A List of Unjust lawsuits Against Wal-Mart

Recently I read an article about a major corporation in Canada, Wal Mart being sued by its franchisee’s for violating the rights of the franchisee. In my opinion, this was not only wrong, it was also totally unjust. The main complaint that the franchisee had, and which I believe should have been the main complaint, is that Wal Mart did not provide adequate training for their franchisees regarding their obligation to refrain from discrimination and harassment. In my opinion, they did not provide adequate warnings as to what they were not permitted to do. Additionally, Wal Mart knew that it was up to the franchisees to police their own shops, and if they did not, they were liable and could be held liable for monetary damages.

In my opinion, this whole suit is nothing more than a publicity stunt by the attorneys that are part of the so-called “suits against retail giant Wal-Mart” that are actually just smoke and mirrors.

This suit is being brought on behalf of the franchisee that is being accused of discrimination, which is a violation of the United States Constitution. In my opinion, lawsuits like this one are nothing more than a way for attorneys to make a living at the cost of innocent people. There are legal limitations on lawsuits such as this, as well as on frivolous ones. If there are any real issues with Wal-Mart management, they need to be addressed in the workplace itself.

One of the most common complaints that I have heard over the years is about the amount of time and money that lawyers spend putting these lawsuits together and then having their client give their version of what happened, and who was at fault.

In my experience, this is simply not the case. Lawyers do not put together a complicated lawsuit, nor do they take hours or even minutes to explain their rationale before presenting it to the judge. I have seen too many times where the defense attorneys presented their “case” to the judge with their opening statement and then spent a few minutes describing the supposed bad behavior of their client.

Another complaint I have heard is that Wal-Mart has a “stroll around the block” policy, whereby their contractors move through their facilities in “stepping over” other employees, and then their supervisors watch them go back to work.

This is obviously an illegal behavior, and the company should pay fines and perhaps have their supervisors fired for being in violation of company policy. The reality is, however, that Wal-Mart has over five hundred stores worldwide, and their walk around the policy does not apply to all of them. Sometimes lawsuits are initiated by employees, and sometimes by customers.

Recently there was a case in California, which you may have read about in the news.

A group of mothers got into a terrible car accident, because their supervisor did not let them call 911, even though it was clear that they were in a life-threatening situation. The mother died in the car, and all the passengers in the car were injured. Although this seems like a terrible accident, Wal-Mart took no action to help the family, because they felt the store was liable for allowing this situation to happen.

My next item on the long list of lawsuits against Wal-Mart is the “bag carry out” policy.

Here, the company reduced the size of its bags so that they could sell them cheaper to retailers. Many of these bags were filled with cheap items that did not need to be sold in large quantities. When the bags went back on the shelves, the merchandise contained enough plastic for only one customer. These actions violated the Federal law requiring minimum quantities to be sold. Wal-Mart was ordered to pay $1.75 million in damages.