Wal-Mart files U.S. labor charge against union

Comments (25)
diluded0000 wrote:

So I guess I support what this group is trying to do and I support workers walking off the job if they want to. But if Walmart owns a piece of land, they have the right to run people off if they want to. I don’t like Walmart, but it is their property.

Nov 16, 2012 3:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
forzapista wrote:

Damn these serfs. How dare they demand a living wage and time to spend with their families. They should be thankful Sam gave them a job at all.

Nov 16, 2012 3:30pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Poor Walmart.

Nov 16, 2012 3:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse

. . . Because human greed knows no bounds . . .

Nov 16, 2012 3:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
dill16078 wrote:

Can’t picket for >30 days without filing a petition with the NLRB? Fine. Make it exactly 30. That’s enough to make a dent in their holiday profits.

Nov 16, 2012 4:15pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Dave1968 wrote:

I have faith that walmart worker don’t have the brains to unionize
there to scared of looseing there crappy jobs. how sad.

Nov 16, 2012 4:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sirchen wrote:

Walmart won’t pay a livable wage but they have alot of money to hire lawyers :(. I will boycott Walmart this year.

Nov 16, 2012 4:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

So according to Citizens United, money is a form of free speech and it is protected under the First Amendment.

But according to Walmart, holding up signs – even off their property is…. unfair? How is it unfair? Walmart has a sign on their own property. It says Walmart. I don’t call that practice unfair.

Nov 16, 2012 4:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jertho wrote:

there is a concerted effort to push unions into actions like this in order to demonize them and lower public opinion, they tell you one side of the story. unions are made up of workers who vote on things, it is a democratic process and protects workers rights, it is the only way to ensure that the late 1800′s don’t happen again, people suffered and died for the formation of unions, don’t believe the hype. these companies are bringing this on themselves.

Nov 16, 2012 5:12pm EST  --  Report as abuse
RSaltyDog wrote:

I support what these people are trying to do and WalMart has a right to not have people on their property. These people should picket on the public sidewalk. Personally, I gave up on WalMart when they began their support of China. I don’t need ChinaMart goods. WalMart in their early years were 100% behind America but their patriotism to the US and US made goods was overcome by greed so now they support China.

Nov 16, 2012 5:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Unionize walmart. That will either kill the Walton empire, or it will give us 2.2 million high paying jobs with good benefits.

Either way…. I’m into it. Onward, Unite!

Nov 16, 2012 5:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Neko wrote:

Nearly 80% of WalMart’s employees are paid so badly they qualify for food stamps. The average cost to the taxpayer is $420,000 per store. This lousy-pay-for-work scam WalMart is running is costing the taxpayers some $2.5 billion a year in food stamps and its wretched health care “plan” is costing us $1.2 billion in health care assistance – all for people who have jobs at WalMart. Yet the 6 heirs of Sam Wall are worth $89.5 billion. That is more than the bottom 40% of all American households combined. But rather then pay their “associates” enough to actually live on, they’re suckering the American taxpayer into feeding them and taking care of their medical care, even as the Wall family is profiting from these peoples’ labor. This is the income gap in action. “We don’t think what the unions have is a better deal to offer” Mr. Tovar? No, what the unions have to offer is WalMart having to get off the federal teat and taking on 100% of its payroll expenses and boy won’t that stink for the Wall Heirs? Next thing you know, they’d be having to run the company like their Daddy did, and they’d purely hate that.

Nov 16, 2012 6:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Neko wrote:

Nearly 80% of WalMart’s employees are paid so badly they qualify for food stamps. The average cost to the taxpayer is $420,000 per store. This lousy-pay-for-work scam WalMart is running is costing the taxpayers some $2.5 billion a year in food stamps and its wretched health care “plan” is costing us $1.2 billion in health care assistance – all for people who have jobs at WalMart. Yet the 6 heirs of Sam Wall are worth $89.5 billion. That is more than the bottom 40% of all American households combined. But rather then pay their “associates” enough to actually live on, they’re suckering the American taxpayer into feeding them and taking care of their medical care, even as the Wall family is profiting from these peoples’ labor. This is the income gap in action. “We don’t think what the unions have is a better deal to offer” Mr. Tovar? No, what the unions have to offer is WalMart having to get off the federal teat and taking on 100% of its payroll expenses and boy won’t that stink for the Wall Heirs? Next thing you know, they’d be having to run the company like their Daddy did, and they’d purely hate that.

Nov 16, 2012 6:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Harry079 wrote:

Wal-Mart has already destroyed tens of thousands of Mom & Pop small businesses and now they want to kill off the people who used to work and shop at them before Wal-Mart came to town.

Nov 16, 2012 7:00pm EST  --  Report as abuse

@AlkalineState

When are you going to get a job, kid?

Nov 16, 2012 7:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sicandtired1 wrote:

These guys really don’t get it. These won’t be high paying jobs because the rest of the industry doesn’t pay particularly well. All these employees are asking for is to be represented in disputes over working conditions and overtime pay etc. If the Waltons had good sense , they’d go along and organize their labor force and negotiate wages and working conditions.This effort by the Unions will cost them far more to litigate than it would to simply organize and they’ll have to Unionize in the end anyway. Funny how having a ton of money clouds your thinking.

Nov 16, 2012 7:55pm EST  --  Report as abuse
imright12 wrote:

As a family, the Waltons are worth an estimated $60 billion – more than the bottom 41.5% of all American families combined. I think they can afford to pay their workers a decent wage and benefits. Can they get any greedier? No wonder they support Republicans.

Nov 16, 2012 7:55pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ktyler wrote:

The first thing a new Walmart employee is shown is a short film of how horrible unions are. Dozens of workplace policies are there to prevent this sort of talk. They actively retaliate against union sympathisers. It elevates people to management at seemingly random and provides them with incentive to oppose unionization, while the non-managerial workers (the wide majority) are at their mercy. Point is, Walmart is fighting against its workers every single minute of every day. It is not simply the workers don’t want the protection of a union. It is because after 50 years of far-right, rich-beholden Republicans in our government our labor laws are toothless and the only way the workers will get a reasonable work situation will be for the unions to overcome the fearmongering and intimidation carried out by the company and its store management.

Walmart is among the worst union-busters in America today. Sam Walton and company belong in the 1800s, not the 2000s.

Nov 16, 2012 8:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jijijijiji wrote:

I’m sure the UFCW is looking forward to killing WalMart, just like unions killed Hostess. Unions don’t care about the poor schlubs they claim to represent – it’s all about money in union boss pockets.

Nov 17, 2012 11:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
crazyredemu wrote:

I work at wal-mart, if they went union I would quit, I have self respect.

Nov 18, 2012 12:46am EST  --  Report as abuse
texascnsrvtv wrote:

I say fire them all, and hire people that will actually do the work you want.

Nov 18, 2012 8:53am EST  --  Report as abuse
CordaydArmont wrote:

Hostess was a good brand. So is Walmart.

Nov 18, 2012 10:36am EST  --  Report as abuse
XRayTech wrote:

Since when did a job at Walmart become an acceptable career choice to support a family??? In my view, we are again having to pay extra for stupid and or lazy ppl. If you want a job that pays well and has benefits GO TO SCHOOL! Knowing how to stock shelves, run a cash register, and fold clothes doesn’t mean you should be making 15.00 bucks an hour!

Nov 18, 2012 10:52am EST  --  Report as abuse
Mercel wrote:

Walmart needs to get Hillary back on their board to help keep the union out.She did a great job in the past of union busting.

Nov 18, 2012 11:57am EST  --  Report as abuse
Overcast451 wrote:

I’ll shop there just to go against what the union says; although normally, I wouldn’t think of shopping there..

Unions are worse than corporations anymore, so don’t try the “poor worker” spin with them, lol.

Last “union president” I knew, had more gold rings than a pawn shop and told jokes that would have made Dr. King roll over in his grave – and he was president of a union for the federal government…

Nov 19, 2012 9:39am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.