Wal-Mart workers win $78.5 million lawsuit
By
Betsey Piette
Philadelphia
Published Oct 25, 2006 1:16 AM
A
Philadelphia jury found Oct. 13 that Wal-Mart, the world’s largest
retailer and Pennsylvania’s largest private employer, knowingly benefited
from not paying employees for all the time they worked. The jury awarded $78.5
million to current and former employees of Wal-Mart Stores Inc.’s
Pennsylvania stores. The ruling involves nearly 187,000
workers.
After a five-week trial, the
Common Pleas Court jury found that Wal-Mart failed to pay workers for their rest
breaks, forcing employees to work off the clock. The jury found that the
mega-chain knowingly received an unfair benefit from not paying the
employees.
Wal-Mart could be forced to
pay more damages in the case.
“I
would say Wal-Mart was stealing our time, because we weren’t getting our
breaks,” former employee Delores Killingsworth Barber of North
Philadelphia testified to the jury. Another Philadelphia area employee, Michelle
Braun, told of being locked inside the store and forced to work without pay
after she had clocked out when her shift
ended.
Wal-Mart attorney Neal Manne
argued that the lead plaintiffs were just a small group of disgruntled
employees. However, the fact that at least seven other class-action lawsuits and
more than 50 smaller lawsuits are pending against Wal-Mart on wage and hour
issues proves otherwise.
In December,
California jurors awarded $172.3 million to a class of 115,919 current and
former Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club workers who were made to miss meal
breaks.
In the Pennsylvania case, jurors
found that workers at Wal-Mart were forced to work more than 33 million rest
breaks between 1998 and 2001 because company management were under pressure to
cut costs. Store managers received bonuses that sometimes doubled their pay if
they reached the profit goal.
While
clearly a victory for the workers involved, the class-action finding fails to
address the ongoing problem that the world’s largest retailer continues to
make mega-profits off the back of its seriously underpaid work
force.
In 2004, Wal-Mart Chief Executive
Officer Lee Scott received a salary of $1.2 million and $22 million in bonuses,
stock awards and stock options. In 2005, Wal-Mart’s average sales
“associate” earned $17,114 a year–that’s more than
$10,000 under the poverty level of a two-person family to meet basic needs. In
addition, Wal-Mart’s health insurance policy only covers 43 percent of its
1.39 million employees. And those covered end up paying a high proportion of
their incomes to cover premiums and
deductibles.
A 2005 study, “The
Effect of Wal-Mart on Local Labor Markets” by David Neumark, also found
that the average Wal-Mart store reduces wages per person by 5 percent for all
workers in the county in which it
operates.
While Wal-Mart clearly profits
from underpaying workers at stores in the United States, its biggest profit
margin comes from exploiting workers in Wal-Mart factories abroad. Workers from
Bangladesh, China, Indonesia, Nicaragua and Swaziland brought a class- action
lawsuit against Wal-Mart in September 2005, asserting that they were often paid
less than the legal minimum wage. Some said they were beaten by managers and
were locked in their factories.
Wal-Mart
workers need more than lawsuits. They need a company-wide union that can fight
for workers’ rights at home and abroad.
Articles copyright 1995-2012 Workers World.
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email:
[email protected]
Subscribe
[email protected]
Support independent news
DONATE