Wal-Mart Ethics
In 2007, Walmart reported net sales in the third quarter of $90,000,000,000.
One of their associates (employees) suffered a tragic automobile accident from which she lost her short term memory. Since then her son died in Iraq. Every time she asks about him and is told he was killed she weeps with the anguish of being told for the first time her son is dead.
Although Wal-Mart was notified of a settlement in her case against the other driver, it did not demand any of the almost $500,000 in medical bills paid by its medical insurance. The net settlement to her was far less than her medical bills. Years later it decided to sue its employee to get the money she received. The medical payments were made because it's employee paid premiums but Walmart insisted on a provision that it would get its money back regardless of how badly their employee was hurt or how small the settlement was compared to her injuries.
Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley, who called Debbie Shank's case "unbelievably sad," replied in a statement: "Wal-Mart's plan is bound by very specific rules. ... We wish it could be more flexible in Mrs. Shank's case since her circumstances are clearly extraordinary, but this is done out of fairness to all associates who contribute to, and benefit from, the plan."
Mr. Simley expresses concern for the other associates if this poor woman is given a break. My guess is that if it asked all the associates to pitch in less than a dollar to avoid this terrible action, everyone would agree. The "very specific rules" to which Mr. Simley refers are Walmart Rules and, therefore, can be changed by Walmart in the face of human tragedy. Unfortunately Walmart does not have a department of conscious down the hall from its legal department.
http://www.bailey-law.com/lawyer-attorney-1215790.html
