Bush Labor Department Puts Wal-Mart in "Privileged Position"

[EC]

True to form, the Bush administration is making sure that its corporate friends are not too inconvenienced on those rare occasions when they are found to be breaking federal laws, especially if it only involves child labor issues.

Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer agreed to pay $135,540 to settle federal charges that it violated child labor laws in Connecticut, Arkansas and New Hampshire. As part of the agreement, revealed yesterday after it was secretly signed in January, the Labor Department agreed "to give Wal-Mart 15 days' notice before the Labor Department investigates any other 'wage and hour' accusations, like failure to pay minimum wage or overtime."


The violations involved workers under age 18 operating dangerous machinery, including cardboard balers and chain saws. Consistent with its new P.R. role models -- the industries that brought us lung cancer, underage drinking and Bhopal -- Wal-Mart reached and agreements to pay the fine, although the company denied any wrongdoing.

The agreement left Congressman George Miller (D-CA) rather angry:

http://www.nathannewman.org/laborblog/archive/002183.shtml
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/12/national/12wage.html?ex=1265864400&en=12fa6925c49373e3&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland
http://www.nathannewman.org/laborblog/archive/002189.shtml
http://www.nathannewman.org/laborblog/archive/002185.shtml

[paineinthearse]

1. This topic hit DU 2/14

And promptly slipped into the archives.

See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3113372#3113448

& a parallel post in the Connecticut forum (still alive, but zero responses).

[Tux]

2. Why?

Why are corporations so scared of following laws? Why must citizens but not corporations? If they want special treatment as a person, they must except responsibility as a person.

[Solon]

3. Our laws are designed on two contradictory premises....

One is that the Corporation is legally a person, but at the same time, it is legally obligated to only be concerned with the bottom line and shareholder's stock. In other words, a Corporation is a "resident" of this nation that is legally obligated to violate any law that contradicts with its sole purpose, the bottom line. That is what is fucked up. There are CAPS on the amount of fines a government can levy against a corporation when they break the law, so corporations will do a cost/benefit analysis, and see whether following the law or not is more beneficial to them. More times than not, they will face the fines because it is cheaper than doing things the legal or ethical way.

[koopie57]

4. why would a conservative support walmart?

it seems to go against everything they hold dear. For instance, a walmart employee making the barest of minimun wage had the day off. His friend drives him down to the food stamp office where tax payers support his family and their needs, then on the way home to their low income housing where we are supporting those needs he gets into a car accident and is brought to the hosptial were, cuz he has no insurance, we are paying for his medical care. Then, he is out of work and since he has no savings we are paying for all his needs. It doesn't made sense? or am I missing something?

[B Calm]

5. They are anti Union and that's all that matters for cheap labor

cons!

[alphafemale]

6. The re-emergence of "Debtor's Prisons" is not far off...

In the * vision of a "Perfect World" for the 1%'ers.