This link to a story about Wal-Mart appeared in my inbox today. Shame on Wal-Mart. With billions in corporate profits, they pick on the little people. Regular readers of Frankly Speaking know that I rarely step on the anti-corporate soapbox. I certainly don't bash Wal-Mart, as they've saved me tons over the years. Now I'm wondering if I should continue to shop there . . .
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Wal-Mart Scrooges
This link to a story about Wal-Mart appeared in my inbox today. Shame on Wal-Mart. With billions in corporate profits, they pick on the little people. Regular readers of Frankly Speaking know that I rarely step on the anti-corporate soapbox. I certainly don't bash Wal-Mart, as they've saved me tons over the years. Now I'm wondering if I should continue to shop there . . .
Let's consider this... she works for a company who purchases health insurance for her, is injured (and collects big money as the result of a lawsuit), runs up huge bills for her health insurance plan, and instead of spreading that cost across all of its subscribers, Walmart seeks to protect its other subscribers by chasing down that payout. Isn't that the prudent thing to do?
ReplyDeletePrudent? Maybe. Customary - this is one of the first instances of Wal-Mart doing so. More troubling is the fact that Wal-Mart doesn't explain the fine print. That their "settlement" would be going to the multi-billion dollar conglomerate was completely unexpected and would have drastically affected the litigation and the proposed settlement.
ReplyDeleteWal-Mart is cheap.
I'm Frank Weller and I approved of this message.