This month, Wal-Mart (WMT) is at the end of the defense of another massive class-action lawsuit in California employees when a California judge has a class of 10 000 employees who think that Wal-Mart broke the law when certified refused to the appropriate seat for cashiers, they are requested. Another day, another test group used to use Wal-Mart.
The answer from Wal-Mart for the certification of the latter, not the provision of suitable parameters of the existing laws seats. Instead, the response of the legal department of Wal-Mart, that the class would not have ever certified, and instead should have to present any cashier and combat, an individual pursuit. Logically, it seems that Wal-Mart is not only an action to fight instead Fielding 10,000 individual claims. But probably work as coupons legal action for the world's largest retailer. The fact that the "deal" for the masses, a small percentage will actually take up the offer only played.
Public Wal-Mart is not to deny that he deliberately chose to deny their tellers sitting. Would argument against Wal-Mart assign seats is that the cashiers have to move cars to look inward, storage racks and greeting customers.
So follow this argument by Wal-Mart estimates that if its tellers have the opportunity while you sit at any time in the series, cashier then lose their ability to get well. As if the cashier told him, "No, I will not be available or shelves to greet customers, because since I was a chair, my job is to sit on the stool now all my shift." The weak argument I would say Wal-Mart.
The point at which there seems to be a confusion between the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California law in this case. ADA law requires "reasonable accommodation" applies to "disability" employees. Of course, argue with the increased number of employees, filed legislation related to ADA, the definition of "disability" seems to be more flexible for the day and the court.
However, the law of the State of California in the seats in a retail environment is much broader and not "disability" at all connected. Very simply, without limitation, the California Commission welfare industry order payable 7 says ...
"1. All employees are provided with suitable seats available when the nature of the work allows the use of appropriate seats.
2. If the employee does not exercise in the active duties of his employment and the type of work requires standing, a sufficient number of suitable seats at a reasonable distance to the workplace are established and workers may use these seats do not interfere with the performance of their duties. "
So, disability or not, so that retail California employees should have the opportunity at any time, do not sit does not affect their work. Why? Because California said. Wal-Mart is of the opinion that it should not meet with the rules of the industrial Welfare Commission of California. Why? Since Wal-Mart said.
The correct name of the legal battle should the state with the largest population of the United States against the Company with the largest US entry be Speaking of annual turnover, California, is the net income 97000000000 less $ than $ 113.000.000.000 Wal-Mart collects in the quarter coffers. So California is the right Goliath David Wal-Mart.
To avoid this litigation completely, Wal-Mart have probably bought 10,000 stool its third global supply chain for each around $ 1 But instead decided to Wal-Mart, that their opinion in suitable seats shall prevail over the views of the organizations and legislators in California have. The threat of a fine of $ 100 per employee per billing period since 2007 is not afraid to Wal-Mart. It's just another game hen law Wal-Mart is known to play world.
It will be interesting to see if Wal-Mart is able, once sufficiently its way to the right gaming area to avoid the legal department of the lower class action Calif background support or constrain sanctions to change the state of California to intimidate its rules on Seats employees in total. This is really a man vs. , So it's probably predict battle money fairly easily, how things are going.
In addition to the continuation of the right seat constantly busy Wal-Mart's legal team is trying to fend off a lawsuit by individual employees filed for malicious prosecution and recently against a complaint by a group of warehouse workers for violation of poor working conditions and safety violations. A judge ruled last week, while Wal-Mart do not deal directly camp staff, the company was still called in the application of the framework, as it owns and / or leases warehouse facilities are allegedly poor conditions I work.
Wal-Mart is also the legal offensive with employees, filing lawsuits against groups that working conditions at Wal-Mart and employment policies dare protest. A complaint against United and Food Workers International Union (UCFW) in March and a separate lawsuit filed this month against our group organizers Walmart currently stop after the decision, the protests happening in and around the Wal-Mart Stores and the next Annual General Meeting of Wal-Mart , Wal-Mart executives do not really solve the problems fueling the protests apply. They just want the courts to help them in the vicinity of the demonstrators. That seems right.
And then there is the tragic Bangladesh factory workers burned to death while creating clothes that fill the shelves of Wal-Mart. Bangladesh tragedy is no dispute as much as it is a moral debate. The position of the Wal-Mart is that they are not employees of Wal-Mart, so what the error or responsibility of the system or Wal-Mart. So ... the official position of the ethics of the world's largest retailer is ... What happened in Bangladesh remains in Bangladesh? It is so strange that Wal-Mart has never won a place on the list of most ethical retailer.
In fact, Wal-Mart is not the only major US retailers sued by their employees. This month agreed to (WTSL) Wet Seal chain to pay $ 5,500,000 to settle a claim for racial discrimination was filed by three former black leaders. A wage and labor lawsuit against Russell Stover was also featured in this month by current and former employees Russell Stover they "liberated" wrongly employees must be paid overtime as saying classified. Rite Aid (RAD), seeking employees earlier this year installed on a combination such as Russell Stover according to assistant manager said it as "exempt" were misclassified and remuneration for overtime.
Retailers, large and small, the requirements of employees, large and small, note how each case to do a precedent for all retail companies in the world, the business in the United States, but because Wal-Mart is often accused than any other retail store , the legal department of Wal-Mart has the greatest influence in shaping the labor law for the entire retail industry in the United States. In essence, with each attempt as Wal-Mart, the entire retail industry in the United States defends behind the ethics, philosophy of human resources and employment practices, Wal-Mart is aligned ready to fight.
Depending on what you believe, perceive as being to employees of Wal-Mart (factory workers and employees of its suppliers), this could be a scary thought for the future of retail employment United States have
There are two sides to every court hearing and certainly not all lawsuits against Wal-Mart has filed merit. But the large number of lawsuits against Wal-Mart is to ask whether it is for the dealer to at least reallocate more productive part of their budget law for positive employment practices. Is it not at least a little embarrassing for Wal-Mart executives, the number of people entitled to feel the vengeance of this right, which they experienced while working to include behind a badge of Wal-Mart?
He shares this article | Retail Trending Topics | News and Updates | Letter to the free distribution | References Tell a Day | Retail Pins Pinteresting | Follow us on Twitter | "Like" on Facebook |
No comments:
Post a Comment