Wal-Mart will pay $40m to workers
Settlement is biggest in Bay State history

By Dave Copeland, Globe Correspondent | December 3, 2009

Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world’s largest retailer, has agreed to pay
$40 million to as many as 87,500 current and former employees in
Massachusetts, the largest wage-and-hour class-action settlement in the
state’s history.

The class-action lawsuit, filed in 2001, accused the retailer of denying
workers rest and meal breaks, refusing to pay overtime, and manipulating
time cards to lower employees’ pay. Under terms of the agreement, which
was filed in Middlesex Superior Court yesterday by the employees’
attorneys, any person who worked for Wal-Mart between August 1995 and
the settlement date will receive a payment of between $400 and $2,500,
depending on the number of years worked, with the average worker
receiving a check for $734.

“The magnitude is large - it’s bigger than most settlements paid in
wage-and-hour cases,’’ said Justin M. Swartz of New York-based law firm
Outten & Golden LLP, who has handled similar cases, including a pending
case against Wal-Mart. “But you would expect it to be bigger since
Wal-Mart is the biggest retailer.’’

Under the terms of the settlement, neither side is allowed to comment.
But in an affidavit filed with the settlement, the lead counsel for the
employees, Philip Gordon of Boston’s Gordon Law Group, said the accord
“dwarfs settlements of similar class actions against Wal-Mart across the
country.’’

“For many employers, this settlement will serve as a reminder to take
the payment of earned wages and benefits seriously. For many other
employers, it will provide comfort that all Massachusetts businesses
must operate on a level playing field,’’ Gordon wrote in the affidavit.
“But most importantly, for employees of Wal-Mart, it finally pays them
their earned wages and it puts in place systems and processes to ensure
that abuses like those alleged never happen again.’’

The Massachusetts case is similar to many others that have been brought
against the retail behemoth by employees across the country, most
alleging that the Bentonville, Ark.-based company violated laws by
requiring employees to work through breaks, to work beyond their regular
shifts, and similar practices. Wal-Mart has denied the allegations, but
in December, the merchant agreed to pay up to $640 million to settle 63
federal and state class-action wage-and-hour lawsuits.

The Massachusetts case, which was not part of that settlement, was
initially filed eight years ago on behalf of 67,000 people who worked
for Wal-Mart in Massachusetts between 1995 and 2005. The two plaintiffs,
Elaine Polion and Crystal Salvas, left Wal-Mart years ago. The case has
been moving back and forth for years, first being certified as a class
action, being almost thrown out as a trial date approached in 2006, and
then being revived on appeal and sent back to trial as a class action by
the state Supreme Judicial Court two years ago.

This isn’t the first wage case settlement for Wal-Mart in Massachusetts.
In September, the retailer settled an investigation of violations of
state meal-break policies, agreeing to pay $3 million. The state
attorney general investigated after workers reported they were required
to work though meal breaks, take breaks after having worked more than
six hours, or to cut such breaks short, according to the state.

After some preliminary skirmishes over the terms of the latest
Massachusetts settlement, the lawsuit was set to go to court this week,
but lawyers for the company and employees alerted the court they would
be filing settlement papers instead. In the settlement affidavit, Gordon
said his firm had begun tracking down as many former Wal-Mart employees
as possible.

A phone number could not be located for Polion, and a phone listing for
Salvas was disconnected. Workers approached yesterday by The Boston
Globe at a Wal-Mart parking lot in Raynham declined to comment on the
settlement.

Sean Blais, who worked at a Wal-Mart in Weymouth for a year before he
was fired for texting at work in July, said he thought the accord “seems
reasonable.’’ Blais, 19, said while he did not notice any discrepancies
in his pay, he routinely had trouble scheduling breaks during his shift.

“You got a 15-minute, unpaid break, but you usually had to fight to get
it,’’ he said.

David Reis, chairman of law firm Howard Rice’s labor and employment
practice in San Francisco, said Wal-Mart has probably already addressed
the alleged practices in the suit. “Given that this suit was filed more
than eight years ago, I would expect that any alleged suspect pay
practices have been remedied by Wal-Mart long ago and that this
settlement is simply a calculated business decision that it’s cheaper
and easier for the company to resolve the case and move forward than to
continue paying its lawyers to fight it,’’ said Reis.

Prior to the latest Wal-Mart settlement, the biggest wage-and-hour case
payout in Massachusetts was $14.5 million last year by Canyon Ranch. In
that lawsuit, the owners of the Lenox spa were accused of not passing
along gratuities to workers. The settlement affected 600 workers.

On Dec 7, 10:16*am, "H the K (I post with a Mac)"
wrote:
Scott Dickson wrote:
I know a lot of people that Walmart has ****ed-over.

I'm sure you do.

--
If you are flajim, herring, loogy, GC boater, johnson, topbassdog, rob,
achmed the sock puppet,or one of a half dozen others, you're wasting
your time by trying to *communicate* with me through rec.boats, because,
well, you are among the permanent members of my dumbfoch dumpster, and I
don't read the vomit you post, except by accident on occasion. As
always, have a nice, simple-minded day.

Nice try, asswipe spoofer. Thunderbird still shows up.... What a
****tard...LMAO!!!

This post smells like Rob.

On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 07:27:42 -0800 (PST), FishWisher
wrote:


With 1,500,000 employees and the largest retailer in history, of
course they're going to be in the news for negatives. Such is the duty
of your MSM in service to the union thugs who keep hammering Walmart.

Walmart does, in fact, obey the law. They have their occasional goof
managers who break the law regarding employees, but by and large
Walmart abides by the law. They can't afford not to.

The main issue with Walmart is their refusal to buckle under to union
thugs. Good for Walmart! They don't have to buckle and I hope they
never do. So the union thugs keep up the endless moaning and bitching
about Walmart.

Build a Walmart anywhere - and hundreds of people will be employed,
thousands will patronize the store and millions of dollars will be
spent. Dozens of union thugs will whine their asses off.

Oh... and the endless whining about mom and pop stores going under is
bogus, too. It's called progress! I suppose we should all whine and
moan about the buggy whip makers who Ford put out of work?! That makes
as much sense.

The more anti-Wal Mart **** I see or hear, the more I like Wal Mart.
--

John H

On Dec 7, 4:46*pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 07:27:42 -0800 (PST), FishWisher



wrote:

With 1,500,000 employees and the largest retailer in history, of
course they're going to be in the news for negatives. Such is the duty
of your MSM in service to the union thugs who keep hammering Walmart.

Walmart does, in fact, obey the law. They have their occasional goof
managers who break the law regarding employees, but by and large
Walmart abides by the law. They can't afford not to.

The main issue with Walmart is their refusal to buckle under to union
thugs. Good for Walmart! They don't have to buckle and I hope they
never do. So the union thugs keep up the endless moaning and bitching
about Walmart.

Build a Walmart anywhere - and hundreds of people will be employed,
thousands will patronize the store and millions of dollars will be
spent. Dozens of union thugs will whine their asses off.

Oh... and the endless whining about mom and pop stores going under is
bogus, too. It's called progress! I suppose we should all whine and
moan about the buggy whip makers who Ford put out of work?! That makes
as much sense.

The more anti-Wal Mart **** I see or hear, the more I like Wal Mart.
--

John H

You would. They sell Squeezy Bacon????

Scott Dickson wrote:
On Dec 7, 4:46 pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 07:27:42 -0800 (PST), FishWisher



wrote:

With 1,500,000 employees and the largest retailer in history, of
course they're going to be in the news for negatives. Such is the duty
of your MSM in service to the union thugs who keep hammering Walmart.
Walmart does, in fact, obey the law. They have their occasional goof
managers who break the law regarding employees, but by and large
Walmart abides by the law. They can't afford not to.
The main issue with Walmart is their refusal to buckle under to union
thugs. Good for Walmart! They don't have to buckle and I hope they
never do. So the union thugs keep up the endless moaning and bitching
about Walmart.
Build a Walmart anywhere - and hundreds of people will be employed,
thousands will patronize the store and millions of dollars will be
spent. Dozens of union thugs will whine their asses off.
Oh... and the endless whining about mom and pop stores going under is
bogus, too. It's called progress! I suppose we should all whine and
moan about the buggy whip makers who Ford put out of work?! That makes
as much sense.
The more anti-Wal Mart **** I see or hear, the more I like Wal Mart.
--

John H

You would. They sell Squeezy Bacon????


Herring learned to treat people like crap when he was in the army, and
when wal-mart does it, too, it gives him a feeling in his loins.