- Sep 27, 2005
- 1,171
- 14
- 0
Fearing unions, Wal-Mart tells employees ?how to vote?
Posted August 1st, 2008 at 10:35 am
Share This | Spotlight | Permalink
About a month ago, Newsweek reported that Wal-Mart, after years of embracing conservative politics, was beginning to draw some criticism from the right. In particular, some conservatives believe the retail behemoth was ?being too nice to unions.?
It seemed like an odd complaint, given that Wal-Mart has been vehemently anti-labor since, well, forever. But in case there were any lingering doubts, consider this front-page report in the Wall Street Journal. (thanks to R.P. for the heads-up)
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is mobilizing its store managers and department supervisors around the country to warn that if Democrats win power in November, they?ll likely change federal law to make it easier for workers to unionize companies ? including Wal-Mart.
In recent weeks, thousands of Wal-Mart store managers and department heads have been summoned to mandatory meetings at which the retailer stresses the downside for workers if stores were to be unionized.
According to about a dozen Wal-Mart employees who attended such meetings in seven states, Wal-Mart executives claim that employees at unionized stores would have to pay hefty union dues while getting nothing in return, and may have to go on strike without compensation. Also, unionization could mean fewer jobs as labor costs rise.
A Wal-Mart customer-service supervisor from Missouri, who attended a mandatory meeting of store employees, told the WSJ, ?The meeting leader said, ?I am not telling you how to vote, but if the Democrats win, this bill will pass and you won?t have a vote on whether you want a union.? I am not a stupid person. They were telling me how to vote.?
Yeah, I think that?s a safe bet.
David Tovar, a Wal-Mart spokesman, told the WSJ, ?If anyone representing Wal-Mart gave the impression we were telling associates how to vote, they were wrong and acting without approval.? Tovar added, however, that Wal-Mart feels a responsibility to ?educate? employees about the dangers of unionization.
I see. So, Wal-Mart instructs store managers and supervisors to go to mandatory meetings, at which point they?re told that unions will cost them money, and those Democrats are pro-union. But that isn?t about telling anyone how they should vote. Riiiiight.
Wal-Mart may be walking a fine legal line by holding meetings with its store department heads that link politics with a strong antiunion message. Federal election rules permit companies to advocate for specific political candidates to its executives, stockholders and salaried managers, but not to hourly employees. While store managers are on salary, department supervisors are hourly workers.
At its core, these election-year efforts are targeting the Employee Free Choice Act, championed by unions and most Democratic lawmakers, which would likely boost union membership through a ?card check? system.
The bill was crafted by labor as a response to more aggressive opposition by companies to union-organizing activity. The AFL-CIO and individual unions such as the United Food and Commercial Workers have promised to make passage of the new labor law their No. 1 mission after the November election.
First introduced in 2003, the bill came to a vote last year and sailed through the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives, but was blocked by a filibuster in the Senate and faced a veto threat by the White House. The bill was taken off the floor, and its backers pledged to reintroduce it when they could get more support.
The November election could bring that extra support in Congress, as well as the White House if Sen. Obama is elected and Democrats extend their control in the Senate. Sen. Obama co-sponsored the legislation, which also is known as ?card check,? and has said several times he would sign it into law if elected president. Sen. John McCain, the likely Republican presidential nominee, opposes the Employee Free Choice Act and voted against it last year.
EFCA, of course, has Wal-Mart feeling panicky. The result, apparently, is leaning on store employees to vote Republican.
As if you needed another reason to not shop at Wal-Mart?.
Posted August 1st, 2008 at 10:35 am
Share This | Spotlight | Permalink
About a month ago, Newsweek reported that Wal-Mart, after years of embracing conservative politics, was beginning to draw some criticism from the right. In particular, some conservatives believe the retail behemoth was ?being too nice to unions.?
It seemed like an odd complaint, given that Wal-Mart has been vehemently anti-labor since, well, forever. But in case there were any lingering doubts, consider this front-page report in the Wall Street Journal. (thanks to R.P. for the heads-up)
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is mobilizing its store managers and department supervisors around the country to warn that if Democrats win power in November, they?ll likely change federal law to make it easier for workers to unionize companies ? including Wal-Mart.
In recent weeks, thousands of Wal-Mart store managers and department heads have been summoned to mandatory meetings at which the retailer stresses the downside for workers if stores were to be unionized.
According to about a dozen Wal-Mart employees who attended such meetings in seven states, Wal-Mart executives claim that employees at unionized stores would have to pay hefty union dues while getting nothing in return, and may have to go on strike without compensation. Also, unionization could mean fewer jobs as labor costs rise.
A Wal-Mart customer-service supervisor from Missouri, who attended a mandatory meeting of store employees, told the WSJ, ?The meeting leader said, ?I am not telling you how to vote, but if the Democrats win, this bill will pass and you won?t have a vote on whether you want a union.? I am not a stupid person. They were telling me how to vote.?
Yeah, I think that?s a safe bet.
David Tovar, a Wal-Mart spokesman, told the WSJ, ?If anyone representing Wal-Mart gave the impression we were telling associates how to vote, they were wrong and acting without approval.? Tovar added, however, that Wal-Mart feels a responsibility to ?educate? employees about the dangers of unionization.
I see. So, Wal-Mart instructs store managers and supervisors to go to mandatory meetings, at which point they?re told that unions will cost them money, and those Democrats are pro-union. But that isn?t about telling anyone how they should vote. Riiiiight.
Wal-Mart may be walking a fine legal line by holding meetings with its store department heads that link politics with a strong antiunion message. Federal election rules permit companies to advocate for specific political candidates to its executives, stockholders and salaried managers, but not to hourly employees. While store managers are on salary, department supervisors are hourly workers.
At its core, these election-year efforts are targeting the Employee Free Choice Act, championed by unions and most Democratic lawmakers, which would likely boost union membership through a ?card check? system.
The bill was crafted by labor as a response to more aggressive opposition by companies to union-organizing activity. The AFL-CIO and individual unions such as the United Food and Commercial Workers have promised to make passage of the new labor law their No. 1 mission after the November election.
First introduced in 2003, the bill came to a vote last year and sailed through the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives, but was blocked by a filibuster in the Senate and faced a veto threat by the White House. The bill was taken off the floor, and its backers pledged to reintroduce it when they could get more support.
The November election could bring that extra support in Congress, as well as the White House if Sen. Obama is elected and Democrats extend their control in the Senate. Sen. Obama co-sponsored the legislation, which also is known as ?card check,? and has said several times he would sign it into law if elected president. Sen. John McCain, the likely Republican presidential nominee, opposes the Employee Free Choice Act and voted against it last year.
EFCA, of course, has Wal-Mart feeling panicky. The result, apparently, is leaning on store employees to vote Republican.
As if you needed another reason to not shop at Wal-Mart?.
