Wal-Mart Won’t Pay Workers Well, But Now Tells Them How to Vote

[Omaha Steve]

Full story: http://blog.aflcio.org/2006/08/16/wal-mart-won%e2%80%99t-pay-workers-well-but-now-tells-them-how-to-vote/

Corporate Greed

Aug 16

E-Mail This Article
Wal-Mart Won’t Pay Workers Well, But Now Tells Them How to Vote

It’s not enough for the world’s largest retailer to contribute millions of dollars to support presidential candidates who will do the bidding of corporations at the expense of America’s workers. Now it turns out, Wal-Mart is trying to tell its employees how to vote—and you can bet its list doesn’t include any candidate who supports working families.

Wal-Mart is mailing 18,000 “voter guides” to its employees in Iowa, state of the first presidential primary in 2008. The guides attack potential candidates for president—all Democrats—for supporting groups that oppose Wal-Mart’s everyday low wages that mean many workers require public assistance to support their families.

In an effort to smear lawmakers who seek to improve Wal-Mart’s treatment of its workers, Wal-Mart vice president of corporate communications, Bob McAdam, says those lawmakers—including Govs. Bill Richardson (N.M.) and Tom Vilsack (Iowa), Sen. Evan Bayh (Ind.) and former Sen. Joe Biden (Del.)—are “playing to a small, increasingly special-interest audience” (made up of millions of working families).

The four are taking part in a 35-city bus tour sponsored by the union-backed organization WakeUpWalMart.com this month to educate elected officials about how Wal-Mart’s low wages, poor benefits and shoddy treatment of its employees damage entire communities.

In his letter to Iowa Wal-Mart workers, regional manager Tom Underwood writes:

We believe it’s wrong for these political candidates to attack Wal-Mart and the transformation underway at our company. We would never suggest to you how to vote, but we have an obligation to tell you when politicians are saying something about your company that isn’t true.

Wal-Mart wants it both ways: The corporate behemoth tries to make it appear as if critics of Wal-Mart are attacking Wal-Mart workers—“after all, you are Wal-Mart,” Underwood writes to Iowa workers, saying such attacks are directed “at your company.” But if workers really had a say in “their” company, it’s a good bet they’d get wages that supported their families and health care benefits they could afford.

[Phredicles]

1. One bit of silver lining: You have to think a lot of employees will

react, "If my boss tells me I should vote for X, I am SO voting for Y."

We can hope, anyway.

[napi21]

2. Well, if that was aimed at their workers, it sure isn'[t going to help

the Pubs! I know quite a few people who work for, or used to work for them, and I have yet to meet ANY who had anything good to say about the co! One of the guys is a former district manager for WM, and while my hubby was working with him, WM was constantly contacting him to come back. Each time he told them where to stuff.......

They only have employee loyalty amoung the top folks at the home office in Ar.

[patrice]

3. It cheers me up to see Unions working on becoming part of the Solution.

Did you see Howard Dean address the Iron Workers yesterday on CSPAN?

It seems like so MUCH is going wrong! The revival and regeneration of Unions is cause for Hope.

[MethuenProgressive]

4. "I owe my soul to the company store"

You load sixteen ton and what do you get?
Another day older and deeper in debt.
St Peter don't you call me, 'cause I can't go,
I owe my soul to the company store.
----

[tanyev]

5. Is it fascism yet?

[cornermouse]

6. Sending voter guides to your employees is just flat out wrong.

They should get in legal trouble for that one. It smacks of coercion, especially if you throw in some overly eager managers/supervisors to put direct daily pressure on their employees.

If you need the job and your employer is telling you who to vote for a sizeable number of them, especially if they're older and easier to pressure are going to cave and do as told.

[WestSeattle2]

9. I don't know how a manager or supervisor would

know how employees voted.

[cornermouse]

11. True.

But the threat is still there. And as odd as it seems, people in low wage jobs are just as afraid, if not more afraid of losing their job as anyone else. Believe me, even without actual knowledge of how individuals vote, this is coercion. I hope Wal-Mart gets hauled into civil and/or criminal court and royally clobbered.

[DocSavage]

14. I had a Union

job for a short time, that bridged a election. I was told that the union would appreciate a vote for candidate A, how is that any different?

[Omaha Steve]

15. Do unions tell their members how to vote? AFL-CIO faq

http://www.aflcio.org/aboutus/faq/

Do unions tell their members how to vote?

Many national unions, central labor councils and state federations—as well as the AFL-CIO—endorse candidates for office and let their members know why they believe the endorsed candidates would do the best job for working families. But no one can tell union members how to vote—that's up to each individual.




Most unions have a commitee that interview candidates for office that are willing to be interviewed. They use the same list of questions for all candidates. Past actions by the candidate can be considered. The commitee then recomends to the membership it's results. The membership vote to endorse by simple majority. Then the endorsment and perhaps funds are released. The union endorses the candidates it feels best represents the union or working man and womans issues.

Walmart is asking it's employees to vote against candidates that want to IMPROVE conditions, wages, and benifits of the Walmart workers. Follow that?

[DocSavage]

20. Explain

The difference between a AFL-CIO voters guide and the one from Wal-Mart. If you think that an industry promoting politicians that will help that idustry is new, well, I have a bridge to sell you. We have a friend that works for Wal-Mart and I asked her today if she was ever told who to vote for. Her answer is was no.

Conversly, to your statement about the unions, wal-mart is endorsing candidates that it feels bests represents them as a business. If it is ok for a Union to do it, to me, it is ok for a business to do it. And there is no difference in my eyes between a union committee and the board of directors of Wal-mat. It is a level playing field, and there is nothing stoping the union from handing out thier voting guides to employees when they are leaving work or by doing a mailing.

[Omaha Steve]

21. small difference

Walmart has been lobbying for many a year. Nothing new there. I won't get a bridge. Look up the dirty 18. Telling employees to votes AGAINST their own best interest is much different.

The union endorses what is good for the workers in it's unit, local, whatever. Walmart is endorsing what is good for the Walmart bottom line and stock. The Walmart worker isn't considered. Keep them low paid with as few benefits as passable. Remember the Walmart leaked memo in the NY Times last year?


Wal-Mart Memo Suggests Ways to Cut Employee Benefit Costs

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/26/business/26walmart.ready.html?ex=1287979200&en=e9a0f5d466bb026e&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

[sandnsea]

24. Workers vote for a union

and they vote for their union representatives. They wouldn't get material from a union if they hadn't voted for it.

Workers don't have a vote in how their employer runs the company, pay or benefits or how much is spent on lobbyists or where products are bought or how much they cost or where the profit goes...

[ieoeja]

25. More Importantly

The problem with Wal-Mart doing this is because of the coercion factor.

"We employ you. We decided who gets raises. We decided who gets fired. We want you to vote for this guy. Get it?"


The Union has no power over an individual's career. When the Union says, "we want you to vote for this guy," where is the threat?

[DocSavage]

26. Yes, they have a vote

they vote with the 10 1/2's on their feet. Unhappy with your pay and benefits...leave. Go find another employer that is willing to compensate you more for your work. Employment is a supply and demand issue. If you are in a field where the demand is high, you get higher pay, able to bargain with benefits ect. If you are a low skilled, in a glut of talent, your bargaining power is greatly diminished.

and BTW, my room mate is a non-voting member of the local teachers union. Joined because it just made life easier. She is inundated in Nov during election cycles with material on who she vote for, most of it from the state offices. Considering that they rarely ever see a executive of the union, I am wondering how the union knows who is best for the teachers in this rural area.

[sandnsea]

27. That's a THREAT, not a vote

The whole complete entire point. You vote for the union so the employer can't threaten to fire you if you don't accept slave wages and no benefits or vote for people whose entire existence revolves around arranging the business community so that's all you ever get.

The rest of your post is such utter bullshit that I'm not even going to respond to it. It makes me sick when I see reaganism brainwashing on DU.

[Omaha Steve]

28. Have her ask...

Her steward those questions, or try going to one meeting and ask.

[cornermouse]

30. If Wal-Mart is all you have on your resume and you're not a

teenager, chances are that you're going to find it a teensy bit difficult to persuade a company with better pay and benefits to hire you. That's why this is so intimidating.

Unions can't fire you, the employer can.

[BlueCaliDem]

7. A vote favoring Wal-Mart is a vote favoring poverty in America. eom

[ulysses]

8. interesting hit list.

Someone should tell Richardson, Vilsack, et al that the DLC corporo-potion seems to be wearing off.

[Sinti]

10. Wal-Mart is found a new way to get corporate welfare

Our tax dollars permit them to make tremendous profits, abuse our workforce, and drive wages down nationwide. Just say no to Wal-Mart.

[Cobalt-60]

12. Yeah, Right

Once I leave the grounds of my particular slave wage pit, the suits don't exist.
I couldn't care less about their claims or wishes.
Waly World is about to learn just how little loyalty chump pay brings them.

[Selatius]

13. If Wal-Mart was "their" company, then it would be a worker co-op

Not an oligarchy where a few own, and everybody else works for the owners in some fashion.

[Mr_Spock]

16. I can imagine this may generate a backlash against WalMart

I can't imagine that this is a good long-term strategy for the company...

[elehhhhna]

22. HELL yes. Backlash is starting right here, right now!

[NobleCynic]

17. I think this is walking the line

I'm not 100% certain it's illegal, but it is borderline enough we'll probably see it in court.

[mopinko]

18. illinois lt governor trying to extend chicago's big box

ordinance to the whole state.

"If they think the secret to success is to drive down the wages of their hard working productive employees, and not pay them health benefits and then tell the state of Illinois, 'Well, through your Medicaid program we expect you to pay the health coverage of our workers.' There's something wrong with that, and we're not going to put up with it," he says.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2457980

[Odin2005]

19. Say hello to your new corporate lords.

The corporatists want everyone else to be thier serfs. If they get thier way you will loose your job if you vote against the pukes.

[elehhhhna]

23. THEY JUST SCREWED THEIR OWN POOCH:

If Corporate is communicating (in writing, yet) the advocay of a particuliar party--let's say Republicans for example-- employees should simply start wear DEM button on their smocks or tee shirts, etc.

Any future adverse employment action, politically relevant or not, could then be called Discrimination (due to personal politics) and automatically trigger an investigation plus expensive legal action.

WALMARTYRS: add DEM flair to your work costumes, NOW!

[Donald Ian Rankin]

29. "We would never suggest to you how to vote"?

So who published this leaflet, then?