Wal-Mart, Largest Employer of the Working poor, is losing Public Support
Wal-Mart has been closely watched by many corporate leaders that see it as a model for the new Economy: rapid growth, poverty wages, few health benefits, no unions, race and gender discrimination, and the destruction of small family businesses. In a surprising turn of events, Wal-Mart is starting to feel the pressure. Robert Greenwald’s incredibly well produced documentary combined with an innovative grass-roots campaign by Wake up Wal-Mart and Wal-Mart Watch, has produced a groundswell of activity. For example, there were 7,000 screenings in churches, private homes, union halls and other locations for the documentary. This in addition to a well publized defeat for a large local expansion plan in Inglewood, by our sponsoring organization CLUE, and LANNE. Replace with, Recently Clergy and Laity United for Economic Justice (CLUE), our sponsoring organization, and LAANE were also successful in stopping Wal-Mart from expanding into Inglewood.
Months later a pioneer health care bill was passed in Maryland, which require Wal- Mart to pay larger percentage of their employees health benefits. Studied showed that this would save state taxpayers millions, by removing some Wal-Mart employees from state welfare programs.
Simular proposals came up state houses across the country as far south as Florida and as far west as California. Maybe Replace with across the country, from Florida to California to ?? Massachusetts??
Wal-Mart is just trying to respond, and restatigze their loosing public relations strategy, by pumping millions into TV advertising, and creating their own documentary called “Why Wal-Mart Works, And Why That Drives Some People Crazy.” These efforts have confused many consumers but Wal-Mart’s momentum is faltering. A recent poll showed that 58% of ____ view Wal-Mart favorably but that’s sharply down from the 76% in January. The poll showed that a majority, 58 percent, viewed Wal-Mart favorably, but the figure was down from 76 percent in January, and it lost it number one spot as most admired company’s on Fortune’s list.
This is the latest article in Los Angeles Times, which show Wal-Mart’s latest defeat.
Wal-Mart Says It Will Boost Health Benefits
By Abigail Goldman, Times Staff Writer
February 24 2006
Wal-Mart Stores Inc., under pressure to shoulder more of its workers’ healthcare costs, outlined plans Thursday to improve its benefit offerings, including opening more clinics in stores and shortening the period that part-time employees have to wait before they can buy coverage.
The world’s largest retailer also said it would expand its cheapest health insurance option, an $11-a-month plan that has been offered in selected areas. The “value plan,” which costs about $20 for families and allows three doctor visits and three prescriptions before a $1,000 deductible kicks in, will be offered to half of the company’s employees, Wal-Mart said.
The proposals are in a speech that Wal-Mart’s chief executive is scheduled to deliver Sunday. They follow promises the company made last year to bring healthcare within reach of all its nearly 1.4 million U.S. employees.
Over the last several months, Wal-Mart has come under increasing criticism for what opponents call stingy health benefits. The company released highlights of the CEO’s speech the same day a union-backed group issued a report claiming that U.S. taxpayers spent $1.5 billion last year providing medical care for uninsured Wal-Mart workers.
Wal-Mart said the five-page report was a publicity stunt based on poor methodology.
The company said the number of employees covered by its health plans increased slightly last year to 46% — below the national average of 60%. It said almost one-third of its workers get health insurance elsewhere, which critics say is evidence that the retailer relies on state programs and other companies to cover its workers.
At a time when expansion is crucial to the company’s future growth, especially along the East and West coasts, the attacks against Wal-Mart are taking a toll, at least in terms of public opinion.
In Fortune magazine’s 2006 list of America’s most admired companies, released this week, Wal-Mart fell eight spots to No. 12. The Bentonville, Ark., retailer, which has more than 3,850 U.S. stores and nearly 2,300 international locations, held the top spot on the list in 2003 and 2004.
The speech by CEO H. Lee Scott Jr. at a National Governors Assn. meeting in Washington is aimed at an audience playing a key role in the company’s latest healthcare battle: state-by-state efforts to force Wal-Mart to pay more of its workers’ medical costs.
In California, state Sen. Carole Migden (D-San Francisco) introduced a bill Wednesday that would require companies that employ 10,000 or more state residents to spend at least 8% of their total payroll on health benefits or make payments into a state fund for the uninsured.
“Wal-Mart’s commitment is not enough and is hardly affordable to their hardworking employees,” Migden said in a statement Thursday. She said Wal-Mart’s 70,000 California employees average about $15,000 in annual pay, and even under the company’s coverage proposals, workers would be charged monthly premiums and large deductibles.
Migden’s bill is based on legislation passed last year in Maryland — which survived a veto by that state’s governor — and introduced in several other states.
In his speech Sunday, Scott is expected to denounce those efforts and call on government to work with business on healthcare issues, the company said.
He also will announce that for the first time, part-time employees will be able to buy health insurance for their children, the company said. Part-time Wal-Mart workers now wait two years before being eligible for individual health coverage. The company said it had not yet decided what the shortened waiting period would be.
The company said Scott also would outline plans to expand a pilot program of nine in-store health clinics to 50 sites. Those clinics, the company said, offer non-emergency care to employees and members of the community, many of whom might otherwise go to a hospital emergency room for routine ailments.
In October, Scott had said he wanted to make affordable healthcare coverage available to all U.S. employees of the company, which this week reported annual profit of $11.2 billion on $312 billion in sales.
A company memo leaked just after Scott’s pledge outlined stark recommendations for reining in healthcare costs, such as making jobs more physically rigorous to discourage unhealthy workers and using more part-time workers.
The memo also recommended boosting the company’s image by touting initiatives such as the ones Scott plans to highlight Sunday.
Wal-Mart has said that the memo was a preliminary document and not a final list of proposals.
But critics said Scott’s planned speech this weekend appeared to take its cue from the memo, which suggested “reframing” the issue of uninsured workers as a societal problem as well as engaging in a “sustained communication campaign” about the company’s healthcare offerings.
In its report Thursday, Wake Up Wal-Mart, the union-backed group critical of the company, projected that American taxpayers would pay $9.1 billion in healthcare costs for Wal-Mart employees by 2010.
The group based the figure on the number of Wal-Mart employees now using Medicaid and projections for the company’s growth.
Wal-Mart disputed the report. “The fact is, Wal-Mart jobs move people from public health programs onto private insurance,” said company spokeswoman Sarah Clark.
“Seven percent of associates join Wal-Mart already on Medicaid. Within two years, that number drops to 3%.”
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
January 22nd, 2018
It is amazing that the Trump election and inauguration was over a year ago. The Center for the Working poor (aka the Center), has been dramatically affected by these cycles of Trump and the protest movement. In the weeks after … Continue reading
January 9th, 2017
Many have asked how I am feeling after Trump was elected to President of the US. The largest natural disaster in my lifetime just hit my community. It reminds me of both the day after my father died in my … Continue reading
August 5th, 2013
You may find the original article in Yes! Magazine or read the full text below. It was also published on Truthout.org. Click Here to Kick Glenn Beck Off the Air: Web Activism’s Big Wins—and What to Do Next Monday, 24 … Continue reading
August 5th, 2013
I wrote this article with my brother Mark Engler about strategy in the movement to combat climate change. It was published in Dissent magazine and Truthout.org. You can read the complete article below or read it on Truthout.org: Climate of … Continue reading
December 18th, 2012
Dear Friends, In our journey to build a more just, a more democratic, and a more sustainable world, there are many challenges: cynicism, fear, despairs. But this holiday season, we are lifted up by the words Dr. Martin Luther King … Continue reading
December 17th, 2012
The Center for the Working Poor, (aka the Burning Bush Community), continues to share in the wonderful mix of serving the poor, communal living, prayer and meditation, and nonviolent movement organizing that distinguishes our beautiful home. In addition to delivering … Continue reading
November 5th, 2012
By Isabelle Nastasia The impact of the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision Citizens United v. the Federal Election Commission allowing unlimited and anonymous campaign spending has been profound and could yet be decisive in this election. With an estimated $9.8 billion … Continue reading
December 15th, 2011
By Paul Engler Every once in a while, a rare and special moment comes when you realize that you are doing more than turning out for just another protest. Instead, you realize that you are in the middle of true … Continue reading