so optimistic that it's opening an office in
Bentonville, with an employee wholly dedicated to coordinating with
Wal-Mart. (Can it be a coincidence that Sam Walton Jr., son of board
chair Rob Walton, sits on the board of Environmental Defense?)
Maybe these enviros can push the
company even further -- to site its stores in downtown, mixed-use
neighborhoods, set green requirements for all its suppliers, add green
roofs and other eco-friendly features to all its facilities, not just
pilot projects, and educate its 176 million weekly customers about the
virtues of sustainable living.
In the meantime, though, Gore's got
some advice for Wal-Mart's leaders: "Following through [on your
environmental goals] is the single most important thing that can be done
in this country to transform the relationship between NGOs and
business," he said, explaining that critics will otherwise be able to
say, "'See there, I told you they weren't serious.'"
Gore was quick to add that he, for
one, is not a cynic: "Have you ever known Wal-Mart not to follow through
on a big commitment of this kind? I have not myself. I believe it's the
kind of journey that once you start, you continue."
[back to top]
WalMart has
plans ready for Vancouver city hall
By: Shane Bigham
July 18, 2006
[back to top]
WalMart has wasted no time in
announcing its plans to try again to open a store in Vancouver. A
spokesman for the company says a proposal will be submitted to city hall
later this year, based on a design by Vancouver architect Peter Busby.
That $30-million design features windmills for generating some of the
store's electricity, geothermal heating and many other 'green' ideas.
That's the same design they used in 2005 in a failed attempt to build a
store in south Vancouver. As we reported on Monday night, city hall
rezoned a section of Marine Drive to allow for big-box retail outlets.
It's the same area where WalMart wants to build. The company bought land
in that neighbourhood in 2002.
[back to top]
Letter to congress
from Wakeupwalmart.com
Dear Member of Congress, [back to top]
The campaign to change Wal-Mart is
quickly becoming one of the most important political issues in America.
Because, whether you are discussing affordable health care, living
wages, economic security, port security, protecting U.S. jobs, child
labor or gender discrimination, Wal-Mart is the poster child for
corporate policies that have taken America in the wrong direction.
There is no doubt, the debate over
Wal-Mart is critical to our nation’s future, and we expect it to be
tough and hard fought. But, recently, Wal-Mart’s right wing war room,
run by the public relations firm Edelman, has gotten out of control.
Under Leslie Dach, a former Democratic operative, Edelman has slammed a
Democratic gubernatorial candidate for promoting universal health care,
attacked reporters at major newspapers for reporting the facts,
personally smeared our campaign workers, and attacked the very unions
that fight every day to help millions of working families negotiate a
better life.
The sad truth is that Wal-Mart and
Edelman’s ‘swift-boat’ style tactics are right out of Karl Rove’s
playbook: don’t tell the truth, hire attack dogs, fund front groups to
deceive the American people, and hide the facts. Wal-Mart and Edelman’s
desire to play gutter-style politics, to ignore their responsibility to
our citizens, and to disregard the hopes and dreams of millions of
working Americans who deserve a better life is a tragic statement on how
base American politics has become.
In fact, Wal-Mart’s public relations
team resembles the vast right wing conspiracy Democrats have been
searching for. The ‘Wal-Mart War Room’ includes: Bob McAdam, a former
Tobacco Institute executive; Terry Nelson, the former national political
director for Bush/Cheney 2004; Mike Krempasky, the founder of
RedState.org; Lee Culpepper, a conservative lobbyist and well-known
opponent of raising the minimum wage; Kevin Sheridan, a former RNC
spokesperson; and Rick Berman, who runs an outside group but is working
with Wal-Mart and has a long record of defending mercury poisoning, Big
Tobacco, and even attacking Mothers Against Drunk Driving. As if that
wasn’t enough, according to the FEC and IRS reports, Wal-Mart’s
commitment to the Republican vision for America is so strong that the
company gave 81% of its political contributions to Republicans over the
last 7 years.
The truth is Wal-Mart, Edelman, and
Leslie Dach ought to be ashamed and we call on them to apologize to
every proud Democrat and the American people for their conduct.
Unlike Wal-Mart’s efforts, our
campaign, WakeUpWalMart.com, is about positive change. We are a
grassroots campaign of more than 245,000 Americans who are fighting for
a better America where corporations like Wal-Mart reflect the best of
American values. Just like every poll shows, an overwhelming majority of
the American people want corporations like Wal-Mart to be held
accountable, to provide better health care, to pay a living wage, to
protect American jobs, to provide a fair and just workplace, and to help
make America better for all of us.
Unfortunately, despite $11.2 billion
in annual profit and a founding family whose net worth is $77 billion,
Wal-Mart has failed to explain to you and the American people why it
does not want to become a responsible and moral employer. Instead,
Wal-Mart’s only answer is to unleash right-wing attack dogs against
anyone who dares to question them. Well, America deserves better from
Wal-Mart.
In the end, contrary to what Wal-Mart
says, we do not want to destroy Wal-Mart. What we want is to work with
Wal-Mart and take advantage of the enormous opportunity this company has
to become a model corporate citizen. We know, by working with us,
Wal-Mart will not only be a better and more profitable company, it will
help us build a better America as well. Above all, we hope Wal-Mart will
choose to exercise the power that it has to change for the better and to
help lead this nation in a direction that is good for all Americans – no
matter what party they are from.
I hope you will join with us in
calling for Wal-Mart to change and I would welcome the opportunity to
discuss our campaign with you at any time.
Sincerely,
Paul Blank
Campaign Director
WakeUpWalMart.com
[back to top]
Wal-Mart, Critics
Slam Each Other on Web
By MARCUS KABEL
Associated Press
07.18.2006
[back to top]
The brawl between Wal-Mart and its
union critics is escalating as groups on both sides, fighting over
whether the world's largest retailer is good or bad, launched
attack-style Web sites maligning each other's motives and politics.
More than a year after unions launched
two political-style campaign groups attacking Wal-Mart Stores Inc. for
what they say are low wages and skimpy benefits, the language is turning
meaner and more personal.
Paidcritics.com was started last week
by Working Families for Wal-Mart, a group funded primarily by Wal-Mart,
to reveal what it described as "the real motives of the union leaders
behind the campaign against Wal-Mart."
It characterized one of its leading
critics, Andrew Grossman of union-backed Wal-Mart Watch, as "a political
operative with a checkered past" in a section called "Paid Critic of the
Week" that also lambasted Wayne Hanley, head of the Canadian chapter of
the United Food and Commercial Workers union.
The site is part of Wal-Mart's
aggressive defense since last year against its increasingly organized
critics. Wal-Mart won't say how much it is spending, but it has set up a
political campaign-style "war room" staffed by consultants, hired
Washington D.C. lobbyists, formed the Working Families group and created
another Web site called Wal-Mart Facts.
"These great guys who love to stretch
the truth (or what mom called liars) honed their special Wal-Mart skills
on an array of right wing political campaigns," the Web site reads.
In a letter to Democratic members of
congress about Wal-Mart's efforts, WakeUpWalMart said the attacks were
reminiscent of a campaign by a pro-Bush group, Swift Boat Veterans for
Truth, that questioned Sen. John Kerry's Vietnam War military record
during the 2004 presidential race.
Corporate reputation management expert
Steven Silvers, who has worked for 25 years advising public and private
companies on strategic communications, called paidcritics.com "a
name-calling, nastily aggressive little Web site" that marked an
escalation in Wal-Mart's battle with critics.
"The company's latest move comes right
out of the Swift Boat playbook. And it could become standard procedure
for other corporations that find themselves in the center of public
controversy," Silvers wrote in his blog Scatterbox. Silvers said neither
he nor his firm, Denver-based GBSM, Inc., do any work for the unions or
Wal-Mart.
Experts say there is no clear winner
yet in the public relations battle. Union groups decry what they call
Wal-Mart's low wages, poor health benefits and destruction of local
economies. Wal-Mart says it creates jobs, provides low-cost insurance
for employees and saves the average family $2,300 a year by keeping
prices low.
"The jury is still out," said Paul
Argenti, professor of corporate communication and reputation management
at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth University.
Both sides have been going at each
other since two unions launched separate campaigns in spring of 2005 to
pressure Wal-Mart for change after failing for years to organize its
stores: WakeUpWalMart.com, funded by the United Food and Commercial
Workers, and Wal-Mart Watch, backed by the Service Employees
International Union.
Both groups say they want to pressure
Wal-Mart into becoming a better employer, not run it out of business.
Wal-Mart in response hired a team of
about 35 consultants at Edelman, which bills itself as the world's
largest independently owned PR company, as well as lobbyists in
Washington D.C.
It has also launched a raft of
initiatives, including adding more affordable health care plans for
employees as low as $11 a month, adopting ambitious environmental goals
and boosting diversity among employees and its sea of suppliers.
"At this point I would certainly say
that we are gaining ground," Wal-Mart spokeswoman Sarah Clark said.
"From our standpoint, 127 million
customers shop at our stores in the U.S. every week. We know many of
them value the savings, the job opportunities and the charitable giving
we provide their communities," Clark said.
Patricia Edwards, a portfolio manager
and retail analyst at Wentworth, Hauser & Violich in Seattle, which
manages $8.2 billion in assets and holds 51,000 Wal-Mart shares, said
investors are getting tired of hearing the same arguments back and
forth.
"When you get to the point where you
have escalating blog wars, it gets to be a little like political ad
campaign season. I use my remote to mute every single one of those ads,"
she said.
Argenti said Wal-Mart has gotten
better at defending itself since last year. But he said the
paidcritics.com site was an ill-advised political attack campaign that
reacts to the critics rather than taking the initiative.
"It's a really bad idea. What
companies need to do is to rise above the argument and set your own
agenda," Argenti said.
Wal-Mart's Clark said Working Families
for Wal-Mart is a separate and independent group.
The group has a steering committee
headed by former Atlanta mayor and civil rights leader Andrew Young, but
the operations are run by a staff housed in Edelman offices.
At least one steering committee
member, filmmaker Ron Galloway, said he would prefer the strategy to
focus on the facts of Wal-Mart's case.
"I still think that it is a
sub-optimal strategy to personalize all this. I think the facts are in
Wal-Mart's favor and that's just not part of the battle I'm interested
in joining," Galloway said, referring to the paidcritics.com Web site.
Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All
rights reserved.
[back to top]
WakeUpWalMart.com Launches New Web Site, Campaign Against Wal-Mart's
Right-Wing Attack Machine, Sends Letter to Congress
Chris Kofinis
WakeUpWalMart.com
[back to top]
WASHINGTON - July 18 - Today,
WakeUpWalMart.com, America's campaign to change Wal-Mart, launched a new
Web site and political outreach campaign in response to Wal-Mart's
vicious "swift-boat" style attack Web site, http://paidcritics.com.
WakeUpWalMart.com's new Web site, http://www.ABunchOfGreedyRightWingLiarsWhoWorkForWalMart.com,
outlines the deep and disturbing right-wing connections behind
Wal-Mart's attack machine and links some of Wal-Mart's newly hired
right-wing operatives to some of the most vicious political smear
campaigns in American political history, including attacks on John Kerry
in the 2004 election, CBS News, and attacks on Democrats in the 2000
Florida Recount.
Wal-Mart's attack Web site, http://paidcritics.com,
is an unprecedented and dangerous decision by a $300 billion dollar
corporation. It is the first time in history that a corporation has set
up, directly funded and openly managed a Web site whose sole purpose is
to attack Democrats, WakeUpWalMart.com staff personally, and all parties
who want Wal-Mart to become a better employer.
"Wal-Mart's decision to spend millions
of dollars hiring right-wing political operatives to attack Democrats
and personally smear people who want health care for its workers is a
shameful act of desperation. At the same time Wal-Mart is publicly
trying to put a smiley face on its company, Wal-Mart has decided to
unleash a 'swift boat' style attack on all of those people who want
Wal-Mart to change for the better," stated Paul Blank, campaign director
for WakeUpWalMart.com.
The Web site, http://www.ABunchOfGreedyRightWingLiarsWhoWorkForWalMart.com
will provide a detailed account of Wal-Mart's right-wing conspiracy
including ties to the most extreme element of the Republican Party, Tom
Delay, George W. Bush, Karl Rove and John Ashcroft, a biographic summary
of the key right-wing operatives involved in the Wal-Mart war room, and
an accounting of Wal-Mart's extensive political contributions to
Republicans. In addition, the Web site will give the American people the
opportunity to vote for their favorite Wal-Mart right-wing liar and view
our latest TV ads on "Right Wing" TV -- a new channel dedicated to
exposing Wal-Mart's right wing connections.
"If Wal-Mart thinks they can
intimidate us with right-wing operatives who are willing to defend child
labor abuses and oppose universal health care, Wal-Mart is sorely
mistaken. We are not critics. We are a movement of Americans who are
fighting for living wages, affordable health care, protecting U.S. jobs
and holding corporations accountable for their behavior," added Blank.
As part of the new counteroffensive,
WakeUpWalMart.com also sent all of the Democratic Members of Congress a
personal letter outlining Wal-Mart's vicious attack campaign being run
by the public relations firm Edelman. The letter highlights just how
desperate Wal-Mart has become to attack Democrats, WakeUpWalMart.com's
campaign staff, progressive groups and all those who strive to make
Wal-Mart a more responsible company. A copy of the letter is available
at http://www.wakeupwalmart.com.
[back to top]
Gloves come off as Wal-Mart, critics slam each other on
By Marcus Kabel,
Associated Press
7/18/2006
[back to top]
BENTONVILLE, Ark. — The brawl between
Wal-Mart and its union critics is escalating as groups on both sides,
fighting over whether the world's largest retailer is good or bad,
launched attack-style websites maligning each other's motives and
politics. More than a year after unions launched two political-style
campaign groups attacking Wal-Mart Stores for what they say are low
wages and skimpy benefits, the language is turning meaner and more
personal.
Paidcritics.com was started last week
by Working Families for Wal-Mart, a group funded primarily by Wal-Mart,
to reveal what it described as "the real motives of the union leaders
behind the campaign against Wal-Mart."
It characterized one of its leading
critics, Andrew Grossman of union-backed Wal-Mart Watch, as "a political
operative with a checkered past" in a section called "Paid Critic of the
Week" that also lambasted Wayne Hanley, head of the Canadian chapter of
the United Food and Commercial Workers union.
The site is part of Wal-Mart's
aggressive defense since last year against its increasingly organized
critics. Wal-Mart won't say how much it is spending, but it has set up a
political campaign-style "war room" staffed by consultants, hired
Washington D.C. lobbyists, formed the Working Families group and created
another website called Wal-Mart Facts.
In response to the new site,
union-funded WakeUpWalMart.com started its own website Tuesday,
www.abunchofgreedyrightwingliarswhoworkforwalmart.com, which attacks the
retailer's public relations and lobbying figures.
"These great guys who love to stretch
the truth (or what mom called liars) honed their special Wal-Mart skills
on an array of right wing political campaigns," the website reads.
In a letter to Democratic members of
congress about Wal-Mart's efforts, WakeUpWalMart said the attacks were
reminiscent of a campaign by a pro-Bush group, Swift Boat Veterans for
Truth, that questioned Sen. John Kerry's Vietnam War military record
during the 2004 presidential race.
Corporate reputation management expert
Steven Silvers, who has worked for 25 years advising public and private
companies on strategic communications, called paidcritics.com "a
name-calling, nastily aggressive little website" that marked an
escalation in Wal-Mart's battle with critics.
"The company's latest move comes right
out of the Swift Boat playbook. And it could become standard procedure
for other corporations that find themselves in the center of public
controversy," Silvers wrote in his blog Scatterbox. Silvers said neither
he nor his firm, Denver-based GBSM, Inc., do any work for the unions or
Wal-Mart.
Experts say there is no clear winner
yet in the public relations battle. Union groups decry what they call
Wal-Mart's low wages, poor health benefits and destruction of local
economies. Wal-Mart says it creates jobs, provides low-cost insurance
for employees and saves the average family $2,300 a year by keeping
prices low.
"The jury is still out," said Paul
Argenti, professor of corporate communication and reputation management
at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth University.
Both sides have been going at each
other since two unions launched separate campaigns in spring of 2005 to
pressure Wal-Mart for change after failing for years to organize its
stores: WakeUpWalMart.com, funded by the United Food and Commercial
Workers, and Wal-Mart Watch, backed by the Service Employees
International Union.
Both groups say they want to pressure
Wal-Mart into becoming a better employer, not run it out of business.
Wal-Mart in response hired a team of
about 35 consultants at Edelman, which bills itself as the world's
largest independently owned PR company, as well as lobbyists in
Washington D.C.
It has also launched a raft of
initiatives, including adding more affordable health care plans for
employees as low as $11 a month, adopting ambitious environmental goals
and boosting diversity among employees and its sea of suppliers.
"At this point I would certainly say
that we are gaining ground," Wal-Mart spokeswoman Sarah Clark said.
"From our standpoint, 127 million
customers shop at our stores in the U.S. every week. We know many of
them value the savings, the job opportunities and the charitable giving
we provide their communities," Clark said.
Patricia Edwards, a portfolio manager
and retail analyst at Wentworth, Hauser & Violich in Seattle, which
manages $8.2 billion in assets and holds 51,000 Wal-Mart shares, said
investors are getting tired of hearing the same arguments back and
forth.
"When you get to the point where you
have escalating blog wars, it gets to be a little like political ad
campaign season. I use my remote to mute every single one of those ads,"
she said.
Argenti said Wal-Mart has gotten
better at defending itself since last year. But he said the
paidcritics.com site was an ill-advised political attack campaign that
reacts to the critics rather than taking the initiative.
"It's a really bad idea. What
companies need to do is to rise above the argument and set your own
agenda," Argenti said.
Wal-Mart's Clark said Working Families
for Wal-Mart is a separate and independent group.
The group has a steering committee
headed by former Atlanta mayor and civil rights leader Andrew Young, but
the operations are run by a staff housed in Edelman offices.
At least one steering committee
member, filmmaker Ron Galloway, said he would prefer the strategy to
focus on the facts of Wal-Mart's case.
"I still think that it is a
sub-optimal strategy to personalize all this. I think the facts are in
Wal-Mart's favor and that's just not part of the battle I'm interested
in joining," Galloway said, referring to the paidcritics.com website.
Copyright 2006 The Associated Press.
All rights reserved.
[back to top]
Vancouver City Council flashes green light to Wal-Mart on Marine Drive
By Kevin Potvin
[back to top]
Ignoring warnings from critics about
the damage to local businesses, to neighbourhood developement, to
traffic control, and greenhouse gasses, the NPA-dominated Vancouver City
Council voted to retain Highway Oriented Retail zoning on Marine Drive,
opening the way for Walmart to renew its proposal for a 131,000 square
foot store.
Vancouver City Council voted the night
of Monday, July 17 in favour of retaining Highway Oriented Retail zoning
for the lands south of Marine Drive roughly between Cambie and Main
streets. The 6-5 split decision clears the way for Walmart, amongst
others, including Canadian Tire, to resubmit applications to build big
box retail stores on their property there, after having been rejected by
the previous City Council in 2005.
In presenting his motion to Council to
retain big box retail zoning in the area, Peter Ladner, representing the
Non-Partisan Association [NPA] on this issue, said “we know from our
retail study” that hardship to nearby small independent retailers “is
not going to happen” when the big box retailers arrive. Walmart’s
proposal last year was for a 131,000 square foot store; the average
independent retailer in the area is about 1/100th that size.
Ladner further suggested that more
customers of big box retailers will use public transit, bicycles, or
foot to arrive and to carry their purchases home than critics think, and
he downplayed the effects on traffic and pollution those critics have
warned about. “I use a bike,” he said to Council, “and I can tell you
that big bags of clothes from a store is among the easier things to
carry on a bike.”
Suzanne Anton, also representing the
NPA, echoed those sentiments, suggesting that shoppers who will frequent
the big box stores on Marine Drive will use public transit: “When
there’s good transit, why would you take a car?” she asked Denning
Smith, who was at Council Chambers on behalf of Better Environmentally
Sound Transportation [BEST].
Kim Capri, NPA, voted for big box
zoning on Marine Drive as well, calling the decision “pro transit” and a
good, balanced approach. B C Lee, also of the NPA, called the big box
retailing model “environmentally friendly and transportation friendly.”
Earlier in the evening, Council opened
up the floor to hear from members of the public on their views of the
proposed zoning. Peter Jackman, representing the Vancouver Board of
Trade, appeared on the list and spoke during this period to argue that
opening up Vancouver to big box retailers like Walmart would actually
cut down on traffic and pollution: As things stand now, “Vancouver
residents must travel to other municipalities to shop at large-format
retail stores,” he said. He also said stores like Walmart are good for
small businesses: “Large-format retail stores could enhance local
businesses by drawing more customers to their area.”
Jay Byfield, who is owner of South
Vancouver Mini Public Storage suggested that massively increased traffic
along the Marine Drive corridor could actually be good for nearby
residents since “more traffic will slow down traffic.” In any event, he
said, the worries of small businesses were not for City Council to
concern itself with: “It is not Council’s responsibility to protect
small business” from giant global corporations, he said.
Gordon Harris, an urban planning
consultant, told Council a big box retail zone on Marine Drive is a
“sustainable development” plan because “it concentrates all that retail
traffic in the one area.”
Stephen Knight, whose real estate
consultancy company works with major retailers to locate new store
locations, said Vancouver suffers from a deficit of retail space,
stating, for example, that because Reitman’s has 60 stores in Western
Canada, it ought to have between 8 to 10 stores in Vancouver, if the
city had enough available retail space. (Reitman’s has no stores in
Vancouver.)
In two special Council sessions
comprising seven hours of discussions with speakers both corporate and
private, and in Councilors questioning of those speakers and City staff,
as well as in City staff’s opening remarks about the issue and in
Council’s debate about the proposal and in their comments regarding
their voting intentions, never once were the words “Kyoto” or “Accord”
mentioned. Nor did anyone explicitly connect big box-oriented retail to
the burning of greenhouse gasses by their car-borne customers. Only
once, and only briefly, did one Councilor, COPE’s David Cadman, make
mention of Peak Oil-related information regarding the future of
gasoline-powered cars travel to and from such stores.
No one mentioned that investment
analysts have serious doubts about the medium-term future of big box
retailers because of rising gasoline prices, doubts that have plunged
the value of stock in Walmart down 25% in recent months, in lock step
with the rising price of oil on international markets.
Scant attention was paid by NPA
Councilors to concerns raised by members of the public and
representatives of environmental and traffic-related organizations to
past City Council-stated commitments to try creating and supporting
small and numerous neighbourhood shopping districts. On the contrary,
the NPA’s Ladner expressed serious concerns instead about perceived
Council obligations to transnational corporations who purchase land
speculating on their ability to locate branches of their stores on it.
Walmart operates over 5,000 stores
worldwide, generating over $300 billion in revenue, and is the biggest
company in the world. Lately, it has been adding 50 million square feet
of new retail space to its overall operations, annually—or the
equivalent of a store like the proposed one on Marine Drive, added every
single day of the year. In an Economist article in 2004, it was pointed
out that in a Phoenix, Arizona suburban area, “On a single 20-mile
stretch of road sit six giant Wal-Marts. Shoppers have 14 more Wal-Marts
to pick from a few miles further south and east. The area, says Mr
Schoewe, with obvious pride, ‘shows you what can happen.’”
[back to top]
Wal-Mart
Starts Teen Site, Sells Ads on Walmart.com
By The Morning News
[back to top]
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. has launched a
Web site aimed at teenagers, apparently in an effort to boost the
retailer's back-to-school sales.
Dubbed "The Hub," the Web site, at
http://schoolyourway.walmart.com, is described as "the place to be for
school your way."
The page offers music and videos
featuring teenagers and shows them how to create their own pages and win
prizes, including a chance to have their own videos appear in a Wal-Mart
television commercial.
An Ad Age article Monday poked fun at
the new Web site, calling it "highly sanitized, controlled and rather
unhip."
A spokesman from Bentonville-based
Wal-Mart did not return a phone call from the Morning News seeking
comment on Monday.
Ad Age also reported Monday that
Wal-Mart confirmed it has begun selling ad space on its walmart.com Web
site but would not discuss its programs or rates.
A walmart.com spokeswoman reportedly
told Ad Age the ads are a "cost-effective online-marketing vehicle,"
comparing them to the retailer's in-store ad network, Wal-Mart TV. Plans
call for enhancing suppliers' online ads, but no details were given.
Two of Wal-Mart's biggest suppliers,
Unilever and Procter & Gamble, may be the first to jump on board,
according to Ad Age.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart a wolf in
sheep’s clothing
By Karen Blotnicky
Chronicle Herald
Monday, July 17, 2006
[back to top]
CONSUMER pull has not been sufficient
to get Wal-Mart into as many communities across North America as the
retail giant would like. So, enter Plan B, a plan that Wal-Mart likes to
consider a "good neighbour" plan.
In response to growing community
unrest regarding the huge retailer and its potential harm to smaller,
local businesses, many communities are saying Wal-Mart is not welcome.
But money talks. So Wal-Mart’s new buy-in strategy just might lead to
more opportunities.
Their strategy is quite simple. They
plan to give money — a lot of money — to the local business community.
First off, there is a $50,000 donation to the local chamber of commerce.
That is nothing to sneeze at. Such business organizations are seldom
well-funded, and there is much to be done on a shoestring. So it is hard
to turn your nose up at such a fine, community-oriented incentive.
But that’s not all. Like an excited
game show host, Wal-Mart is giving out even more money. They are
offering up $1.5 million in grants to local businesses. These grants
will include monies for financial assistance, advertising support and
even training. But that’s not all. Even competing retailers will have
access to these funds.
Clearly, Wal-Mart is giving a lot of
money to the community; $1.5 million is nothing to scoff at, especially
for small business. Just think what such an incentive could mean to the
businesses in the community, especially those that exist in smaller
municipalities without the resources to compete? While Wal-Mart suddenly
looks like a hero offering a helping hand to the businesses that are
threatened by its arrival in town, the retail giant is really a wolf in
sheep’s clothing. Stores that cannot compete with Wal-Mart will still
not be competitive a year later, with or without all that money.
And Wal-Mart is not really giving all
that much — at least not from Wal-Mart’s perspective. The largest
retailer in North America celebrated more than $300 billion in sales
last year, so $1.5 million is only about an average week’s sales to most
stores.
But money does grease business wheels,
and surely it will in this case. This campaign, which is more of a bribe
to local business than a good-neighbour policy, is likely to bring more
success to Wal-Mart expansion than several times that much money
invested in consumer-based advertising. But the key to retail success
for local competitors is not a grant program that throws money at
smaller firms; it is finding a way to make such firms more competitive.
Easy money tends to blind such firms who let greed overcome their common
sense.
Some retail experts argue that
Wal-Mart brings a lot of consumer traffic into an area, which affects
the community by creating spinoff revenues for local businesses. If that
was a common outcome, surely there would be communities lobbying
Wal-Mart to bring its big-box style of retailing to their town, and the
giant wouldn’t have to resort to paying its way into new communities.
There is a fundamental difference between retailers who can survive
Wal-Mart’s competition and those which cannot. First of all, be
realistic about competing on price. You can’t beat Wal-Mart’s prices on
flagship items.
It is common knowledge that not all
prices for all products are lower in a Wal-Mart store. But they don’t
have to be. Consumers will seek out the flagship items at Wal-Mart, then
buy other items there because it’s convenient for them to do so.
Wal-Mart is also excellent at putting impulse items where they need to
be, maximizing sales of products that were not planned purchases.
It you can’t compete on price, you can
still compete in other areas of the marketing mix such as product
quality and location. If you are already in business and have a sizable
market in the local community, with high-quality products, you will not
stand to lose as many customers as a store that doesn’t have that
reputation.
Location is a plus for many local
businesses, which are handier to the customer than travelling to another
community, or a centralized retail centre, to go to Wal-Mart. But lower
price can still be a critical draw.
Your market segment is the key to
success. You need loyal customers, with loyalty programs to keep them
coming back. You can spice up this approach with generous helpings of
high-end customer service. Perhaps you think that your particular
service is immune to Wal-Mart’s attraction. Think again. If you are
selling travel or photography services, eyeglasses, or hairstyling
services, you will still face the retail giant in a competitive market.
And if I were you, I would think very carefully before taking handouts
from predators who really want my customers.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart still on horizon, despite ordinance proposal
By Elaine Sedlock
Sunday, July 16, 2006
[back to top]
AVON PARK — Despite rumors that the
plans for a new Wal-Mart in Avon Park may be changed if the proposed
Illegal Immigration Relief Act passes, Wal-Mart officials say otherwise.
When questioned as to whether or not
the ordinance would have any impact on the future Wal-Mart, company
spokesman John Simley said, “We can’t comment on (anyone’s) opinion of
the constitutionality of the ordinance. But to suggest that its passing
could prevent a Wal-Mart from opening indicates a lack of understanding
of our business. No one has greater interest than Wal-Mart in insuring
that all our associates are authorized to work in the United States.”
In reference to past infractions by
Wal-Mart, Simley said, “We had a case where an outside vendor certified
to us that all his employees were properly work authorized, and we were
hoodwinked. The subcontractor responsible for that was Christopher
Walters.”
The ordinance, which would fine
business owners for employing illegal immigrants and landlords for
renting or leasing to them, has come under a lot of fire.
It was initially a mirror image of an
ordinance proposed in Hazleton, Pa., said Avon Park Mayor Tom Macklin
(who brought the idea to the city council).
Since then, much controversy has
arisen and a variety of news media have shown an interest, including CNN
and the New York Times.
Because the ordinance was a model of
Hazleton’s proposal, many have been waiting to see what would happen
when Hazleton held its final vote on July 13.
According to the Standard Speaker, the
ordinance passed with a 4 to 1 vote.
Whether or not it will pass in Avon
Park remains to be seen. At this time it appears that the majority of
the council are in support.
City Manager C.B. Shirey said the city
may modify the ordinance based upon the modifications which were done by
Hazleton.
Councilman Doug Eason said, of
comments made by city attorney Michael Disler, “He said on FOX 13 News
that he thinks our ordinance violates the First Amendment. Tell me what
part of that could possibly violate the First Amendment.”
“I’ve never seen so many people
comment, probably without even reading the ordinance. Nothing in the
ordinance does anything to illegals. It goes after the businesses and
the landlords,” he continued.
Eason said of Hazleton’s passing the
act, “Apparently they’re not afraid of the ACLU (American Civil
Liberties Union) or the Southern Poverty Legal Center,” and added that
“two days ago, the assistant director of Homeland Security said, ‘We’re
going to criminalize business owners who knowingly employ illegal
immigrants.’ We’re not criminalizing them — we’re just penalizing them.”
There are those who fear the unknown
consequences such an ordinance could bring about, but Eason believes
that things can only get better.
He cited complaints, including many of
“people so overcrowded in houses that they’re ‘doing their business’ in
their yards,” and one of a woman who “woke up and discovered a man
laying in her yard passed out drunk.”
“You’re not going to know what will
happen (if the ordinance passes). But I think we should have the courage
to stand up and try to change this mess,” he said.
The final public hearing for the
ordinance will be at 6 p.m. Monday, July 24, at the Avon Park Community
Center, 300 W. Main St.
Content © 2006 News Sun Software ©
1998-2006 1up! Software, All Rights Reserved
[back to top]
Scheme’s ringleader
betrays Wal-Mart
By Peter Shinkle
St. Louis Post Dispatch
Sunday, July 16, 2006
[back to top]
A local businessman masterminded a
scheme in the late 1990s to bring illegal immigrants to clean floors at
Wal-Mart stores across the country.
Wal-Mart paid at least $82.2 million
over three years to shell companies set up by businessman Christopher
Walters, federal agents discovered. Walters' companies in turn paid
subcontractors who hired illegal immigrants from countries stretching
from Poland to Mongolia.
When investigators dug into the
scheme, Walters cut a deal and became a star cooperating witness in a
criminal probe targeting Wal-Mart. He told investigators that a Wal-Mart
executive told him to set up the shell companies, and he recorded
conversations with scores of Wal-Mart employees.
"Walters created these dummy
corporations, but he did so at the direction of Wal-Mart," said Jeff
Demerath, Walters' attorney.
The investigation led to a landmark
settlement in March 2005, when Wal-Mart agreed to pay $11 million to
avoid charges that it employed illegal immigrants.
In return for his cooperation, Walters
avoided criminal charges. But he agreed that 12 of his shell companies
would plead guilty to conspiring to transport illegal immigrants into
the country and would forfeit $4 million.
Now, more than a year later, the
companies still have not paid the $4 million. Court records reflect
payment of about $2 million. Federal officials say the amount forfeited
so far is about $2.8 million.
Walters, 43, who lives in a mansion on
a gated lane in Chesterfield, declined to comment. Demerath said he
expected the companies to pay the $4 million.
Walters' pivotal role in the probe has
left him persona non grata at Wal-Mart, which denies it knew of the
illegal immigrants working for Walters' companies.
"We feel like we were hoodwinked,"
said John Simley, Wal-Mart spokesman.
As for the claims Walters made about
the conspiracy and Wal-Mart's role, Simley said: "It's important to note
that he was a cooperating witness. It's not like he volunteered to do
this."
The St. Louis raid
The scheme began after federal
immigration agents raided a Wal-Mart in the St. Louis area in early
1997.
At that time, the cleaning company
Walters inherited from his father, Intensive Maintenance Care Inc., was
cleaning about two-thirds of all Wal-Mart stores in the country,
according to an account by Walters cited by immigration officials. As a
result of the raid, Wal-Mart fired Walters' company, according to both
Walters and Wal-Mart.
Walters said that Leroy Schuetz, then
a vice president in the operations branch at Wal-Mart headquarters in
Bentonville, Ark., told him IMC had been fired because of its use of
illegal workers.
But the Wal-Mart executive also gave
him a very different message, Walters told agents of U.S. Immigration
and Customs Enforcement. Schuetz "told him to create different
companies" so that if one company was fired for employing illegal
immigrants, Walters could still do business with Wal-Mart through the
other companies, according to Walters.
Wal-Mart denies it recommended setting
up the companies.
"There's nothing in the evidence to
indicate that," said Simley.
What's more, the employee Walters
spoke with was Leroy Schuetts, not Schuetz, and he was a regional
manager, not a vice president, Simley said. As for the claim that the
Wal-Mart employee urged use of multiple companies, "Schuetts has denied
it," Simley said. He said Wal-Mart would not make Schuetts available for
an interview.
In July 1997, Walters established
Express Corporate Services Inc., according to records filed with the
Missouri Secretary of State. More than a year later, he established IMC
Associates Inc. And on Dec. 14, 1998, seven companies were established
on a single day. They had names such as Comet Floor Care Associates
Inc., World Clean Associates Inc. and Ironman Maintenance Associates.
Walters had his employees' names put on the public filings; his own name
seldom appeared on them.
Walters then hired subcontractors, and
it was those subcontractors who hired the illegal workers, said Demerath,
Walters' attorney.
Soon, cash from the world's largest
retailer was gushing into Walters' companies.
In 1999, Wal-Mart paid Intensive
Maintenance Care and six other Walters companies $18.3 million, agents
said. By 2001, that number had jumped to $37.8 million.
Wal-Mart paid those companies a total
of $82.2 million from 1999 through 2001, but that might be only a
fraction of the amount Wal-Mart paid because the six companies do not
include a key company, Express Corporate Services, or several other of
Walters' cleaning companies. Nor does it include the amounts paid to
Walters' brother, who also had a company that provided cleaning services
for Wal-Mart.
Walters bought a $2.4 million house in
Ladue and an apartment complex in Fenton, also for $2.4 million. Other
expenditures agents found included a $21,763 Rolex watch for Walters'
wife, Jamie.
By then, a Russian had tipped off the
feds.
The tip-off
In November 1998, an immigration agent
interviewed Vladimir Blinov, a Russian who worked cleaning the Wal-Mart
in Honesdale, Pa. He said his employer was a man named Stanley Kostek.
Blinov was in the country illegally
because he had entered on a tourist visa and then had overstayed the
term of that visa. Blinov had been told before he left Russia about the
job he would get at Wal-Mart, Blinov told the agent, Julio Santana of
the Philadelphia office of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
This was the start of what would be a
seven-year probe by Santana and other immigration agents of Wal-Mart's
use of illegal immigrants. They called it Operation Rollback, a play on
the retailer's ads for lowering prices.
In early 2000, agent Santana
discovered information that quickly expanded the probe to Wal-Mart
operations nationwide.
A probation officer told Santana that
the Honesdale Wal-Mart's manager identified the company that cleaned the
store as Comet Floor Care and said that he believed the cleaning crew
members were all illegal immigrants, Santana said in an affidavit filed
in court in Pennsylvania. Immigration officials subpoenaed documents
from Wal-Mart, and those documents revealed that Wal-Mart had paid Comet
$8 million in 1999 to clean 82 stores throughout the United States,
Santana said.
Santana also got information from a
confidential informer, who set up recorded phone calls with Kostek. The
informer worked for Kostek at the Honesdale Wal-Mart and lived in a
trailer with cleaning crew members from the former Soviet republic of
Georgia.
Armed with this information,
immigration agents raided Wal-Mart stores in Honesdale, Harrisburg and
two other cities in Pennsylvania on March 20, 2001. They arrested 27
illegal immigrants from countries including Georgia, Russia, Hungary and
Ukraine.
They also searched the trailer in
Honesdale where the informant said Kostek housed illegal workers who
cleaned the local Wal-Mart.
"The aliens slept on the floor in
sleeping bags, and the bathroom was abnormally dirty," Santana wrote.
Two days after the raids, the informer
called immigration officers to tell them that Kostek, who owned a
company called CMS based in Queensbury, N.Y., had moved him to Salem,
N.H., to clean a different Wal-Mart, and from there to New Jersey.
Soon, the informer himself was in
trouble. By April 2001, other workers had threatened him physically and
suspected him of cooperating with immigration officials. Also, back in
his home country of Georgia, family members of deported Georgians had
threatened his family. He was taken out of the investigation, Santana
said.
Violence reared its head when another
man working with Kostek, Myroslav Dryjak, brought in some Armenians to
replace the crew at the Honesdale store. When one of the Armenians, a
man about 60 years old, complained that he wanted to work in New York,
Dryjak and another man took him outside the trailer and assaulted him,
the informant told immigration officials.
In fall 2001, immigration agents
raided Wal-Marts in Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio and Missouri, arresting
68 illegal workers from countries including Poland, Lithuania and
Mongolia.
At stores in St. Ann and O'Fallon, the
agents arrested six Czechs and a Pole, all employed by a company called
National Floor Management. Illegals at other stores worked for a string
of other companies: Ironman Maintenance Inc., IMC, Comet, Champion,
Precision Cleaning Inc. and Pinnacle Management Inc.
Santana began to scrutinize the
companies. The public documents they filed offered limited information,
but they kept leading back to St. Louis County. Investigators also
discovered a pattern: Many of the companies had the same agent at the
same address on South Florissant Road in Ferguson.
Immigration agents also obtained
records from Wal-Mart revealing the $82.2 million that Wal-Mart paid the
seven Walters companies. And from Normandy Bank in St. Louis County,
Santana obtained records showing a web of payments linking the Walters
companies to each other and to subcontractors.
On April 10, 2002, agents raided the
offices of Intensive Maintenance Care in Ferguson, CMS in Queensbury and
one other subcontractor. The agents seized financial accounts holding $3
million in cash. They also filed forfeiture cases in federal court in
Pennsylvania seeking to take control of the Walters' Ladue home and the
Fenton apartment complex, claiming both had been bought with the
proceeds of an illicit scheme to launder money and employ illegal
immigrants.
Walters maintained that he never knew
the subcontractors were hiring illegal immigrants, said Demerath, his
attorney. But making that case stand up in court might be tough,
Demerath acknowledged.
"We knew it was dangerous to go to
trial on that because he probably did look the other way," Demerath
said.
The deal
In July 2002, three months after his
office was raided, Walters agreed to talk with the federal investigators
- with his attorney present. It was then that Walters acknowledged that
he had first learned of illegal workers used by his subcontractors as
early as 1994, Santana said in his affidavit. He also told the story of
how the 1997 raid led him to set up multiple companies.
But Walters did more than recount
history to help the agents - much more. After the April 2002 raids, he
had two of his employees call Wal-Mart stores and inform them that he
was shutting down and going out of business. The employees recorded the
calls. In July, Walters turned over the recordings to Immigration.
Demerath and prosecutors negotiated an
agreement in which Walters' 12 companies would plead guilty to
conspiracy to transport illegal workers into the country and would
forfeit $4 million. In return, U.S. attorney Thomas Marino of
Harrisburg, Pa., agreed not to pursue any charges against Walters, his
wife, his father or his employees.
"It was a good deal for him," Demerath
said.
Walters signed the agreement in
January 2003, but it would remain secret for more than two years. In
that period, Walters cooperated with the federal probe extensively,
recording more than 100 phone calls and arranging secretly recorded
meetings with Wal-Mart employees.
On April 23, 2003, Walters wore a wire
to a meeting with Steve Bertschy, whom immigration agents identified as
a Wal-Mart vice president over store maintenance.
Walters said he wanted to help
Wal-Mart replace illegal immigrants in its stores with legal workers,
but Bertschy did not accept the offer, Santana said in an affidavit
later filed in federal court in Arkansas.
Walters told Bertschy that he knew of
as many as 1,000 illegal immigrants working at Wal-Mart stores.
"We're trying to address that issue
because people don't know exactly if there are illegal workers in our
stores," Bertschy responded.
At another point, Walters said, "I
know of at least 400 stores that had illegal aliens in them." Santana
said Bertschy replied: "Don't repeat that."
Wal-Mart spokesman Simley acknowledged
that Bertschy had made the comments attributed to him, but he said they
were "out of context." Simley also denied that Bertschy was a vice
president. His title was "manager, floor maintenance program," Simley
said.
Later in 2003, Walters made recorded
phone calls to 118 Wal-Mart stores to discover whether they employed
contractors for cleaning services.
Armed with the recordings and other
information provided by Walters, immigration agents obtained search
warrants. On Oct. 23, 2003, agents raided the offices of Bertschy and
other employees at Wal-Mart headquarters, taking away computer and
e-mail data and 13 boxes of files and other papers. On the same day,
agents arrested about 245 illegal immigrants employed at 61 stores in 21
states from New York to Arizona.
The settlement
On March 18, 2005, Wal-Mart agreed to
pay $11 million to settle allegations of hiring illegal immigrants, but
the company denied any wrongdoing.
Walters' 12 companies agreed to a
guilty plea and the $4 million forfeiture.
The settlement documents also pointed
out that after the October 2003 raids, Wal-Mart notified the government
that it intended to take action to ensure that independent contractors
working for Wal-Mart comply with laws on employment of illegal
immigrants.
Wal-Mart also agreed to a court order
requiring it to train its managers on preventing the hiring of illegal
immigrants, and to verify that its independent contractors are complying
with immigration laws.
Walters and the Wal-Mart executives
avoided any criminal charges, but prosecutors came down on others linked
to the scheme. Three months after the settlement was announced, Walter
Truszkowski, the owner of Deluxe Cleaning, pleaded guilty in federal
court in Chicago of money laundering and conspiracy to conceal illegal
immigrants.
Truszkowski admitted with his guilty
plea that, through Walters' company Intensive Maintenance Care, he got
"criminal proceeds in the form of Wal-Mart's payments." Last month,
Truszkowski was sentenced to three years in prison and ordered to pay a
$60,000 fine.
Truszkowski, of McHenry, Ill.,
admitted that he paid $247,319 as part of the conspiracy to an illegal
immigrant from Lithuania, Algimantas Kondratavicius.
Kondratavicius, who was arrested in
2000 at a Wal-Mart in Valparaiso, Ind., pleaded guilty of importing
illegal immigrants, admitting he obtained his workers from "alien
smugglers" in Moscow and Tomsk, Russia. In 2004, he was sentenced to a
year in prison.
Meanwhile, two other subcontracting
firms, DJR Cleaning and CMS of Queensbury, got deals like Walters'. DJR
owner Vincent W. Romano was not charged with a crime, but DJR itself
pleaded guilty of conspiracy to transport aliens into the country and
agreed to forfeit $200,000. Charges against CMS owner Stanley Kostek
were dropped, but CMS pleaded guilty and forfeited $10,000.
Dryjak, who allegedly assaulted the
Armenian while moving crews of illegal workers for CMS in the Northeast,
pleaded guilty of conspiracy and was sentenced to probation.
Meanwhile, Walters' companies have yet
to forfeit the full $4 million.
Last September, federal prosecutors
dropped their efforts to force Walters to forfeit the home in Ladue and
the apartment complex in Fenton.
Marty Carlson, first assistant U.S.
attorney for the middle district of Pennsylvania, which investigated
Walters, declined to discuss why the full forfeiture had not taken
place.
"We intend to move forward until we've
secured the full $4 million," he said.
Amid all the Operation Rollback cases,
what remains obscured is the fate of the hundreds of illegal immigrants
arrested at Wal-Marts nationwide. Immigration officials have said many
were deported, but it is unclear how many. Some disappeared during the
investigation.
Some former Wal-Mart janitors have
filed a lawsuit claiming Wal-Mart committed racketeering offenses in its
failure to pay the minimum wage and Social Security taxes to janitors,
including illegal immigrants.
James Linsey, an attorney who is
seeking to make the case a class action on behalf of many Wal-Mart
janitors, said immigrant janitors were "were working seven nights a
week, 364 days a year," and in some cases were locked inside stores
while they worked overnight.
Wal-Mart has denied the claims and has
asked a federal judge in New Jersey to dismiss the case.
[back to top]
WalMart ATM in Kearny, NJ doing well and making NJ Banks run for cover
India Daily
Jul. 16, 2006
[back to top]
Wal-Mart-branded automated teller
machine is reigniting fears among small banks in NJ. These inefficient
banks are scared of WalMart. But people are happy with WalMart ATMs. It
is time for the NJ banks to face some real compition and bring some
sense of efficiency and customer care.
[back to top]
Judge
gives Wal-Mart more time to file local site plan
By AMY JO JOHNSON
TIMES
Saturday, July 15, 2006
[back to top]
Bay County Circuit Judge William J.
Caprathe late Friday afternoon granted Wal-Mart an additional 30 days to
submit an amended site plan to Portsmouth Township.
The site plan for a controversial
retail store to be built along M-15 was set to expire a year from
issuance - which would have been Tuesday.
Attorneys representing the Friends of
Portsmouth Township, a grassroots group fighting against the Wal-Mart
development; Chris and Karla Ratajczak, a township couple who are
seeking to sell their land to Wal-Mart; the township and Wal-Mart all
presented arguments to the judge Friday on whether the retailer should
be given more time, and if so, how long.
Daniel C. Rusch, a Saginaw attorney
representing Wal-Mart, argued that the approved site plan is an asset to
his client, an asset on which it has invested hundreds of thousands of
dollars.
He claimed the appeal filed by the
Friends of Portsmouth Township shortly after the site plan was approved
was holding up Wal-Mart's progress.
Traverse City attorney Scott W.
Howard, representing the Friends of Portsmouth Township, said Wal-Mart
can't move forward, not because of the appeal, but because the land on
which it wants to build is in Public Act 116, a tax-incentive program to
preserve farmland.
''We're not the ones who are
responsible for holding this up,'' he said.
Caprathe appeared to agree with
Howard, asking Rusch what Wal-Mart would do if the appeals case didn't
exist.
''It's not the suit that's holding
this thing up, it's (P.A.) 116,'' he said before granting the 30-day
extension to Wal-Mart.
Dr. Mark C. Stewart, a member of the
Friends of Portsmouth Township, said he was pleased with the judge's
decision to only give 30 days and vowed to keep working to keep Wal-Mart
from developing.
''This is clearly unnecessary urban
sprawl,'' he said. ''We're going to keep fighting and see what we can
do. We're trying to preserve a way of life.''
Following the judge's decision, Rusch
said he found the one-month extension to be ''a reasonable resolution.''
Asked about a time frame for future
construction, he said, ''There's no timetable that's been established at
this point because of the pending litigation.''
The Ratajczaks' lawyer, Peter A.
Poznac, reiterated that his clients have not given up on selling their
land to Wal-Mart, a deal that's been considered for roughly two years.
He said they will again ask the state
Agriculture Department this fall for the OK to use their farm land for
the retail development.
The state denied the Ratajczak's
request before, but that was before the township board passed a
resolution saying the supercenter is in the public interest.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart lowers shoplifting
bar
Guardian Unlimited
14 July 2006 [back to top]
"Always low prices" is the endlessly
repeated slogan of Wal-Mart, the world's biggest retailer. But now, if
the price is low enough -- under $25 -- you might get away without
paying at all.
The chain has decided to stop seeking
prosecution of shoplifters stealing goods worth less than $25, ending
the "zero tolerance" policy inaugurated by the firm's strictly moral
founder, Sam Walton.
Shoplifters under 18 or over 64 will
also escape prosecution, according to an internal memo leaked to the New
York Times by an anti-Wal-Mart pressure group. The store will continue
to seek prosecution of all suspected thieves who threaten violence or
refuse to show identification.
The previous policy of prosecuting any
thefts over $3 had overstretched local police departments, some of which
were forced to hire extra officers to attend to Wal-Mart's calls. It
also brings the company into line with most of its rivals, and frees up
resources for fighting the bigger problem of organised theft by members
of Wal-Mart's 1,3-million workforce.
"If I have somebody being paid $12 an
hour processing a $5 theft, I have just lost money," JP Suarez, the
company's head of asset protection, told the New York Times. "I have
also lost the time to catch somebody stealing $100 or an organised group
stealing $3 000." -
© Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
[back to top]
Wal-Mart Supercenter
unplugged
Home Channel News
Thursday, July 13, 2006
[back to top]
Wal-Mart Store's ultra-green
supercenter in this Denver suburb was closed for business Wednesday
afternoon due to a power failure caused by an electrical fire. Store
associates worked the parking lot during the outage, alerting incoming
customers to the lack of electricity inside. It was uncertain when the
store will reopen. The location had been closed since Tuesday morning.
When it opened late last year, the Aurora store was the second of
Wal-Mart's much-heralded eco-friendly test stores (the first was in
McKinney, Texas). Energy efficiency and solar power figure prominently
in the store's design, and a giant wind turbine is situated near the
206,000-square-foot supercenter.
The fire was limited to the store's
circuit panel. Two electrical workers received burns, and some store
associates felt ill after breathing agents released from fire
extinguishers, according to wire reports.
Wal-Mart Stores ranks third on the
Home Channel News Top 500 Scoreboard.
[back to top]
Fed Warns Congress
About Wal-Mart Banks
By Robert Schroeder
Dow Jones Newswires
July 13, 2006 [back to top]
WASHINGTON (Dow Jones) -- The growth of the
specialized banks sought by Wal-Mart and other companies is a threat to
a longstanding separation of banking and commerce and undermines bank
supervision, a Federal Reserve official told a congressional
subcommittee Wednesday.
Scott Alvarez, the Fed's general counsel, told a House
Financial Services subcommittee that Congress should act on a loophole
that allows companies to own so-called industrial loan companies.
Companies of any kind are currently allowed to operate an ILC. The
specialized banks have gotten heightened scrutiny following a bid by
Wal-Mart (WMT) to operate one.
Alvarez's comments come as lawmakers are taking a
growing interest in industrial-loan companies.
Monday, Reps. Barney Frank, D-Mass., and Paul Gillmor,
R-Ohio, introduced a bill that would kill bids by Wal-Mart and Home
Depot (HD) to operate ILCs. The congressmen say ILCs are poorly
regulated. They also voiced concern about companies owning banks.
ILCs are state-chartered banks with direct access to
federal deposit insurance and the Fed's discount window. They have many
of the same powers of commercial banks.
There are currently about 60 ILCs in existence.
Although some of these are community-based banks, others are run by
companies to process credit card, commercial loans, and other financial
transactions. Among the biggest consumer-oriented companies that are
operating ILC's are General Motors and retail giant Target.
Wal-Mart says its application is limited and wants to
operate the specialized bank to process credit card and other payments.
Critics, meanwhile, worry that Wal-Mart, the country's
largest retailer, will use its ILC to grow banking operations.
In testimony before the subcommittee, the chairman of
the Independent Community Bankers of America criticized both the
Wal-Mart and Home Depot applications and urged lawmakers to block bids
by commercial companies to own banks.
"The financial system's safety and soundness,
integrity and ability to serve local communities and small businesses
are all at great risk," ICBA chairman Terry Jorde told lawmakers in
prepared testimony.
The Fed's Alvarez said ILCs are now "virtually
indistinguishable" from commercial banks. Assets have increased almost
500% between 1997 and 2005, from $25.1 billion to $150.1 billion,
according to the Fed. Deposits have grown by more than 800% in the same
period, from $11.7 billion to $107.9 billion.
Copyright (c) 2006 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart
Backers Take On Critics With New Web Site
By Kris Hudson
Wall Street Journal
Friday, July 14, 2006
[back to top]
DALLAS -- A group primarily funded by
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. has gone on the offensive against the giant
retailer's critics.
Working Families for Wal-Mart, a group
that Wal-Mart formed in December to counter a barrage of criticism
generated by union-backed groups, silently launched a Web site this
month with the unusual aim of discrediting those critics. The site,
paidcritics.com1, was formally announced on the Working Families's Web
site this afternoon following inquiries from The Wall Street Journal.
Paidcritics.com levels most of its
criticism at WakeUpWalMart.com2, an anti-Wal-Mart group backed by the
United Food and Commercial Workers union. It is one of two groups
launched last year -- the other being Wal-Mart Watch, backed by the
Service Employees International Union -- to criticize Wal-Mart's labor
practices, among other things.
The new website points out "hypocrisy"
in the union group's public criticisms of Wal-Mart, "heavy-handed
tactics" that unions use in politics and other arenas and their
"extreme, not mainstream" political leanings. The site also features a
"paid critic of the week," an apparent answer to the Wal-Mart Watch
Person of the Week on that group's Web site routinely highlighting a
Wal-Mart critic in the news.
Kevin Sheridan, spokesman for Working
Families for Wal-Mart, said paidcritics.com was started "to let people
know about the real motives of the union leaders behind the campaign
against Wal-Mart."
Mr. Sheridan added that the
union-backed groups "are attacking the wrong company… Union leaders
should focus on standing up for working families rather than attacking a
company that serves working families in this country and around the
world."
WakeUpWalMart.com spokesman Chris
Kofinis, the subject of two postings on paidcritics.com, said his group
soon will counter with its own website outlining the Republican
strategists working on political and media issues for Wal-Mart.
"It's so sad that to see Wal-Mart, a
$300 billion dollar company with [slowing sales growth] and a terrible
public image, fund another in-the-gutter publicity stunt to attack the
very people who want to change Wal-Mart and America for the better," Mr.
Kofinis said.
[back to top]
Some Leeway for the
Small Shoplifter
By Michael Barbaro
New York Times
Thursday, July 13, 2006
[back to top]
Wal-Mart refuses to carry smutty
magazines. It will not sell compact discs with obscene lyrics. And when
it catches customers shoplifting - even a pair of socks or a pack of
cigarettes - it prosecutes them.
But now, in a rare display of limited
permissiveness, Wal-Mart is letting thieves off the hook - at least in
cases involving $25 or less.
According to internal documents, the
company, the nation’s largest retailer and leading destination for
shoplifting, will no longer prosecute first-time thieves unless they are
between 18 and 65 and steal merchandise worth at least $25, putting the
chain in line with the policies of many other retailers.
Under the new policy, a shoplifter
caught trying to swipe, say, a DVD of the movie “Basic Instinct 2”
($16.87) would receive a warning, but one caught walking out of the
store with “E.R. - The Complete Fifth Season” ($32.87) would face
arrest.
Wal-Mart said the change would allow
it to focus on theft by professional shoplifters and its own employees,
who together steal the bulk of merchandise from the chain every year,
rather than the teenager who occasionally takes a candy bar from the
checkout counter.
It may also serve to placate
small-town police departments across the country who have protested what
the company has called its zero-tolerance policy on shoplifting.
Employees summoned officers whether a customer stole a $5 toy or a
$5,000 television set - anything over $3, the company said.
At some of the chain’s giant 24-hour
stores, the police make up to six arrests a day prompting a handful of
departments to hire an additional officer just to deal with the extra
workload.
“I had one guy tied up at Wal-Mart
every day,” said Don Zofchak, chief of police in South Strabane
Township, Pa., which has 9,000 residents and 16 officers. He said the
higher threshold for prosecution “would help every community to deal
with this.”
J. P. Suarez, who is in charge of
asset protection at Wal-Mart, said it was no longer efficient to
prosecute petty shoplifters. “If I have somebody being paid $12 an hour
processing a $5 theft, I have just lost money,” he said. “I have also
lost the time to catch somebody stealing $100 or an organized group
stealing $3,000.”
The changes in Wal-Mart’s theft policy
are described in 30 pages of documents that were provided to The New
York Times by WakeUpWalMart.com, a group backed by unions that have
tried to organize Wal-Mart workers in the United States.
The group said it received the
document from a former employee at the chain who is unhappy with the new
policy.
In interviews, several current and
former Wal-Mart employees said the new shoplifting policy undermines
their work and would, over time, encourage more shoplifting at the
chain.
But Wal-Mart said it would closely
track shoplifters it did not have arrested, and would ask that they be
prosecuted after a second incident. (Under the new policy, it will also
seek the prosecution of all suspected shoplifters who threaten violence
or fail to produce identification, no matter how much they are trying to
steal. Not carrying identification is a popular tactic among
professional shoplifters to avoid arrest.)
“There is not a lot of margin for
success for those intent on making a living stealing from us,” Mr.
Suarez said. “We will put them in jail just as we always have.”
Still, the new policy, which became
effective in March, is in many ways a striking departure from Wal-Mart
traditions. In the past, the company has proudly defended its aggressive
prosecution of shoplifters, saying it helps hold down prices.
“Other retailers might offset the cost
of shoplifting with higher prices,” a spokeswoman said in a 2004
interview. “But we don’t do that.”
Indeed, Wal-Mart’s zero-tolerance
policy can be traced to its founder, Sam Walton, who tied employee
bonuses to low theft rates at stores. Stolen merchandise, he wrote in
his autobiography published in 1992, the year he died, “is one of the
biggest enemies of profitability in the retail business.”
Over all, American retailers lose more
than $30 billion a year to theft, according to the National Retail
Federation, a trade group.
In the book, “Sam Walton: Made in
America,” Mr. Walton boasted that the amount of merchandise lost to
theft at Wal-Mart was half that of the retailing industry’s average.
With the new policy, though, employees
“are confused,” said a former Wal-Mart employee who worked in the loss
prevention department at a store outside San Jose, Calif..
“They want to stop shoplifters,” she
said. “They want to do what they are trained to do.”
But if the shoplifter is under 18 or
steals less than $25 worth of products, “they can’t do anything,” said
the former employee, who left the company shortly after the new
shoplifting policy was put into effect and spoke on condition of
anonymity because she said she feared retribution.
Chris Kofinis, director of
communications at WakeUpWalMart.com, said the policy “is a
head-in-the-sand strategy that is far different than what Sam Walton
would ever have wanted, and it’s not clear this is the best strategy for
Wal-Mart workers.”
Mr. Suarez, the Wal-Mart executive,
said there was “overwhelming” employee support for the new policy
because it would more effectively deter theft.
Wal-Mart is not alone in giving
shoplifters some leeway. Its new policy “is consistent with guidelines
many retailers use,” said Joseph J. LaRocca, vice president for loss
prevention at the National Retail Federation.
Retailers, he said, have learned that
prosecuting small shoplifting cases “does not warrant the store
resources or the judicial resources required, given the dollar amount
that was stolen.”
In some cases, loss prevention
executives said, retailers will prosecute only shoplifters who steal at
least $50 or $100 worth of merchandise. The legal costs required for
prosecution, they said, are simply too high. Stores must hire a lawyer
for employees who become witnesses in a trial, for example, and pay
workers overtime to appear in court.
Until now, they said, Wal-Mart was the
exception. “They would arrest somebody for stealing a pair of socks,”
said Chief Zofchak in South Strabane Township. “I felt we were spending
an inordinate amount of time just dealing with Wal-Mart.”
Since Wal-Mart enforced its new
shoplifting policy, arrests have fallen at the store in Harrisville,
Utah, according to authorities there. But the town’s chief of police,
Maxwell Jackson, still prefers the original zero-tolerance rule.
“Once the word goes out that there is
a dollar limit,” he said, “there will be more stealing.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart
shares at 9-month low after downgrade
[back to top]
CHICAGO, July 13 (Reuters) - Wal-Mart
Stores Inc. <WMT.N> shares slumped to a nine-month low on Thursday after
Merrill Lynch lowered its rating on the stock, citing concerns over
slowing sales and a tough economic outlook.
Analyst Virginia Genereux said that
historically, Wal-Mart's sales outperform other retailers in slower
economic times, but that may not happen now because its core
lower-income customers are grappling with a troubling mix of steep
energy prices, rising interest rates, and stricter credit card payment
terms.
The shares fell $1.37, or 3 percent,
to $43.78 in morning trade on the New York Stock Exchange, their lowest
mark since October.
Genereux lowered her rating on the
stock to "neutral" from "buy." The shares have been stuck in a rut for
about six years amid concerns about slowing domestic sales growth, a
raft of lawsuits, and growing opposition to its U.S. expansion.
Nearly one-half of Wal-Mart's sales
come from households earning $30,000 a year or less, Genereux noted. The
average household spent $4,600 on energy in 2005, and costs have
continued to rise this year, taking up a hefty chunk of the budgets for
lower-income families.
To make matters worse, interest rates
have risen dramatically, making home refinancing less attractive. Recent
legislation that mandated higher minimum monthly credit card payments is
also hitting lower-income consumers.
"Historically, Wal-Mart's (sales at
stores open at least a year) have tended to outperform other retailers
in slower economic times," Genereux wrote in a note to clients. "It is
not clear, however, that Wal-Mart's comps will see the 'trade-down' lift
this time, given these secular pressures on lower income consumers."
The downgrade came as Wal-Mart is
remodeling hundreds of its stores as part of its effort to appeal to
higher-income consumers who are less sensitive to energy costs.
The retailer already draws some 130
million customers to its U.S. stores each week, but Wal-Mart wants to
encourage them to buy more higher-margin merchandise such as clothing,
rather than just food and cleaning supplies.
Genereux said the remodeling efforts
will likely pay off in the longer term, "but this is a difficult
environment in which to execute those changes, and earnings could face
more pressure in the intermediate term."
She also noted that weakness at home
may increase the focus on Wal-Mart's international operations, where a
series of recent acquisitions in Japan, Brazil and Central America have
pressured margins.
© Reuters 2006. All rights reserved.
[back to top]
Gore takes green talk to
Wal-Mart
Former vice
president makes pitch on global warming at conference sponsored by top
retailer.
CNNMoney.com
July 13 2006
[back to top]
NEW YORK -- Wal-Mart Stores hosted
former Vice President Al Gore at a conference Wednesday evening that the
company said is the next step in its efforts to improve the environment.
The company said the conference at its
Bentonville, Ark., headquarters, dubbed the quarterly sustainability
network meeting, included Gore's presentation on the dangers of global
warming, as well as one from officials of the Rocky Mountain Institute
and the Evangelical Environmental Network.
The meeting also included discussions
with Wal-Mart (Charts) suppliers on how sustainability can impact the
supply chain and benefit the customer, according to the statement from
the world's largest retailer. Suppliers who were at the meeting included
Procter & Gamble (Charts), Sara Lee Apparel and Paramount Classics.
"We are all passionate about making
real progress regarding the environment," said a statement from Wal-Mart
CEO Lee Scott. "By working together, we can help each other save money,
reduce greenhouse gas emissions and pass the savings on to our
customers. Sustainability is good for the environment, and it's also
good for business."
In addition to his remarks to the
conference, Gore screened his movie, "An Inconvenient Truth," about the
threat of global warming.
Earlier this year Wal-Mart announced
that it would seek to eliminate 30 percent of the energy used by stores,
with the corporate goal of eventually being fueled 100 percent by
renewable energy .The retailer also plans to eliminate 25 percent of the
solid waste from U.S. stores in the next three years, with the corporate
goal of producing zero waste.
Wal-Mart also is targeting increased
efficiency of its truck fleet by 25 percent over the next three years,
with efficiency doubled within 10 years except in the North, where
Wal-Mart utilizes white reflective roof membranes, resulting in a 10
percent lower cooling load.
The company has been the subject of
criticism from labor and other public interest groups. One of those
groups, WakeUpWalMart.com issued a statement saying it is skeptical
about Wal-Mart's environmental goal.
"While we are glad Wal-Mart is talking
about environmental sustainability, Wal-Mart's long record of inaction
and empty rhetoric leaves us deeply skeptical about Wal-Mart's true
intentions," said the group's statement.
The group called on Gore to help
police Wal-Mart's environmental practices.
"We hope Vice President Gore will join
with us in our national campaign effort to make Wal-Mart not just an
environmentally-friendly, but an employee-friendly company as well," the
statement said.
[back to top]
Some Leeway for the
Small Shoplifter
By Michael Barbaro
New York Times
Thursday, July 13, 2006
[back to top]
Wal-Mart refuses to carry smutty
magazines. It will not sell compact discs with obscene lyrics. And when
it catches customers shoplifting - even a pair of socks or a pack of
cigarettes - it prosecutes them.
But now, in a rare display of limited
permissiveness, Wal-Mart is letting thieves off the hook - at least in
cases involving $25 or less.
According to internal documents, the
company, the nation’s largest retailer and leading destination for
shoplifting, will no longer prosecute first-time thieves unless they are
between 18 and 65 and steal merchandise worth at least $25, putting the
chain in line with the policies of many other retailers.
Under the new policy, a shoplifter
caught trying to swipe, say, a DVD of the movie “Basic Instinct 2”
($16.87) would receive a warning, but one caught walking out of the
store with “E.R. - The Complete Fifth Season” ($32.87) would face
arrest.
Wal-Mart said the change would allow
it to focus on theft by professional shoplifters and its own employees,
who together steal the bulk of merchandise from the chain every year,
rather than the teenager who occasionally takes a candy bar from the
checkout counter.
It may also serve to placate
small-town police departments across the country who have protested what
the company has called its zero-tolerance policy on shoplifting.
Employees summoned officers whether a customer stole a $5 toy or a
$5,000 television set - anything over $3, the company said.
At some of the chain’s giant 24-hour
stores, the police make up to six arrests a day prompting a handful of
departments to hire an additional officer just to deal with the extra
workload.
“I had one guy tied up at Wal-Mart
every day,” said Don Zofchak, chief of police in South Strabane
Township, Pa., which has 9,000 residents and 16 officers. He said the
higher threshold for prosecution “would help every community to deal
with this.”
J. P. Suarez, who is in charge of
asset protection at Wal-Mart, said it was no longer efficient to
prosecute petty shoplifters. “If I have somebody being paid $12 an hour
processing a $5 theft, I have just lost money,” he said. “I have also
lost the time to catch somebody stealing $100 or an organized group
stealing $3,000.”
The changes in Wal-Mart’s theft policy
are described in 30 pages of documents that were provided to The New
York Times by WakeUpWalMart.com, a group backed by unions that have
tried to organize Wal-Mart workers in the United States.
The group said it received the
document from a former employee at the chain who is unhappy with the new
policy.
In interviews, several current and
former Wal-Mart employees said the new shoplifting policy undermines
their work and would, over time, encourage more shoplifting at the
chain.
But Wal-Mart said it would closely
track shoplifters it did not have arrested, and would ask that they be
prosecuted after a second incident. (Under the new policy, it will also
seek the prosecution of all suspected shoplifters who threaten violence
or fail to produce identification, no matter how much they are trying to
steal. Not carrying identification is a popular tactic among
professional shoplifters to avoid arrest.)
“There is not a lot of margin for
success for those intent on making a living stealing from us,” Mr.
Suarez said. “We will put them in jail just as we always have.”
Still, the new policy, which became
effective in March, is in many ways a striking departure from Wal-Mart
traditions. In the past, the company has proudly defended its aggressive
prosecution of shoplifters, saying it helps hold down prices.
“Other retailers might offset the cost
of shoplifting with higher prices,” a spokeswoman said in a 2004
interview. “But we don’t do that.”
Indeed, Wal-Mart’s zero-tolerance
policy can be traced to its founder, Sam Walton, who tied employee
bonuses to low theft rates at stores. Stolen merchandise, he wrote in
his autobiography published in 1992, the year he died, “is one of the
biggest enemies of profitability in the retail business.”
Over all, American retailers lose more
than $30 billion a year to theft, according to the National Retail
Federation, a trade group.
In the book, “Sam Walton: Made in
America,” Mr. Walton boasted that the amount of merchandise lost to
theft at Wal-Mart was half that of the retailing industry’s average.
With the new policy, though, employees
“are confused,” said a former Wal-Mart employee who worked in the loss
prevention department at a store outside San Jose, Calif..
“They want to stop shoplifters,” she
said. “They want to do what they are trained to do.”
But if the shoplifter is under 18 or
steals less than $25 worth of products, “they can’t do anything,” said
the former employee, who left the company shortly after the new
shoplifting policy was put into effect and spoke on condition of
anonymity because she said she feared retribution.
Chris Kofinis, director of
communications at WakeUpWalMart.com, said the policy “is a
head-in-the-sand strategy that is far different than what Sam Walton
would ever have wanted, and it’s not clear this is the best strategy for
Wal-Mart workers.”
Mr. Suarez, the Wal-Mart executive,
said there was “overwhelming” employee support for the new policy
because it would more effectively deter theft.
Wal-Mart is not alone in giving
shoplifters some leeway. Its new policy “is consistent with guidelines
many retailers use,” said Joseph J. LaRocca, vice president for loss
prevention at the National Retail Federation.
Retailers, he said, have learned that
prosecuting small shoplifting cases “does not warrant the store
resources or the judicial resources required, given the dollar amount
that was stolen.”
In some cases, loss prevention
executives said, retailers will prosecute only shoplifters who steal at
least $50 or $100 worth of merchandise. The legal costs required for
prosecution, they said, are simply too high. Stores must hire a lawyer
for employees who become witnesses in a trial, for example, and pay
workers overtime to appear in court.
Until now, they said, Wal-Mart was the
exception. “They would arrest somebody for stealing a pair of socks,”
said Chief Zofchak in South Strabane Township. “I felt we were spending
an inordinate amount of time just dealing with Wal-Mart.”
Since Wal-Mart enforced its new
shoplifting policy, arrests have fallen at the store in Harrisville,
Utah, according to authorities there. But the town’s chief of police,
Maxwell Jackson, still prefers the original zero-tolerance rule.
“Once the word goes out that there is
a dollar limit,” he said, “there will be more stealing.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart,
county agree on environmental points
High Springs Herald
[back to top]
ALACHUA -- Representatives from
Wal-Mart and Alachua County have agreed on several key environmental
issues -- agreements that mean the county will no longer attempt to
legally challenge the proposed Supercenter in Alachua.
Wal-Mart's original proposal of using
a large "dry pond" -- one that drains water rather quickly into the
aquifer -- has been approved as a pond system better for filtering water
than a traditional "wet pond" system where water sits for long periods
of time.
The proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter will
be located near the top of the hill behind the McDonald's restaurant at
Interstate 74 and U.S. 441 in Alachua. The dry pond will be located near
the bottom of the hill, not far from from the McDonald's restaurant.
The pond system Wal-Mart plans to use
was one of key objections the Alachua County Environmental Protection
Department raised when viewing the Supercenter site plans a few weeks
ago. The county had threatened to legally object to Wal-Mart's permit
from the Suwannee River Water Management District.
But county and Wal-Mart officials met
and agreed on a number of environmental issues while compromising on
others.
One of the key issues, though, remains
on hold. The county had asked for Wal-Mart to conduct a pre-development
assessment of the nearby Mill Creek Cave System, determining water
quality and what aquatic life exists. The county also wanted Wal-Mart to
do regular follow-up tests once the Supercenter was built.
But in a July 7 meeting with Wal-Mart
officials, county representatives said a more detailed assessment needs
to be written because Wal-Mart is only one of many businesses that could
affect the Mill Creek Cave System.
Wal-Mart officials said that once a
new assessment plan is presented, they'll consider participating in it.
They did not commit to participating in it.
Other key items from the discussions
between the county and Wal-Mart were:
• No evidence of caves or large
cavities were found when Wal-Mart did extensive drilling down to 100
feet throughout the property. The county believes the cave system is
roughly 200 feet down.
• Wal-Mart will have the garden center
covered, and any water from the garden area will be directed to drains
that will go into the sewer system, not into the dry pond. This means
any possible nitrates from fertilizers at the garden center will not
make their way to the aquifer.
• Wal-Mart agreed that it will not
allow RVs to park overnight in the parking lot. Usually, Wal-Mart allows
this practice.
• As part of a test, Wal-Mart will put
down pervious pavement in a remote area of the parking lot. This
pavement, a first for Wal-Mart in Florida, will allow water to seep
through the pavement into the ground. Wal-Mart will attempt to have the
special pavement placed over sandy areas of the property so the land can
better filter the water before it hits the aquifer.
• If a sinkhole forms on the property,
Wal-Mart must notify the county, as well as the Suwannee River Water
Management District. Further, a geotechnical engineer must inspect the
sinkhole, and Wal-Mart must implement its approved plan for plugging
sinkholes.
Copyright © 2006 High Springs Herald
[back to top]
Congress May End
Wal-Mart's Banking Dreams
By Martin H. Bosworth
ConsumerAffairs.Com
July 13, 2006
[back to top]
The loophole in banking laws that
Wal-Mart and other retail giants are using to charter their own banks
may soon be closed, thanks to a new bill drafted in part by Congressman
Barney Frank (D-MA).
Frank, along with Rep. Paul Gilmor
(R-OH), introduced the "Industrial Bank Holding Company Act of 2006" on
July 10th. it would prohibit the purchase of industrial loan companies (ILCs)
by commercial entities, and would grant the FDIC greater ability to
oversee and regulate ILCs.
Frank said that "the proliferation of
new ILC applications is creating a situation where Congress must set
appropriate policy to preserve the integrity of the banking system."
"ILCs are being used by a few
commercial companies to expand a loophole big enough to drive a truck
through," said Gilmor. "With a historic number of pending ILC
applications, Congress and the FDIC must work together to craft
regulations which retain the wall between banking and commerce."
Retailers such as Wal-Mart and Target
have been pushing to purchase ILCs, which perform many of the functions
of a traditional bank, such as payment processing capability, but
operate under much less scrutiny from banking authorities.
Consumer groups and local banks oppose
the move, out of fear that retailer-owned banks will undercut community
banks with lower prices and loan rates, and drive them out of business.
Home Depot recently announced plans to
buy home improvement lender EnerBank, an industrial bank based in Utah,
in order to use its loan services to offer customers money for
remodeling projects.
The majority of American ILCs are
based in Utah, due to its lenient laws on chartering banks. Utah has an
agreement with 20 states that enables ILCs based there to expand, but
the remaining 29 states would require additional negotiations.
Opponents of retail banks fear that a
retail company located in all 50 states could circumvent the
negotiations and open branches everywhere it had stores.
GAO Findings The Government
Accountability Office (GAO) issued a new report on July 12th discussing
the growth of ILCs, following a previous report issued in September
2005.
The GAO study found that as of March
2006, "6 ILCs owned over 80 percent of the total assets for the ILC
industry, with aggregate assets totaling over $125 billion and
collectively controlled about $68 billion in FDIC-insured deposits…most
of the growth occurred in the state of Utah while the portion of ILC
assets in other states declined."
The GAO investigation also found that
ILCs that offered instruments such as credit cards would be able to
charge the maximum interest rate allowable in the ILC's home state, much
as credit card companies base in states with lenient lending laws, such
as South Dakota and Delaware.
The report warned against the
excessive mixing of "banking and commerce" that a bank chartered for a
retail store might bring.
"[To] foster the prospects of their
commercial affiliates, banks may restrict credit to their affiliates'
competitors, or tie the provision of credit to the sale of products by
their commercial affiliates," said the report. "Commercially affiliated
banks may also extend credit to their commercial affiliates or affiliate
partners, when they would not have done so otherwise."
Copyright © 2003-2005
ConsumerAffairs.Com Inc. All Rights Reserved.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart Applauds House Passage of Voting Rights Act - Urges Senate to
Follow
MSN Money
All PRNewswire News
July 13, 2006
[back to top]
BENTONVILLE, Ark., July 13 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/
-- With the House passing the reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act
of 1965 (VRA), Wal-Mart WMT, the nation's leading employer of African
Americans and Hispanics, reiterated its call for the Senate to do the
same. Wal-Mart first went on record in support of the VRA after meeting
with Members of the Congressional Black Caucus and others in February of
2005. During June of that year, Wal- Mart CEO Lee Scott sent a letter to
President George W. Bush urging him to back this important legislation.
Related newsWall Street May Find
Solace in Earnings "The Associates, customers and shareholders of the
country's largest employer should be proud today. It is a credit to
Wal-Mart that they have taken the initiative and led the way for other
corporations to be vocal in their support for reauthorization of the VRA.
As a result, we were able to pass reauthorization of the VRA," said
Congressman Bennie Thompson (D-MS), who is the Ranking Democrat on the
House Homeland Security Committee and Chairman of the Congressional
Black Caucus Institute. He went on to say, "As the first corporation to
publicly announce its support for the VRA, Wal-Mart has shown that
sensitivity to the social needs of all Americans is important to the
company. I look forward to working with Wal-Mart as we press forward for
Senate approval and a Presidential signature."
In a letter to members of Congress
sent on Monday, July 10, Scott wrote, "Wal-Mart is the largest private
employer of African-Americans and Hispanics and we, therefore, have a
particular interest in this issue ... we believe it is important to move
forward expeditiously and enact the reauthorization of the Voting Rights
Act."
Wal-Mart demonstrated further
commitment to this issue by supporting the VRA initiatives of both the
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and
the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO)
Educational Fund. The company provided the NAACP with a $200,000 grant
to help fund its civic engagement and voter initiatives. These programs
create opportunities for voter registration and education, as well as
enforcement of laws that protect voting rights and promote voter
participation. Additionally, Wal-Mart gave the NALEO Educational Fund a
grant of $160,000 to educate the public and policymakers about the
impact of the VRA on the Latino community.
"The Voting Rights Act has served as a
powerful tool to combat electoral discrimination against Latinos and
other racial and ethnic minorities," said Rosalind Gold, Senior Director
of Policy Research and Advocacy at the NALEO Educational Fund. "Renewal
of the Act will help ensure that Latinos and all of our citizens have a
fair opportunity to become full participants in our nation's democracy.
We are grateful for the leadership that private corporations like
Wal-Mart are showing by supporting the renewal of this landmark law."
Scott's letter to legislators went on
to say, "We have been pleased by the statements that the President has
made endorsing the principle that the Voting Rights Act should be
reauthorized, and we were further encouraged when the Senate and House
leadership announced in May of this year that a bipartisan agreement on
reauthorization had been reached and that swift action would follow."
Joe Leonard, Jr., Executive Director
and COO of the Black Leadership Forum, Inc. (BLF) said, "Wal-Mart's
early response in support of the Voting Rights Act is critical. It
signaled to the corporate community that the reauthorization of the Act
is vital to American democracy. The mere fact that the world's largest
retailer was an early supporter underscores the validity of the Voting
Rights Act it in its current form. The BLF and its 28 member
organizations greatly appreciate the early support of Wal-Mart and Lee
Scott in this effort."
© 2006 PRNewswire
[back to top]
Gore praises Wal-Mart's
green goals
Former vice
president speaks to 800 employees, applauds company's sustainability
initiatives
By Marcus Kabel
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Posted on Thu, Jul. 13, 2006
[back to top]
BENTONVILLE, Ark. - Former Vice
President Al Gore on Wednesday praised Wal-Mart for a newfound focus on
environmental sustainability, saying the retailer showed there is no
conflict between the environment and the economy.
"I believe that this kind of
commitment is so important, that the rest of the world is likely to be
listening and learning," Gore told an auditorium of more than 800
Wal-Mart employees, suppliers and outside experts who are advising the
company.
Chief Executive Lee Scott last October
said Wal-Mart would become a leader in sustainability, with three goals:
reducing waste to zero, moving toward using only renewable energy and
offering more products made in a way that preserves the environment.
Gore spoke after screening his
anti-global-warming documentary "An Inconvenient Truth." He received a
standing ovation and cheers from the audience.
Gore said some people questioned
whether Wal-Mart was serious about the environment, then added: "Have
you ever known Wal-Mart not to follow through on a big commitment of
this kind? I have not."
Gore said Scott had recognized not
just the danger of global warming and the moral obligation to act, but
also a business opportunity in innovation.
"The message from Wal-Mart today to
the rest of the business community is: There need not be any conflict
between the environment and the economy. We will find the way not only
to reconcile (those), but to find new profits and new opportunities as
we do the right thing," Gore said.
Scott called the retailer's focus on
the environment a "higher purpose" in line with founder Sam Walton's
vision of the company. Scott told the conference that Wal-Mart Stores
Inc. must use its size to improve environmental standards in-house and
among its 60,000 suppliers.
Scott took the environmental offensive
at a time when Wal-Mart is under attack from organized labor and other
groups for its business practices, including employee pay and health
benefits.
Union-funded critics said Wal-Mart was
not doing enough to counter their claims it skimps on worker pay and
benefits. Wal-Mart denies those claims.
"I think most people have a difficult
time understanding why Wal-Mart can't become both a more
'environmentally-friendly' as well as a more 'employee-friendly' company
that pays a living wage, provides affordable health care, and is good
for America," said Chris Kofinis from campaign group WakeUpWalMart.com.
During the conference, company
officials said Wal-Mart has a huge potential to reduce greenhouse gases.
Last year, Wal-Mart emitted the
equivalent of 20.8 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, the main
greenhouse gas, while the best estimate for its supply chain -- all the
production and shipping needed to fill Wal-Mart shelves -- is 10 times
that, said Jim Stanway, director of project development in Wal-Mart's
energy department.
Charles Zimmerman, who works in
developing new Wal-Mart stores, said the company was already reducing
energy demand by installing more efficient lighting and retrofitting
refrigerators.
New store prototypes in the works will
use design and technology to be 30 percent more efficient than today's
stores and in the longer term 50 percent more efficient.
© 2006 ContraCostaTimes.com and wire
service sources. All Rights Reserved.
[back to top]
GREEN BEGATS GREEN…
Jeff Hess
Writing On The Wal
Thursday, July 13th, 2006
[back to top]
Basic Rule: you get rich not by making
more money, but rather by spending less of the money you do make. And
the rule applies whether you’re making $50,000 or $50,000,000 a year;
whether you’re Jeff Hess or Rob Walton.
Having said that, I’ll give Wal Mart
its due for all its environmental initiatives. But remember that in each
and every case, its actions are profit driven, they’ve improved Wal
Mart’s bottom line and put more money in its shareholders’ bank
accounts. That’s a good thing. And I hope other companies follow suit.
But we shouldn’t get all warm and fuzzy when we read:
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is the biggest
private user of electricity in the world and has huge potential to cut
back on greenhouse gases in-house and among its 60,000 suppliers,
company officials said ahead of a global warming information stop
Wednesday by former vice president Al Gore.
Wal-Mart working groups on
environmental change were meeting ahead of Gore’s visit to discuss steps
already taken and new efforts ahead under a green initiative launched
last October by Chief Executive Lee Scott to make the often-criticized
company a better environmental citizen.
Since before Earth Day in 1970
environmentalists have talked about how conservation is good for
business and there have been notable examples of major corporations
saving millions by not wasting energy and other recourses. And, remember
the basic rule, you get richer by not spending the money you have. And
if you’re the world larger (insert noun here) you can save bundles.
New store prototypes in the works will
use design and technology to be 30 percent more efficient than today’s
stores and in the longer term even 50 percent more efficient.
“We are the number one private
purchaser of electricity in the United States and therefore in the
world,” Zimmerman said.
In logistics, covering Wal-Mart’s
fleet of 7,000 trucks, Tim Yatsko said the company had already cut fuel
use by 8 percent by putting alternative power units in rigs this year so
they can stop idling engines during loading or breaks. That saved $25
million in fuel bills and cut 100,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide
emissions.
The question of course is: who
benefits the most from the $25 million?
[back to top]
Arizona AG
accuses Wal-Mart of pricing violations
By Amanda Bergeron,
Drug Store News
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
[back to top]
Arizona attorney general Terry Goddard
filed a lawsuit last against Wal-Mart Stores, alleging that the world's
largest retailer violated state pricing regulations. This suit falls in
line with a series of similar allegations across the country, one of
which concluded this spring when Wal-Mart settled with Michigan for $1.5
million.
Goddard reportedly filed the lawsuit
Thursday under the state's consumer protection law. He said the Arizona
Department of Weights and Measures has found, during several unannounced
inspections dating back to 2001, that store cash registers rang up
prices that did not match those listed on the shelves. Goddard also
alleged that, in some instances, there were no prices on the shelves at
all, which is a direct violation of Arizona law.
According to published reports,
Wal-Mart did not contest the results of theses inspections and paid the
fine for the violations.
Wal-Mart executives, according
reports, said they intend to correct the situation, making certain that
all pricing is correct, and procedures fall in accordance with state
laws.
Meanwhile the Arkansas-based retailer
reportedly faces potential suits regarding pricing infringement and
fraud in Pennsylvania, Indiana, Illinois and Connecticut.
[back to top]
City Council Approves Public Input on Wal-Mart Expansion
Chain Store Age
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
[back to top]
The Inglewood City Council in
California gave initial approval Tuesday night to legislation that will
allow greater public input over decisions to let Wal-Mart Stores and
other large retailers build superstores. The ordinance, which will
receive a final vote within 30 days, makes Inglewood only the third
jurisdiction in the United States to enact this type of legislation, and
could deal a setback to Wal-Mart's Southern California plans as the
retailer pushes into urban markets here and around the country. The
council vote comes more than two years after Inglewood voters
overwhelmingly rejected a ballot measure sponsored by Wal-Mart that
would have allowed the retail giant to construct a superstore without
public input or environmental review. Despite the loss of its
initiative, Wal-Mart purchased the land designated for the superstore,
signaling its intentions to pursue a project in Inglewood.
[back to top]
Fed Raises Concerns
About Special Banks
By MARCY GORDON
AP Business
Wednesday July 12, 2006
[back to top]
WASHINGTON (AP) - A Federal Reserve
official raised concerns Wednesday about nonfinancial companies such as
Wal-Mart and Home Depot establishing banks.
Legislation to block such arrangements
has been moving forward in the House.
The two retailers are among 14
companies awaiting approval from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. to
establish what is called an industrial loan corporation, or ILC.
The application of Wal-Mart Stores
Inc., the world's largest retailer, has rallied opposition from banks,
unions, lawmakers, and consumer and community organizations fearful they
would crush smaller local financial institutions.
The Fed believes that ``the decisions
on these important policies, which influence the structure and
resiliency of our financial system and economy, should be made by
Congress, acting in the public interest,'' the Fed's general counsel
told a House Financial Services subcommittee.
The central bank is concerned because
the owners of federally insured ILCs are able to avoid the regulatory
requirements that apply to owners of other types of insured banks
overseen by the Fed, Scott Alvarez said.
The Fed chairman, Ben Bernanke, has
urged Congress to bring ILCs under Fed supervision.
Legislation to block commercial
company's from owning these banks has been proposed by Rep. Barney
Frank, D-Mass., and Rep. Paul Gillmor, R-Ohio, and enjoys strong
bipartisan support in the House. Prospects in the Senate are clouded.
In addition, nearly 100 lawmakers have
asked the FDIC to halt any new approvals of the industrial banks to give
Congress a chance to consider the legislation.
Some subcommittee members,
particularly those from rural areas, said those banks unfairly can
dominate small, local banks and other businesses.
``We must not jeopardize the very
survival of these businesses,'' said Rep. Bernard Sanders, an
independent from Vermont. ``We must end the ILC loophole once and for
all.''
Opponents of the legislation insisted
there was no evidence that ILCs pose any financial risk.
The FDIC has not taken a position on
the bill.
A message left with Wal-Mart was not
immediately returned Wednesday. The company has said it has no plans to
compete with community banks and has pledged to the FDIC to stay out of
branch banking and consumer lending.
Wal-Mart's newly chartered bank, to be
based in Utah, would be used to handle the 140 million credit, debit
card and electronic check payments it processes each year, the company
says.
There are now 61 ILCs with a total of
about $141 billion in assets and $98 billion in deposits. Thirty-three
are based in Utah, one of only seven states that grant charters for such
banks.
The banks are allowed to issue credit
cards, take deposits and make loans. What they cannot do is offer
standard checking accounts if the bank's assets exceed $100 million.
In addition to Wal-Mart and The Home
Depot Inc., companies awaiting FDIC approval to establish ILCs also
include Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc., The Blue Cross and
Blue Shield Association, automakers Ford Motor Co. and DaimlerChrysler
AG, and information services provider Ceridian Corp.
The ILCs are federally insured, with
deposits in individual accounts guaranteed up to $100,000 if any of them
failed. The FDIC insurance fund, standing at some $49.2 billion
currently, is financed by premiums paid by banks.
[back to top]
Frank bill would bar
Wal-Mart bank
Bloomberg
Tuesday, July 11, 2006
[back to top]
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. would have to
abandon its bid to operate a bank under the provisions of a bill
introduced yesterday in Congress. Legislation proposed by US
Representatives Barney Frank and Paul Gillmor would ban nonfinancial
companies seeking charters from operating industrial banks and stop
current industrial banks from expanding their services. The Newton
Democrat and Ohio Republican are the senior members of the House
Committee on Financial Services.
Wal-Mart and Home Depot Inc. are among
13 nonfinancial companies with bank applications pending, the lawmakers
said. Opponents say companies that operate their own banks, known as
industrial banks or industrial loan corporations, can't make
disinterested lending decisions.
``There is ambiguity in banking
policy, and retailers are exploiting a loophole," said Steve Adamske, a
spokesman for Frank.
In Wal-Mart's case, banks fear the
world's largest retailer would eventually open branches, threatening
smaller competitors.
Wal-Mart has said it does not intend
to get into retail banking and wants to use its bank to save on fees it
now pays to third parties to process credit card, debit card, and check
transactions.
``On behalf of its customers, Wal-Mart
would be very disappointed if Congress eliminated its ability to obtain
an ILC charter," spokeswoman Tara Raddohl said in an e-mail message
today.
[back to top]
First green group
opens near Wal-Mart
By MARCUS KABEL
Associated Press
JUL. 11
[back to top]
The greening of Wal-Mart Stores Inc.
will get another push when the first national environmental advocacy
group opens an office near the headquarters of the world's biggest
retailer.
Environmental Defense said Tuesday it
plans to base a project manager in Bentonville later this year. Hundreds
of Wal-Mart suppliers have set up offices over the years to nurture
closer ties with the retailer, but no advocacy groups yet, according to
local business experts.
The group is one of several
environmental organizations that have been working with Wal-Mart on a
host of changes under a green initiative launched last year by Chief
Executive Lee Scott.
On the eve of a visit to a Wal-Mart
environmental conference by former vice president and anti-global
warming campaigner Al Gore, Environmental Defense said it believes
Wal-Mart has taken credible steps. "We think their actions demonstrate
they are serious about sustainability and the environment," said
Environmental Defense Executive Vice President David Yarnold.
"Being geographically close to
Wal-Mart will increase the number of opportunities to advise them on
environmental issues," Yarnold told The Associated Press.
Wal-Mart had no comment on
Environmental Defense's move.
Started in 1967 as the Environmental
Defense Fund, the group's efforts include partnering with major
corporations to improve their environmental practices in ways that make
business sense, including helping FedEx introduce hybrid-electric
delivery trucks that cut fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions by
one-third. It says it accepts no donations from its corporate partners.
In Wal-Mart's case, Environmental
Defense was one of several groups Wal-Mart contacted in early 2005 to
help formulate a green policy unveiled by Scott last October. Under that
plan, Wal-Mart set goals of using 100 percent renewable energy, creating
zero waste and selling more products that sustain the environment.
Gwen Rutta, director of corporate
partnerships at Environmental Defense, said her group advised the
company on most of those goals and has been part of several of 14 issue
groups set up by Scott to pursue changes.
Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton's
grandson, Sam R. Walton, is on the board of trustees of Environmental
Defense, but the group said he was not involved in the Wal-Mart project
and recused himself whenever it came before the board.
Wal-Mart is taking the environmental
offensive at a time when it is under attack from organized labor and
other groups for its business practices, including employee pay and
health benefits.
Rutta says Wal-Mart can potentially
have a major environmental impact because of its influence over the
roughly 60,000 companies it buys from. As the world's largest retailer,
environmental standards it sets for suppliers can spread throughout the
industry as suppliers compete to gain space on Wal-Mart's shelves.
"We've come to believe through
experience that you really can create environmental progress by
leveraging corporate purchasing power. And who's got more corporate
purchasing power than Wal-Mart?" Rutta said.
Rutta said she hoped a presence near
Wal-Mart would help her group take part in more meetings, without the
need to fly in from its offices in New York, California and elsewhere,
and participate more directly in decision making.
"Opening up this office in Bentonville
is the most efficient way to work with them," Rutta said.
Rutta said Wal-Mart has made a
credible start toward its longer-term environmental goals by rapidly
making a number of changes in daily operations.
For example, the company told drivers
of its 7,000 trucks to stop idling while they load and unload, reducing
fuel consumption, and it replaced standard lighting in its nearly 4,000
U.S. stores with more efficient bulbs.
Wal-Mart also is selling more organic
food and organic cotton clothing, which reduces pesticide use by
growers, and it started a three-year program to improve the
environmental standards of all the fleets it buys wild ocean fish from.
"By challenging itself and its supply
chain, we really believe that Wal-Mart can create a race to the top for
environmental benefits," Rutta said.
Copyright 2006, by The Associated
Press. All rights reserved.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart denies putting its employees in danger in hunt after bomb
threat
NELSON WYATT
The Canadian Press
[back to top]
MONTREAL (CP) - Wal-Mart was only
helping police and not endangering employees when it asked them to
search for a possible bomb at one of the chain's stores, a company
spokesman said Tuesday.
The manager of the St-Jean-sur-Richelieu
outlet was alerted to a bomb threat last Thursday, said Yanik Deschenes,
who confirmed that 40 sales clerks were asked to help find the device.
One young employee, who was apparently
shaken by the incident, told her mother about it later. She complained
to the store manager and the media.
Deschenes insisted nobody was forced
to search the store about 60 kilometres east of Montreal.
"We will never put in jeopardy the
security of our employees," he said in a telephone interview.
"Never, never, never (will) we force
them to do such kinds of investigations. If this associate had said or
all the associates had said 'We don't want to participate', there would
be no problem. They would have been able to leave the building without
hesitation."
Deschenes said police told the manager
the threatening call had been made to 911 from a pay phone outside the
store.
Police ordered customers out but then
told employees to look for any suspicious packages. Police would take
over if any devices were found.
Deschenes said the manager asked the
police officer - one of five present - if he was sure he wanted
employees to do the search.
"They thought this was the right
procedure to do and we trust them," Deschenes said. "Our procedure is
very clear, to collaborate with the police officer all the time so
that's what we did."
Nothing was found in the search.
Deschenes said various police forces
have given different instructions in similar situations in the past.
Some have ordered a complete
evacuation, while others have told only managers to stay. In some cases,
police have done the search themselves.
"Cases are always different," he said.
Police are still investigating the
incident. Deschenes would not speculate on motives but said the store is
not having any labour trouble.
Mailie Fournier, a former employee of
the store, told media sources on Monday that several employees found the
experience traumatic.
The incident prompted the Quebec
workplace health and safety board to investigate.
Police said the store didn't violate
any laws and had an obligation to evacuate the store only if a
suspicious object was found.
© The Canadian Press, 2006
[back to top]
Wal-Mart office chairs
recalled
Over 750,000 chairs
recalled following reports of injuries.
CNNMoney.com
July 11 2006
[back to top]
NEW YORK -- A federal safety
agency announced Tuesday the recall of over 750,000 office chairs sold
exclusively at Wal-Mart.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission
(CPSC) said that the legs and backs of the Mainstays Associate Office
Chairs, manufactured in China and imported by Wal-Mart, pose a risk of
breaking or tipping over, which could result in an injury.
So far, Wal-Mart (down $0.36 to
$45.82, Charts) has received nine reports of chairs breaking and two
reports of tipping. The retailer said it has received seven reports of
injuries, including a broken wrist.
The product safety agency said the
recall affects about 762,000 chairs, which are black or gray in color
and carry a UPC Code Label of #9501401610 under the seat, the safety
agency said.
Wal-Mart stores exclusively nationwide
from April 2003 through April 2006 for about $36, according to the CPSC.
Consumers are urged to stop using the
chairs and to return it to Wal-Mart for a full refund or can call (800)
925-6278 or visit Wal-Mart's Web site for more information.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart Can Afford
to Pay Workers More
By Jared Bernstein and Josh Bivens
Mother Jones
Monday, July 10, 2006
[back to top]
Article created by The Economic Policy
Institute:
The City of Chicago is in the throes
of fundamental debate about the future direction of the American economy
and its workers, one that touches on our most pressing concerns, from
globalization to the role of government. All of this is wrapped up in a
seemingly parochial law that would mandate higher wages and benefits for
large Chicago retailers.
The 'retail living-wage ordinance'
currently being considered by the City Council would make large
retailers (with stores of at least 90,000 square feet) pay a starting
wage of $10 an hour, plus $3 of health benefits. Though the proposal
would apply to numerous large retailers in the city, including Target
and Costco, it quickly got the attention of Wal-Mart. To put it mildly,
the world's largest employer, with plans to open numerous stores in the
city, wasn't happy and immediately threatened to suspend the store
openings.
Cutting through the noise that such
debates typically generate, the central question comes down to this: Can
Wal-Mart do better by its workers and still profitably offer its
trademark 'everyday low prices'? The firm says 'no,' stating that the
ordinance will erase its competitive advantage; a Wal-Mart spokesperson
wrote 'If this proposal becomes law . . . retail development will go to
the suburbs.'
Our research suggests otherwise: The
$13 an hour total compensation cost mandated by the Chicago ordinance is
roughly a 20 percent raise over what Wal-Mart claims to pay its
employees. A raise of this size could be financed through a combination
of Wal-Mart allowing its profit margin (after-tax profits divided by
sales) to fall from its current 3.6 percent to 2.9 percent and by
raising its prices 0.7 percent -- less than a penny on a $1 pair of
socks.
The resulting profit margin would be
higher than some competitors (Costco, for example, at 2 percent) and
lower than some others (Target, at 4.7 percent). Most relevant,
Wal-Mart's profit margin would still by higher than the average that
prevailed for Wal-Mart from 1996-1998, perfectly good years for the
firm. Moreover, if Wal-Mart's price advantage is anywhere near as large
as it claims, such a small price increase will not erase its competitive
edge.
In short, our findings suggest that
Wal-Mart and Chicago can help each other. The store can expand its
market share in a major American city while offering Chicago consumers
low-priced goods. At the same time, it can more fairly share its profits
with its workers, without sacrificing its price advantage.
Unfortunately, its business practices are such that it's unlikely to do
so without the ordinance.
There is a message here that goes
beyond Chicago's city limits. Our economy has seen a growing job quality
problem for decades, replacing jobs with family-sustaining wages and
benefits with jobs of far lesser quality. Workers in these new jobs
(which are disproportionately retail) have yet to develop ways to raise
their bargaining power with their employers. Wal-Mart, in particular, is
vehemently anti-union.
In this context, a useful way to view
rules such as the Chicago retail ordinance is as society's way of
offsetting the inequalities that have evolved along with the new
economy. While globalization and other forces have put many high-paying
jobs at risk, we need to do all we can to ensure that jobs that can't be
done abroad are good ones. Viewed in this light, the 'City of Big
Shoulders' has an opportunity to point the way toward the high road. We
hope they take it.
[back to top]
Carry on camping -
American style
Who needs the great outdoors when
there's a Wal-Mart, asks ravi somaiya
The First Post
[back to top]
There's an apocryphal story about a
couple who drive their caravan round the M25 for a week, stopping at
travel inns, without realising it's a circular road. They must have been
American, because this tale has virtually come true in the States, in
the form of "Wal-Mart camping". The campers - usually retirees who
endlessly tour America in enormous RVs (recreational vehicles) - drive
from car park to car park, in order to stay the night for free.
They eschew beauty spots, and head for
the 24-hour provisions, toilets and security at Wal-Mart.
There's a book, The Wal-Mart Locator,
and web forums dedicated to logging enjoyable experiences.
It may sound soulless but the nomads
justify it on grounds of convenience: "Sometimes we pull into a town at
midnight," says one on Roaming Times. "We just need to sleep five or six
hours, then get back on the road."
With uncharacteristic generosity, the
world's biggest retailer tacitly condones them, assuming that they'll be
tempted to shop. Not all Wal-Marts allow it though, and those that do
keep it low-key - as do the campers: "Don't roll out the carpet and put
out lawn furniture or you'll ruin it for everyone," says one.
But why would British tourists want to
cross the Atlantic to sleep in a supermarket car park? Joe Mann, a
24-year-old Londoner, is planning a Wal-Mart camping trip for September:
"We're doing it to save money, although it also seems like the most
American way to see America. There is an irony in sharing a great big
corporate car park with a bunch of true RV-ers."
If adventure holidays, Faliraki or
package tours fail to appeal this summer - you know what to do.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart full of
cheap talk on minimum wage
By Anna Burger
Arkansas Journal-Constitution
Monday, July, 10 2006
[back to top]
Wal-Mart's chief executive, Lee Scott,
made news last October when he announced that Wal-Mart would support a
minimum wage hike. Scott, who earned $18 million last year — or about
$8,700 an hour — seemed to understand that working families living on
the minimum wage won't be able to spend enough at Wal-Mart to sustain
the company's recording-breaking profits.
The minimum wage has been stuck at
$5.15 an hour for nine years. It buys less today — less gas, less food,
less medicine, less child care — than it has in 50 years. The federal
minimum wage is so out of date that 21 states, including Wal-Mart's home
state of Arkansas, have raised it rather than wait for Congress to act.
Supporters of a higher minimum wage
cheered Wal-Mart's announcement. Some assumed that Wal-Mart would tap
its team of top Washington lobbyists to help push through a modest raise
for millions of working families. Given Wal-Mart's deep ties to the Bush
administration and the steady streams of cash that Wal-Mart has pumped
to Republican members of Congress, a higher minimum wage seemed
imminent.
A new Economic Policy Institute study
shows Wal-Mart could raise wages by $2,100 a year for its own workers
and still make billions of dollars a year in profits.
But when it came to the recent effort
to raise the minimum wage, leaders on Capitol Hill report that Wal-Mart
was nowhere to be found.
The truth is that Wal-Mart had no
intention of working to raise the minimum wage.
How about Wal-Mart's promise to join
the debate to transform health care in the United States? Wal-Mart has
rolled out its "new" health care plan several times in the last year to
great fanfare. But faced with $1,000 deductibles and strict limits on
coverage, half of Wal-Mart workers still have to rely on Medicaid or go
elsewhere when they need to see a doctor. A Wal-Mart memo leaked to the
press last year revealed that 46 percent of the children of Wal-Mart
employees are uninsured or depend on taxpayer-funded health care
programs.
The real Wal-Mart is the one that pays
poverty wages to hundreds of thousands of its own workers and backs
groups like the Retail Industry Leaders Association and American
Legislative Exchange Council, which work day and night in Washington and
in state Capitols around the country to keep wages down.
A hike in the minimum wage isn't
something our families should have to dream about. But in the Wal-Mart
economy, where employees of America's biggest company live just one
paycheck or another illness away from disaster, it's still the stuff of
dreams.
Wal-Mart's size and power bring with
them a unique moral responsibility for the livelihoods of millions of
workers and the needs of billions of consumers. We call on Wal-Mart to
drop its public relations ploys and to make good on its promise to help
raise the minimum wage.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart gets civil
reception in cities
Eastern county
store plans are evaluated without the rancor of other areas.
By Molly Dugan
Sacramento Bee
Sunday, July 9, 2006
[back to top]
Saying "Wal-Mart Supercenter" in some
California city halls is akin to yelling "Fire!" in a crowded movie
theater -- the first reaction is panic. Not so in eastern Sacramento
County.
Political leaders here are taking a
more pragmatic approach to the corporate giant, discussing issues
associated with the behemoth store as they calmly clear the way for the
retailer.
In Folsom, Wal-Mart's application to
build a Supercenter prompted the City Council to create a committee to
review the approval process for larger retailers.
"We want to make sure we understand
all the potential benefits and all the potential detriments," said
Folsom Mayor Andy Morin. "We want to handle it in a very pragmatic,
sophisticated manner."
Meanwhile, a plan for a Supercenter in
Orangevale, initially met with hostility from some residents, is now on
the fast track to construction.
Standard Wal-Marts in Folsom and
Rancho Cordova have been welcomed by local leaders. Even in Citrus
Heights, where extensive review for a new store took place, Wal-Mart is
being met with, if not enthusiasm, acceptance.
Bill Childers, president of the Arcade
Creek Neighborhood Association in Citrus Heights, said Wal-Mart's
arrival is inevitable. "What I see is just progress."
At the request of the Citrus Heights
City Council, Wal-Mart's plans were reviewed by the council and Planning
Commission, not just the design review committee, said Janet Ruggiero,
community development director.
One result: The store's operating
hours were limited to 5 a.m. to 11 p.m., not the 24 hours Wal-Mart
requested.
Folsom is following the lead of Citrus
Heights in its review of the proposed Supercenter, a 236,501-square-foot
outlet on Iron Point Drive off Highway 50.
Because of concerns about Wal-Mart's
effect on small businesses and the likelihood of increased traffic,
Folsom officials figure the Supercenter issue would probably end up
before the City Council.
So Folsom's leaders have charged a
committee with determing whether large retail outlets should
automatically be subject to council review.
The city has received a handful of
e-mails and phone calls from residents with questions and concerns about
the proposed Supercenter, city officials said.
One of the conditions of approval
could be a written guarantee that Wal-Mart would not close its existing
Folsom store on Glenn Drive, Morin said.
The city has three large vacant
buildings, including one next to the existing Wal-Mart. "To have another
building go vacant in our central district would be of great concern,"
Morin said.
Wal-Mart spokesman Kevin Loscotoff
said the company plans to expand the existing store.
"The demand is there for two stores in
Folsom," Loscotoff said.
Orangevale resident Ken Willis, who
organized a failed petition drive to block a Wal-Mart from the northeast
corner of Greenback Lane and Hazel Avenue, believes local government
needs to fully scrutinize any Wal-Mart application. He said Orangevale
residents were not informed of Wal-Mart's plans.
However, Sacramento County planners
said the site was zoned for large retail and the developer wasn't
obligated to give the community any special notification.
"It came to us as a design review
project. The only thing we looked at was the aesthetics," said Josh Pino,
former chairman of the Orangevale planning advisory council. Pino said
the plans should have undergone more public review.
Wal-Mart representatives said the
company should not be singled out for extra scrutiny.
"We certainly want to be treated as
any other applicant," Loscotoff said.
Wal-Mart sued the city of Turlock two
years ago after it passed an ordinance banning stores that exceed
100,000 square feet and devote at least 5 percent of their space to
groceries or other nontaxable items.
When a Stanislaus judge sided with
Turlock, saying the store could cause substantial traffic congestion and
environmental damage, Wal-Mart appealed to the state's 5th District
Court of Appeal and a federal appeal court in Fresno. Both upheld the
ordinance.
In Sacramento, pressure from city
leaders and an ordinance making it tougher to approve large discount
retailers blocked a Wal-Mart in the Downtown Plaza.
The first Wal-Mart in El Dorado County
opened in 2003. Matt Huckabay, owner of a business on Main Street in
Placerville, said big retailers on the outskirts of town strip customers
away from downtown businesses.
"It really takes a conscientious
effort by city leaders to understand the negative impact it has,"
Huckabay said.
But another downtown business owner,
Dave Machado, said if retailers are building on commercially zoned land,
"they have a right to be there."
Copyright © The Sacramento Bee
[back to top]
Guest Column:
Organics and the Wal-Mart effect
By Karen King
The Rock River Times
[back to top]
Wal-Mart recently announced it will be
expanding its organic offerings at stores throughout the country. While
I am glad to see more people are buying organic, and it is becoming more
mainstream, I am concerned, not just for us, but for the organic
farmers, the standards, and the future of the industry. Wal-Mart has a
history of doing whatever it takes to get a lower price regardless of
how it affects other businesses or their suppliers. A recent documentary
featured several of Wal-Mart’s vendors who stated when they could not
meet the price Wal-Mart told them they would pay, Wal-Mart literally
told the vendors they needed to ship their manufacturing overseas to
lower their labor costs. Think about how many jobs have been lost in
Rockford over the past several years. There is a trickle-down effect.
When their suppliers are looking to lower their costs to meet Wal-Mart’s
demands, they look for the cheapest supplies, whether it is screws or
food ingredients. When Wal-Mart is their largest customer, they do what
they have to do to stay in business. Their lack of ethics and disregard
for local economies was demonstrated by the recent closing of
Newell-Rubbermaid in Freeport.
Rubbermaid, an 86-year-old company
with all manufacturing facilities located in the USA, sent a letter to
all their vendors stating there would be a price increase due to an
increase in the price of resin, a raw material used to make plastic. All
of Rubbermaid’s customers understood the increase except Wal-Mart,
Rubbermaid’s largest customer. Wal-Mart stated in a letter that if
Rubbermaid increased their prices, they would pull all Rubbermaid
products from their shelves. Rubbermaid tried to comply with Wal-Mart’s
demands, and as a result went into financial distress, forcing them to
sell out to Newell, Rubbermaid’s largest competitor. Shortly after
purchasing the company, Newell moved its manufacturing facilities to
Mexico and other countries, laying off hundreds of people in the
Freeport office. Ironically, Freeport is in the process of building a
new Super Wal-Mart, and Rockford is building their fourth store. You
could say, in a sense, Wal-Mart creates its own market by creating
poverty and job loss so people can’t afford to shop anywhere else. It is
a vicious cycle, and there is only one way to stop it. This is only one
example how this company has negatively affected this area; I am certain
there are more.
While their prices are low now,
consolidation and overseas production will eventually lead to increased
prices due to lack of competition or lack of supply. This has already
been demonstrated in England when a large chain grocery store came in
and undercut all the local independent stores, putting them out of
business. Once the competition was gone, they then raised their prices,
driving up the cost of food. What do you think would happen if Wal-Mart
was the only retailer left? ... that is their goal. Whether you realize
it or not, when you shop at any store, you are funding their business
practices, good or bad. Businesses cannot survive without their
customers’ support. Choosing where you spend your money can be, and
sometimes is, more powerful than voting.
Since the Rockford Register Star ran
the article in last week’s paper announcing Wal-Mart’s organic
expansion, our sales have decreased by one-third. I only hope it is
temporary while everyone is curious to see what they have.
Unfortunately, it is tough to compete with a company of this magnitude.
We are a one-store operation and do not have the buying power of these
larger national chains. When you research the company, you find that
Wal-Mart is not always cheaper than their competition. Everyone assumes
it is because of the nature of the store... and Wal-Mart takes full
advantage of this.
Managers who were interviewed said
they placed inexpensive products, priced below cost, on the end caps to
lure people down the aisle. Once down the aisle, customers usually
bought one of the more expensive items featured, which is many times
priced higher than the competition (they also have very poor price
accuracy ratings—84.6% of Illinois Wal-Mart stores failed to meet
federal price accuracy standards.) The manager who was interviewed said
the trick is getting people down the aisles. It is nothing more than
psychology, and Wal-Mart is very good at it. Last time I stopped in to
see what they had (I refuse to shop there), I noticed that our kiwis
were less expensive, and they looked better! Buyer beware.
The difference between us and other
stores is that we believe in what we are doing and are working to keep
organic standards high, unlike Wal-Mart, who has been lobbying Congress
for quite some time now to lower the standards. This store has been a
dream of ours for nearly a decade. We believe in supporting local
farmers and the local economy. We live here, too! We want Rockford to be
a better place. It is for this reason we buy our office supplies and
most other supplies at locally-owned businesses instead of national
chains. We support our schools and our community, not just in lip
service. We are not looking to get rich by having this store. I am
perfectly happy driving my 10-year-old minivan. We care about having
good quality food that is not contaminated with GMOs and is grown on a
family farm, not by some corporate behemoth. We want a nice, stable
community, now and in the future.
For more information about Wal-Mart,
their lack of ethics and their impact on our communities, please visit
www.wakeupwalmart.com and for a fun, 60-second spoof about how they
treat their workers, go to walmartworkersrights.org.
Karen King is the owner of Choices
Natural Market
From the July 5-11, 2006, issue
Copyright © 2002-2006 - The Rock River
Times
[back to top]
Gore to Address Wal-Mart
Executives
By MARCUS KABEL
Associated Press
July 08, 2006
[back to top]
Former Vice President Al Gore will
take his campaign against global warming to Wal-Mart Stores Inc. next
week, speaking at Wal-Mart headquarters to executives seeking to make
the world's largest retailer more environmentally friendly, a company
spokesman said Friday.
Gore will talk to a quarterly
conference of Wal-Mart managers working on ways to implement Chief
Executive Lee Scott's plans to make the retailer a leader in cutting
emissions, energy use and solid waste and selling more environmentally
friendly products.
Gore will speak about global warming,
the subject of his recent documentary film, "An Inconvenient Truth,"
Wal-Mart spokesman Dan Fogleman said.
The daylong meeting Wednesday at
Wal-Mart's Home Office in Bentonville, Ark., is a quarterly gathering of
14 individual groups it calls sustainability networks, which include
Wal-Mart managers and outside experts.
Each network works on specific areas,
such as logistics or food, to put into practice a broad environmental
initiative launched by Scott last October.
In recent months, Wal-Mart has taken
steps including doubling the number of organic food items in its stores,
reducing fuel consumption by its fleet of 7,000 trucks and installing
energy-saving light bulbs in stores.
Wal-Mart is taking the environmental
offensive at a time when it is under attack from organized labor and
other groups for its business practices, including employee pay and
health benefits.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart, AutoZone sued by
state
By Michael Kiefer
Arizona Republic
Friday, July, 7 2006
[back to top]
Goddard alleges consumer fraud, seeks
penalties The country's largest overall retail chain and the largest
retailer of auto parts were hit with consumer-fraud lawsuits in Arizona
on Thursday for refusing to comply with state pricing laws.
Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard
filed lawsuits in Maricopa Country Superior Court against Wal-Mart and
AutoZone for consistently failing to list accurate prices on their
shelves or for failing to post them at all.
"Consumer purchases are not games of
chance," Goddard said. "Arizona law makes it very clear: Consumers have
a right to know what they're being charged, and they have a right to
accurate pricing on the product. Violations of those rights are very
damaging to consumers in our state."
In the lawsuits, Goddard asked for
civil penalties of $10,000 per violation. And although he could not give
an estimate of the number of violations, the penalties could reach into
the millions.
In Arizona, prices do not need to be
marked on every item for sale, but they need to be clearly posted where
the product is displayed. And the price posted on the shelf should be
the same price that appears on the customer's receipt when it is scanned
at the cash register.
Inspectors from the state Department
of Weights and Measures routinely check both points by taking samples of
250 products to make sure prices are posted and also samples of 50 items
to make sure they are properly marked. Stores must be at least 98
percent in compliance or they fail. Then they are subject to
reinspections within 60 days.
Since 2001, according to figures
provided by the Department of Weights and Measures, Wal-Mart has failed
526 of 976 inspections, or nearly 54 percent, at various stores across
the state. AutoZone has failed 426 of 846 inspections or 50 percent,
statewide.
Goddard said more than half of the
violations against both companies were on reinspections, when store
managers knew inspectors were coming.
Wal-Mart, which has 70 stores in
Arizona, has been fined $450,000 for violations, an amount that would
have been larger if it weren't capped by Arizona statute. AutoZone,
which has 90 stores in Arizona, has paid fines of nearly $170,000,
Goddard said.
"Neither company has ever appealed
these fines," Goddard said. "We come to the inescapable conclusion that
they simply consider the fines in Arizona for illegal pricing as simply
a cost of business."
Goddard could not say whether the
mispricing of items is an attempt to deliberately overcharge customers
or merely a failure to clean up a sloppy system.
When asked if more lawsuits would be
filed against other offending retailers, Goddard answered, "We're
starting with the leaders. We're starting with the largest auto-parts
retailer in the country and in Arizona and the largest retailer in the
country and in Arizona, because I believe that what happens to the
leaders is going to be reflected in the rest of the industry. We can't
afford to sue every company that's violated for several times."
Representatives from Wal-Mart and
AutoZone did not return calls for comment. Wal-Mart pricing has been
investigated in Michigan and Connecticut as well.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart asks that defamation suit require higher level of proof
Associated Press
[back to top]
BENTONVILLE, Ark. Bentonville-based Wal-Mart has asked a
judge to require a higher level of proof that the company allegedly
defamed a former executive caught up in a scandal at the company.
Jared Bowen is suing the world's
largest retailer for slander and defamation. He says the company
described him as a "liar, a thief and a fraud." The company fired Bowen
for allegedly not telling the company about false invoices submitted by
former executive Tom Coughlin, who has pleaded guilty to related
charges.
Benton County Circuit Judge John Scott
is to rule within two weeks on Wal-Mart's request that Bowen be judged
as a special kind of public figure. The designation would require Bowen
to submit additional proof to back up his allegations.
Bowen was fired by Wal-Mart in April
2005.
Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All
rights reserved.
[back to top]
Big boxes create big opportunities and sometimes big headaches
by Kathy Bergstrom
Business First of Columbus
July 7, 2006
[back to top]
Whether a big box store is left dark
by a retailer that declares bankruptcy or simply because it decides to
build a newer store down the road, filling the space is a challenge,
experts say.
Local big box vacancies have captured
the attention of Columbus City Council, and the issue of big box
development is a topic among city staff, council and industry
representatives.
"You don't have to go very far to see
an empty big box, and the concern is that the life cycle, the market
life cycle for that type of development is becoming narrower and
narrower," said city Councilwoman Maryellen O'Shaughnessy. "They go in,
get their money, get out and leave us holding the bag."
When a big box store closes it "leaves
an empty shell that's a blight on the neighborhood," she said. "We want
to see what we can do to make sure whatever they build there is some
built-in mechanism that would encourage some adaptive re-use," she said.
More than a third of retail big boxes
in the Columbus area are vacant, says retail broker Kevin James. The
vacancy rate is high, but events like the closing of the Big Bear
grocery chain and Kmart's bankruptcy have helped skew the numbers, he
says.
James is vice president of retail
services for the Columbus office of Colliers Turley Martin Tucker. Data
compiled by the firm shows that 17 of the 37 properties left vacant by
Big Bear in 2004 remain vacant.
According to Colliers, there are 43
big box retail buildings with 50,000 square feet or more in the Columbus
metropolitan area, which includes Fairfield, Franklin, Licking, Madison,
Delaware, Pickaway and Union counties. They total 8,274,126 square feet
and have a vacancy rate of 38.4 percent.
There are 12 retail buildings in the
metro area with 100,000 or more square feet totaling 3,451,581 square
feet and 34.5 percent of those are vacant.
When a big box retailer shuts its
doors, property owners are left with the challenge of trying to lease
the space to a limited pool of retailers who need that much space,
subdividing the space for a few smaller users or tearing the building
down and starting over.
"There is no one solution to empty big
boxes," said Chris Boring, president of Boulevard Strategies, a Columbus
retail consulting firm. "One of the key challenges in refilling an empty
big box is that most of the big box chains have unique footprints that
they insist on, and they're attractive enough to investors and
developers that they usually get their way. They get a brand new store
exactly to their specifications," he said.
In the past, retailers such as Hobby
Lobby, Kohl's and Giant Eagle have chosen to locate in existing big box
stores in the Columbus area.
Giant Eagle took over nine of the
former Big Bear spaces while Kroger or Kroger Marketplace stores opened
in five of the former Big Bear locations, according to Colliers.
Other companies that have moved into
or are expected to move into former Big Bear buildings or locations
include Wal-Mart, Big Lots, Fresh Market, Grossman's Bargain Outlet, My
Bear, Hilltop Marketplace and Whole Foods.
The tenant pool for 50,000-square-foot
spaces isn't nearly as large as those who want 10,000 or 20,000 square
feet, James said.
There can be other challenges to
leasing the space that have nothing to do with the building
specifications or location. Sometimes the former retail tenant remains
on the lease and has placed restrictions on future retailers that go
into the space, Boring said.
Subdividing the space can be a good
option, but that also carries challenges and extra expenses.
Big boxes are square instead of
rectangular, making it hard to subdivide the space so each retailer gets
enough frontage, Boring said.
Another challenge is the cost of
separating all the utilities, James said. The firm recently got a quote
of $500,000 to subdivide one of the Big Bear spaces it markets.
James doesn't think big box vacancies
are necessarily a problem in Columbus.
"I think that around the country it's
somewhat of a concern that the large retailers keep building new
locations and kind of abandoning the old Kmarts and the old Ames," he
said.
Property owners must be realistic
about the future of their properties, he said.
"They have to be aggressive and have
aggressive brokers working out there for them," he said. "For tenants
that are willing to take a portion of their space, they've got to be
willing to split up the space and be creative with them."
Sometimes sites may no longer be
suitable for the former use, he said. "Maybe the demographics have
changed a little bit so now you need to have middle to lower income
tenants in there that can service kind of the changing community," he
said.
The Carriage Place shopping center on
Bethel Road in Columbus remains a strong retail location, but Big Bear
and Drug Emporium left a large pocket of vacant space in the center.
Center owner Casto has demolished most
of the former buildings and is constructing a new 146,500-square-foot
store for Wal-Mart. The store is expected to open early next year.
Kristin Mack, spokeswoman for the
Columbus-based Casto, said the cost will be significantly higher because
of the adaptations and efforts to make the store fit into the existing
center, but she could not say how much.
Two other vacant former Big Bear sites
are in the process of being leased, she said. There are two competing
proposals for the former Big Bear at the Town and Country shopping
center on East Broad Street in Columbus.
Casto plans to subdivide a former Big
Bear at Great Southern, a shopping center at the northwest quadrant of
Route 23 South High Street and Interstate 270.
"In that area, we found because of the
big boxes that are already there and the grocery stores that are already
there, there was more of a demand for smaller stores," Mack said.
Subdividing is a strong option for a
former Kmart store at Mill Run, said Jason Taggart, director of
marketing for Taggart Management and Real Estate Services. He is
marketing the 122,000-square-foot space for owner Clearview Investments,
a Texas firm that bought the building for $5.3 million in 2005.
Mill Run is one alternative for
retailers who can't find space at Tuttle Crossing, because it's just one
exit south on I-270, he said.
The building exceeds 300 feet in depth
in some places, and a junior anchor like a Borders or Barnes & Noble
would only require 150 feet, Taggart said.
He would work with an architect and
developer to design a space that would work for new tenants, he said.
Possibilities include shaving off a
portion of the building's rear and maybe creating room for an outlot and
a parking field for a restaurant, he said.
While Taggart said the firm would be
happy to sign one large tenant, "We're really looking for multiple
retailers," he said. "I think we're better suited if we find a couple."
Good fits for the area would be
electronics, sporting goods or outdoor related activities, general
department stores and soft goods.
More communities are considering ways
to minimize the potential for large big box vacancies.
Boring recommends communities adopt
this strategy: "If you can't beat them regulate them: accept them but
try to get them to do the best store possible. Adopt your design
guidelines ahead of time but make sure that you're sensitive to the
realities of retail, especially with parking," he said.
He also encourages communities to
develop a retail master plan that designates where retail should locate
and stick to that plan.
Communities also should conduct a cost
benefit analysis when a big box retailer wants to build and consider
impact fees, he said.
Kathy Bergstrom is a freelance writer
in Columbus.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart refuses
to chip in for fire truck
By Chris Young
TC Palm
Friday, July, 7 2006
[back to top]
PORT ST. LUCIE — Wal-Mart has refused
to pay for a new ladder truck as one of the conditions it must satisfy
to build its SuperCenter at Gatlin Commons, fire officials said.
St. Lucie County Fire District
officials said the specialized truck is needed to properly cover all
areas of the 207,000-square-foot building in a fire, but Wal-Mart
attorney Susan Motley argued in a letter the building has "an abundance"
of sprinklers and built-in safety measures that exceed National Fire
Protection Association standards.
But if it doesn't get money for a new
truck, the district doesn't have to approve the building's certificate
of occupancy, Battalion Chief Buddy Emerson wrote in a letter to the
city.
The district also asked the city on
Monday for help persuading Wal-Mart to follow through on its end of the
deal.
The Wal-Mart SuperCenter is the
largest business planned for Gatlin Commons, a 400,000-square-foot
commercial project on Gatlin and Rosser boulevards, which also will
include a 134,000-square-foot Sam's Club and other retailers and
restaurants.
As a condition of plan approval,
Wal-Mart agreed to provide evidence that the Fire District could provide
aerial service to the project, Emerson wrote. But the district didn't
specify a ladder truck because Wal-Mart agreed to meet the district's
needs at the Site Plan Review meeting, he continued.
Although there is no ordinance
requiring developers to pay for ladder trucks, the district's
requirement was consistent with the city's planning process, wrote
Emerson, who could not be reached for comment Thursday.
Wal-Mart officials maintained their
stance.
"We should be able to move forward
because we met the (fire) standards," said Eric Brewer, spokesman for
Wal-Mart. "Our current position is we don't feel the contribution is
needed by law."
He said the requested contribution was
$900,000.
Councilman Christopher Cooper, a
firefighter in Palm Beach County, said Wal-Mart should pay for at least
part of a new ladder truck.
"I think it's a justified fee for a
new business which is impacting the level of service from the norm," he
said.
Wal-Mart is not the first company to
face requirements for new fire equipment. The district has gotten money
for half a ladder truck — $350,000 — from The Ginn Co. in March as a
precondition for allowing high-rise buildings at Tesoro.
Developer Wayne Huizenga is
contributing the other $350,000 for the truck.
THE COST OF FIRE PROTECTION
• Wal-Mart, which is building a
SuperCenter at Gatlin and Rosser boulevards, might not get final
approval of the project from the St. Lucie County Fire District.
• The district says it can't
adequately protect the large building without a new ladder truck and
asked Wal-Mart to buy it.
• Wal-Mart has refused, saying it has
enough fire protection in the building.
[back to top]
Move if you want Wal-Mart
mykawartha.com
07/07/06
[back to top]
To the editor:
My husband and I both work in this
area and we both contribute and shop here. Between Lindsay, Fenelon
Falls and Bobcaygeon, you can always find what you want and then some.
I love the area, the people, the
stores - large or small. This area is still country, and beautiful
country it is. So why ruin it?
I do believe in improvements and also
progress. However, huge housing developments?
Yes, let's bring a few thousand more
people here especially a seniors' home, when we don't have enough
doctors now. Being a personal support worker and working in the health
field with high-need clients who don't even have doctors and truly need
them, I know this problem is serious enough now. My own family has no
doctor.
Super-sized Wal-Marts, huge housing
developments, more seniors, no doctors, congested traffic and other big
city problems, we don't need. That's why we live here now. For those
people, council and developers who insist we turn Lindsay into a super
city, my suggestion is "Move to one."
Sandra Reardon,
Lindsay
Contents © Copyright 2005,
mykawartha.com
[back to top]
Wal-Mart contests state's
tax bill
The retailer says
the state should not have combined its businesses, and it wants $30
million back
David Ranii
July 7, 2006
[back to top]
Jul. 7--Wal-Mart claims that the state
owes it a $30.2 million refund for improperly assessing its corporate
income tax.
In a lawsuit filed in Wake County
Superior Court, the world's largest retailer contends that the state
overstepped its authority. According to the suit, the state combined
Wal-Mart's state income tax return with the returns of two legally
separate entities the company owns or controls -- including one that
doesn't do business in North Carolina -- to determine Wal-Mart's tax
bill.
The attorney representing Wal-Mart,
Jack Cummings of the Raleigh office of Alston & Bird, said he also has
filed a similar suit seeking a $3.5 million refund on behalf of Sam's
Club's operations in North Carolina. The Sam's Club warehouse store
chain is owned by Wal-Mart.
The lawsuit's outcome could have
ramifications beyond Wal-Mart and Sam's Club. Cummings said he is aware
of "other similarly situated taxpayers."
Wal-Mart has paid a total of $30.2
million in extra taxes, interest and penalties that the state claimed it
owed, after an audit for the four fiscal years that ended Jan. 31, 2002,
according to the lawsuit. Now it is seeking a refund of that money, plus
interest.
The suit was filed on behalf of
Wal-Mart Stores East, a Wal-Mart subsidiary that operates the chain's
112 stores in North Carolina. The defendant is E. Norris Tolson, the
state secretary of revenue.
Last month, the state responded to the
lawsuit with a motion to dismiss the case. Revenue department
spokeswoman Kim Brooks had no immediate comment on the case.
In its lawsuit, Wal-Mart makes a
variety of arguments contesting the legality of how the state calculated
its tax bill. They include violations of due process and the commerce
clause of the U.S. constitution as well as violations of the state
constitution.
During the tax years at issue, the
state computed Wal-Mart's tax bills by combining the company's tax
return with tax returns filed for Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, a
real estate investment trust, and Wal-Mart Property Co. During this
period Wal-Mart was the sole owner of Wal-Mart Property Co., which in
turn owned the majority of the shares of Wal-Mart Real Estate.
The state combined the three returns,
the suit states, because it contended that the company's income tax
return failed to disclose Wal-Mart's "true earnings on its business
carried on in the state."
Wal-Mart and Wal-Mart Real Estate had
filed separate state income tax returns. Wal-Mart Property didn't file a
state income tax return, and Wal-Mart contends it wasn't required to
because Wal-Mart Property didn't conduct business in the state.
In its tax return, Wal-Mart deducted
rent it paid Wal-Mart Real Estate, which owns or subleases stores to
Wal-Mart, but did not pay tax on dividends it received from Wal-Mart
Property. The two entities were created in the mid-1990s "as part of a
larger company-wide restructuring to more effectively and efficiently
manage our business, including our ever-growing real estate portfolio,"
said Wal-Mart spokeswoman Tara Stewart.
Wal-Mart also argues that the state's
decision to compute its taxes in the way it did "was motivated in whole
or substantial part by the fact that Wal-Mart Property Co. did not do
business in North Carolina."
Cummings said that the state, by
combining the tax returns of the landlord and tenant, in effect
eliminated from Wal-Mart's tax return the rent it paid.
The lawsuit contends that the state
determined Wal-Mart's taxable income "in an arbitrary manner, without
the guidance of any constitutionally acceptable standard."
The law the state cited as giving it
the authority to combine the different returns doesn't permit Wal-Mart
or other companies to combine them on their own initiative, said
Cummings. Nor does it provide any "guidelines or parameters" for such
combinations.
"The key is that the secretary of
revenue doesn't have any power to require the payment of this tax,"
Cummings said. "That statute is invalid as applied."
In the state's motion to dismiss, it
argues that "even if the factual allegations of the ... complaint were
true, each and every one of plaintiff's claims would fail as a matter of
law."
Copyright (c) 2006, The News &
Observer, Raleigh, N.C.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart challenges N.C.
tax bill
Associated Press
Saturday, July 8, 2006
[back to top]
RALEIGH, N.C. - Wal-Mart has sued the
state of North Carolina, contending it paid $30.2 million too much in
corporate income tax because the state combined income from Wal-Mart
with 112 stores in the state and two separate businesses.
The lawsuit was filed in Wake County
Superior Court. The state has filed a request to dismiss the lawsuit,
but had no comment on the case.
The corporation said the state
shouldn't have combined income taxes on Wal-Mart, Wal-Mart Real Estate
Business Trust and Wal-Mart Property Co.
Wal-Mart attorney Jack Cummings said
he also has filed a lawsuit seeking a $3.5 million refund for Sam's Club
stores in North Carolina.
The lawsuit said Wal-Mart Property
didn't conduct business in the state.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart seeks guidance from Al Gore in effort to become environmentally
friendly
by RAW STORY
07/06/2006
[back to top]
The Wall Street Journal's Washington
Wire has reported that former Vice President Al Gore will be addressing
Wal-Mart executives next week at the company's quarterly conference on
sustainability, RAW STORY has learned.
Gore will speak on global warming, the
subject of his documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth."
Last November, Wal-Mart made a
commitment to environmental sustainability as part of its response to a
burst of negative publicity over its treatment of employees and effect
on small retailers. It has adopted policies to reduce energy use,
improve the fuel efficiency of its vehicles, and cut down on waste.
It has also created 14 internal
groups, called the sustainable value network, to explore environmentally
sound business practices, covering everything from logistics to
greenhouse gases to jewelry. The conference to be addressed by Al Gore
is one of four where all the internal groups will meet to discuss
progress and stumbling blocks.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart signs on to Annex
The retail giant's
purchase of 26 acres in northern Atascadero makes it the first chain to
join the project
Stephen Curran
The Tribune
July 6, 2006
[back to top]
Jul. 6--Retail giant Wal-Mart
officially became part of The Annex development in northern Atascadero
on Wednesday when it bought 26 acres of the land for the proposed
project.
The purchase of land across from the
former Atascadero Factory Outlets makes Wal-Mart the first chain to sign
on to The Rottman Group's planned project at El Camino Real and Del Rio
Road.
Officials from neither company would
disclose what Wal-Mart paid.
The development confirms the
suspicions of a segment of city residents, who criticize the chain for
aggressive expansion plans. Wal-Mart detractors in Atascadero say the
company pays chronically low wages and leaves shuttered businesses in
its wake.
The developer has courted more than
half a dozen other chains, including Trader Joe's and Lowe's Home
Improvement, only to see them pursue locations in Templeton and Paso
Robles, respectively.
The store would be the Central Coast's
first Wal-Mart Supercenter, a combination department and grocery store.
The county's two existing Wal-Marts in Paso Robles and Arroyo Grande do
not contain a grocery store.
The developers said the store would
bring 300 to 500 jobs averaging $10.50 an hour to Atascadero, along with
a wide variety of food merchandise they say will save customers on
average between 17 and 20 percent over a traditional grocery store.
Maury Froman, Rottman senior vice
president, said the deal could pave the way for other stores in The
Annex, a cooperative involving Rottman, Wal-Mart and developer JMW
Management's Mission Oaks at The Annex.
Signing the retailer, he said, will
likely be the "defining factor" in attracting other stores to
Atascadero.
Debate ensues
The Atascadero agreement comes as many
local leaders pin their financial hopes on the shopping center.
If successful, they say, the right
big-box store could bring in significant additional tax revenue, helping
to reshape a city that's sat mostly on the sidelines as residents took
their money to Paso Robles and San Luis Obispo.
Opponents, though, say a Wal-Mart
Supercenter will damage existing businesses and do little to pay for
Atascadero's understaffed police and fire departments.
Groups such as the Atascadero
Homeowners Association and Oppose Wal-Mart have already armed themselves
with statistics, negative media reports and even attorneys in a
public-relations campaign to stop the project.
The group has remained tight-lipped
about its specific strategy, pledging only to do "whatever it takes."
"We've already discussed all our
options," said Tom Comar, spokesman for Atascadero-based Oppose
Wal-Mart. "We're quite aware of what we can do."
The developer hopes to bring in
Wal-Mart officials to quell some residents' fears.
"We recognize that there are going to
be many issues surrounding the possibility of a Wal-Mart in Atascadero,"
Froman said. "What we're doing is asking Wal-Mart to introduce
themselves, correct some of the misconceptions and make a case for how
it will benefit Atascadero."
At least one unexpected ally has come
to the project's defense. Steve Martin, executive director of the
Atascadero Main Street Association, told the City Council last week that
his agency, dedicated to restoring the community's historic downtown,
supports retail development at El Camino Real and Del Rio.
His reaction contrasts with small
merchants in San Luis Obispo who have teamed to fight rancher/developer
Ernie Dalidio's proposed retail project on Madonna Road along Highway
101.
They worry that development will
present an unfair challenge to their smaller stores.
Supporting the Atascadero project,
Martin said, affords his group an opportunity to guide the community's
inevitable change.
"Change is coming," he said. "It's
been coming for some time. Now it's time for people in Atascadero to
manage that change."
A former Paso Robles city councilman,
Martin helped establish the owner participation agreement he said was
crucial to allowing the Wal-Mart on Niblick Road to coexist with the
small businesses that today dot Paso's downtown.
That agreement, signed in August 1993,
requires the Arkansas-based company to donate several thousand dollars a
year to preserving the downtown. So far, Martin said, it has meant more
than $100,000 to the historic core.
"That support over the 10 years was
helpful in supporting Main Street (Association) operations in Paso
Robles," he said.
City reaction
Atascadero City Manager Wade McKinney
said Wednesday he would support bringing a similar policy before
councilmembers in his city.
Wal-Mart spokesman Kevin McCall said
the company would explore "what's appropriate with Atascadero and how
our presence affects the community."
Mayor Tom O'Malley, who is up for
re-election in November, also said he would support the policy if it
came before the council.
But, with no environmental report or
official application on file for the necessary amendment to the city's
general plan, he and McKinney added that any formal action on The Annex
is at least a year away.
"There are so many issues that are
equally or more important to Atascadero," O'Malley said. "Any number of
things can change in the next two years."
Copyright (c) 2006, The Tribune, San
Luis Obispo, Calif.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart Requests More
Proof In Case
Kat Robinson, Producer
7/6/2006
[back to top]
Bentonville-based Wal-Mart has asked a
judge to require a higher level of proof that the company allegedly
defamed a former executive caught up in a scandal at the company.
Jared Bowen is suing the world's
largest retailer for slander and defamation. He says the company
described him as a "liar, a thief and a fraud." The company fired Bowen
for allegedly not telling the company about false invoices submitted by
former executive Tom Coughlin, who has pleaded guilty to related
charges.
Benton County Circuit Judge John Scott
is to rule within two weeks on Wal-Mart's request that Bowen be judged
as a special kind of public figure. The designation would require Bowen
to submit additional proof to back up his allegations.
Bowen was fired by Wal-Mart in April
2005.
(Copyright 2006 by The Associated
Press. All Rights Reserved.)
[back to top]
Wal-Mart traffic
slows despite price cuts
By Jennifer Waters
MarketWatch
Thursday, July, 6 2006
[back to top]
CHICAGO (MarketWatch) -- Wal-Mart
Stores Inc. turned in anemic June sales results Thursday despite price
cuts as budget-tightening consumers combined shopping trips to the
stores and focused their spending on the necessities. The Bentonville,
Ark.-based behemoth said sales at stores open longer than a year inched
up 1.2% for the month compared with last year's strong 4.7%.
That was in line with results Wal-Mart
reported over the weekend, but on the low end of the its initial
projection of a 1%-to-3% gain in same-store sales.
At the Wal-Mart stores, same-store
sales were 1.1%, considerably weaker than last year's 4.9% while the
Sam's Clubs turned in a same-store sales gain of 1.3% compared with last
year's 3.8% increase.
Wal-Mart CFO Tom Schoewe said that the
sums of average tickets drove the comparable-sales results amid weak
traffic. He said that Wal-Mart's research among shoppers "points to an
increasing concern about the rise in gas prices over last year,"
according to the press release.
"The priority in spending by our
customers is on food and consumables," Schoewe said.
"In addition, cooler trends in some
regions of the country did result in softer sales of seasonal
merchandise for the start of summer," he added.
The retailer is still projecting
second-quarter earnings in a range of 70 cents to 74 cents a share. At
Thomson, analysts are looking for an average of 73 cents a share.
Wal-Mart shares ended Wednesday's
session at $47.02.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart Appeal Against City of Williams Lake Dismissed
City of Williams Lake
July 5, 2006
[back to top]
The appeal on the lawsuit initiated by
Bruce Gardner against the City of Williams Lake was dismissed and costs
were awarded to the City.
The ruling was issued and confirms
that the City did everything properly with respect to the rezoning
application for Wal-Mart. The judges stated that local government
legislation is clear about the fact that the nature of the opportunities
to consult, and the persons or entities consulted, are matters to be
decided by the City Council. Furthermore, the ruling defines
‘consultation’ as an elastic concept dependent upon the extent of the
change proposed and other circumstances surrounding the proposal.
“The community is extraordinary
pleased with this decision”, Mayor Nelson said, “The ruling confirms
that we did everything right. We are also relieved that costs were
awarded to the City as this long dispute has been expensive for the
taxpayers. ”
In a nut shell, the judges dismissed
the appeal and confirmed that the City Council was within its
legislative mandate in determining that the consultation in which it
engaged was adequate and that an opportunity for consultation was indeed
provided to the public according to the law.
“The fact is that a Wal-Mart store
will be built in Williams Lake and that’s very good news for our
community”, Nelson said. The Subdivision approval is still pending and
an announcement from Wal-Mart is expected in the very near future.
[back to top]
Judge To Rule On Motion In Slander Case Against
Wal-Mart
Gary Zekis, Producer
7/5/2006
[back to top]
A judge will decide in two weeks
whether former Wal-Mart executive Jared Bowen will have a tougher time
suing the world's largest retailer for alleged defamation and slander.
In a hearing today, Benton County
Circuit Judge John Scott heard from both sides on a pre-trial motion by
Wal-Mart to declare Bowen a special kind of public figure.
This would set a higher bar for his
attorneys to prove in trial that Wal-Mart had defamed him.
Case coordinator Betty Schrader says
the judge said he'd rule in two weeks.
Bowen was fired after Wal-Mart alleged
that Bowen did not tell the company about false invoices filed by former
vice chairman Tom Coughlin.
Bowen sued Wal-Mart in Benton County
Circuit Court for defamation and slander after the company publicly
claimed Bowen was a (quote) "liar, a thief and a fraud," according to
Bowen's lawsuit.
Copyright 2006 by The Associated
Press. All Rights Reserved.)
[back to top]
Wal-Mart fights to
keep the smiley face
Retail giant says
symbol personifies its price-reducing policy, but London-based firm says
it secured rights years ago.
CNNMoney.com
July 5 2006
[back to top]
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The
ubiquitous yellow happy face is at the center of an angry battle between
Wal-Mart Stores and a company owned by a French family, according to a
report Wednesday.
London-based SmileyWorld first
registered rights to the symbol with the French trademark authorities in
October 1971, but the battle with Wal-Mart (Charts) didn't begin until
SmileyWorld filed for a U.S. trademark in 1997 for the exclusive right
to commercial use and licensing of the term "smiley" in conjunction with
the face logo, the International Herald Tribune reported.
Wal-Mart has photographs of smiley
faces in its stores dating back to 1996.
"A prehistoric man probably invented
the smiley face in some cave, but I certainly was the first to register
it as a trademark," said Franklin Loufrani, who said he initially
registered the design, according to the newspaper.
"When it comes to commercial use,
registration is what counts."
However, unlike most countries in
Europe and Asia, the U.S. operates under a system in which being the
first to register a trademark bears less weight than being the first to
exploit a symbol commercially, Burkhart Goebel, the global head of the
intellectual property practice at the law firm Lovells, told the
newspaper.
"Here in the U.S., we consider how
heavily a trademark is used, and that would give SmileyWorld a big
uphill battle," Marc E. Ackerman, a New York-based partner at the White
& Case law firm and a specialist in U.S. trademark law, told the
newspaper.
Wal-Mart filed a notice of opposition
to SmileyWorld's trademark application and then filed a separate
application to trademark the smiley, the newspaper said.
In response, SmileyWorld filed a
notice of opposition to Wal-Mart's application on the grounds that its
own attempt to trademark the face had been rejected.
Both parties say they expect victory
when the United States Patent and Trademark Office rules on the case
this summer, the newspaper said
[back to top]
Federal court upholds
Wal-Mart ban
By Michael R. Sheah
Modesto Bee
Tuesday, July, 4 2006
[back to top]
TURLOCK — A federal court in Fresno
ruled on Monday that the city's ordinance barring big-box retailers
doesn't infringe on Wal-Mart's "constitutional or other rights." It's
the city's third courtroom win against the retail giant. Wal-Mart sued
Turlock soon after the City Council unanimously passed an ordinance in
2004 barring a 225,000-square-foot supercenter the corporation planned
for Countryside Drive, off Highway 99. The council said the operation
would cause substantial traffic congestion and result in undue
environmental damage.
Wal-Mart lost in Stanislaus County
Superior Court in 2004 and appealed the case to the 5th District Court
of Appeal in Fresno, which ruled against the corporation in April. The
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California, also in Fresno,
mirrored the other courts' rulings on Monday.
"I'm extremely pleased and feel
extremely vindicated," said Mayor Curt Andre. "Three courts of law have
ruled in favor of a city setting its traffic standards and being able to
develop without the fear of being overruled by a monster corporation or
any special interest, for that matter."
Wal-Mart has the option to appeal the
federal ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in San
Francisco. The retail giant already has petitioned to have the state
appellate case reviewed by the state Supreme Court.
"We are disappointed with the
judgment, and given the length of the opinion, 64 pages or so, we're
going to have to study it before we determine our next step," said
Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley.
Turlock attorneys said if Wal-Mart
decides to appeal the federal case, the Bentonville, Ark.- based
retailer would be playing with fire as an unfavorable ruling would apply
to much of the Western United States. On the state level, the Supreme
Court has not decided whether it will hear the case.
"Frankly, I don't expect (the state
Supreme Court) to grant review because it's not a decision that should
rise to the level of its attention," said Ben Fay, a partner in
Oakland-based Jarvis, Fay & Doporto, which is representing Turlock in
the case.
In September 2003, the city passed an
ordinance prohibiting "discount superstores" greater than 100,000 square
feet that devote more than 5 percent of the sales floor to nontaxable or
grocery items.
Wal-Mart alleged the city was in
collusion with existing area grocers such as Raley's, Safeway Inc. and
Save Mart Supermarkets. The motivation, the retailer argued, was to keep
an "out-of-state" business — Wal-Mart — out of Turlock.
Monday's ruling was a sum-mary
judgment, written by Judge Oliver W. Wanger, and essentially sidesteps a
full-blown trial.
"At the very root of what this means
for the city and other smaller cities across the state is they have
control over their own land-use planning," Fay said.
The ruling has no effect on Wal-Mart's
store on Fulkerth Road.
Turlock has spent $370,000 in its
legal war against Wal-Mart — none of which it can get back under
California law, but some proposed legislation may change that.
Typically, the loser in a civil case
pays the winner's legal costs, but state law prevents government
entities from collecting. State Senate Bill 1818, if made law, would let
government entities collect. The Senate has approved SB 1818 and late
last month the Assembly Judiciary Committee did, too.
If the full Assembly endorses the
bill, it will land on Gov. Schwarzenegger's desk. The Assembly is
expected to hear the bill next month.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart applauds B.C. labour board ruling, plans to use it for Surrey
dispute
Canadian Press
Tuesday July 4, 2006
[back to top]
MISSISSAUGA, Ont. (CP) - Wal-Mart
Canada (NYSE:WMT) said Tuesday that a B.C. Labour Relations Board ruling
has thwarted a union's effort to organize the auto department of a
Cranbrook, B.C. store as a separate unit from the rest of the outlet.
Brent Mullan, the chair of the B.C.
Labour Relations Board, ruled that the United Food and Commercial
Workers Union's attempt to separate 10 workers in the store's Tire Lube
Express department was not permissible under B.C. law.
Wal-Mart said it plans to use the
ruling to stop a similar union drive in Surrey, B.C.
"Wal-Mart Canada believes that the
carving out of a very small group of select workers from the total team
of associates in a store for the purpose of unionization is
unrepresentative and undemocratic," the company said in a release.
The union said it plans to appeal the
ruling this week or early next week to the Supreme Court.
"We find it very offensive that
Wal-Mart would consider this democratic," Andy Neufeld, spokesperson for
the UFCW Canada Local 1518 said in an interview.
"Wal-Mart's typical pattern is to
litigate and delay," he said.
Wal-Mart, the world's largest company,
has been embroiled in union conflicts across Canada in recent years.
A store in Saguenay, Que. was the
first Wal-Mart outlet in North America to organize a successful union
drive.
The retailer closed the store, citing
financial reasons, before a collective agreement with the union could be
reached.
Wal-Mart is the world's biggest
retailer with more than 4,000 stores. In Canada, the company operates
about 268 stores and employs more than 70,000 people.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart
expansion would not be good for Uxbridge
To the editor: Re: 'Here we go again'
Suzanne Crone
Times-Journal, June 28
Jul 4, 2006
[back to top]
It was with a deep sigh and a great
deal of nausea that I read of Wal-Mart's wishes to expand.
Slowly, Uxbridge's unique | 
