WSJ: The Wal-Mart Labor Settlement: A Preemptive Strike Against Unionization?

[Omaha Steve]

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/12/24/the-wal-mart-labor-settlement-a-preemptive-strike-against-unionization/

December 24, 2008, 8:59 am
The Wal-Mart Labor Settlement: A Preemptive Strike Against Unionization?
Posted by Dan Slater

Wal-Mart’s agreement yesterday to pay a whopping $640 million to settle the vast majority of 76 suits alleging that it routinely underpaid its employees is being viewed by many as just one step — albeit a large one — in a push to overhaul Wal-Mart’s image.

The company, for instance, is in the process of remodeling most of its U.S. stores and, notes the WSJ, has adopted a soft, sunny new logo (pictured, right).

In a statement regarding the settlement, Wal-Mart’s GC, Tom Mars said: “Many of these lawsuits were filed years ago and are not representative of the company we are today.”

But there may be something else going on. Remember the Employee Free Choice Act? Last month, the day after Barack Obama won the presidency, the Law Blog spoke to Littler Mendelson’s Jay Sumner, a D.C.-based labor partner, who helped us speculate on what designs the President-elect may have for the American workplace. When we asked Sumner what employment-law-related change we might expect to see under the new administration, he said there could be a softening on unions as Obama is a proponent of several pieces of legislation — i.e. the Employee Free Choice Act — that make it easier to organize.

To wit, the Journal today writes:

Paul M. Secunda, an associate professor at Marquette University Law School, suggested Wal-Mart wanted to settle the lawsuits not just to avoid potentially more costly defeats in the courtroom, but to resolve issues that might be used to argue for passage of the Employee Free Choice Act. The legislation, expected to be considered by Congress next year, is fiercely opposed by Wal-Mart because the company worries it will make it easier for workers to unionize.

FULL story at link.

[Yavin4]

1. Getting WalMart To Pay Their Workers Better Wages

Would do more for this economy than almost anything that Obama could do.

[Kolesar]

2. Wal*mart could fund healthcare instead of sending their employees to the Medicaid office

Adding to the rolls of 16%* of the population who is already on publicly-funded Medicaid health care

*In Ohio

[blueknight]

3. without a doubt,

the worlds worst company. they would use 10 year old children if they could get away with it. and one day they will, if they ever bust the rest of the unions in this country

[ogneopasno]

4. "Preemptive"? LMAO!