Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Rights and Liberties

Celebs Ignore 'Green' Wal-Mart's Worker Oppression

By Evan Derkacz, AlterNet. Posted October 20, 2006.


Prominent liberals are lining up to praise Wal-Mart, and the company can thank its recently hired Democratic operative, Leslie Dach.
Advertisement

When Wal-Mart hired Leslie Dach, "a prominent Democratic operative," earlier this year, Wal-Mart critics worried that the world's richest retailer would get just what it paid for.

Next Monday evening, when Wal-Mart CEO H. Lee Scott Jr. is honored by a raft of lifelong liberals "for his commitment to environmental sustainability," it'll be that much harder to argue that Dach wasn't an excellent acquisition for the global behemoth. In fact, it'll be its biggest public relations coup since Al Gore's green patina graced the offices of Wal-Mart executives this summer.

Monday's event is to be hosted by Weinstein brothers, lifelong Democrats and producers of the most successful documentary in the history of cinema, Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11." Among the other prominent guests scheduled to attend are both PBS journalist Charlie Rose and Gore buddy and Democratic heavy Bob Pitmann. Musical accompaniment will be provided by the Eagles, led by singer/songwriter Don Henley, whose history as a champion of the environment pads his bulging resume as one of the best-selling recording artists in history.

So what's wrong with all this? Why shouldn't these liberal bigwigs clink some glasses to changes in Wal-Mart's environmental practices, described by Grist's David Roberts as: "substantive," and, "well beyond what would be necessary for a successful greenwashing campaign"?

One of the more compelling answers, ironically, can be found in a story on Tuesday's front page: the workers. Cindy Zeldin's story tracked the latest leaked memo, detailing "plans to limit its 2007 health insurance options for new hires to two choices, both high deductible plans, in an effort to squeeze benefit costs." Zeldin is not hopeful for the health of future Wal-Mart employees and their families, calling the plan "a dagger through the heart of the very concept of insurance."

And speaking of workers, at the very moment that Monday's invite sailed into my mailbox, Wal-Mart department managers Guillermo Vasquez and Rosie Larosa were leading about 200 employees out of a Wal-Mart Supercenter in Hialeah Gardens, Florida. According to Business Week, the employees were "shouting 'We want justice' and criticizing the company's recent policies as 'inhuman.'"

These are by no means isolated incidents. Apart from our Republican-dominated federal government, no single entity boasts more lawsuits against it than Wal-Mart. Class action suits in motion at the moment read like a pamphlet from the nascent worker's rights movements of the early 20th century. They include: gender discrimination, racial discrimination, unpaid wages, exploitation of undocumented workers, pressure to work overtime or off the clock, and denied lunch breaks. And those are just the class action suits.

Lest anyone think these claims frivolous, juries are siding with workers more often than not. The most recent decision, handed down earlier this month, awarded nearly $80 million in damages to Pennsylvania workers.

Given the ongoing burdens shouldered by the Wal-Mart worker, it's downright shocking that the corporation's CEO is being praised and in such a high-profile manner by a group with liberal chops to burn.

Asked about the event, Robert Greenwald, the director of "Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price," lamented: "If only Wal-Mart would spend as much money trying to improve the working conditions for employees, the lack of health care and sweatshops around the world as they do on self-congratulatory P.R. advisers and self-serving events."

Much like diplomacy in every realm, some combination of carrots and sticks is required. Waiting until Wal-Mart is the perfect global citizen before praising its baby steps -- no matter how self-serving they may be -- is ludicrous. By the same token, lavishing the head of a deeply problematic corporation with praise for having made important strides in one area is unconscionable. Not to mention the fact that giving away the carrot farm for some improvements, despite Wal-Mart's unrepentant policies toward workers, is a poke in the eye to the workers themselves.

The issue of unjust labor practices at Wal-Mart and elsewhere isn't news to the liberals lending their names and reputations to Scott's recognition dinner. Don Henley, to take just one example, has testified before two senate committees as the cofounder of the Recording Artists' Coalition, which protects musicians' rights against standard industry practices. Were the RIAA, which represents the industry's interests, to receive accolades from high profile liberals for going green, while Henley went to bat for the artists, it might not sit too well with the artist.

Unless Henley pulls a Colbert and retools his pop hit "Dirty Laundry," to ensure that the tens of thousands of struggling employees aren't forgotten, this episode will be seen by many as a betrayal of the liberal values many attendees claim to hold.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: wal-mart, hollywood, liberals

Evan Derkacz an AlterNet editor and writer of PEEK, the blog of blogs.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
attone
Posted by: rsaxto on Oct 20, 2006 2:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wal-Mart needs to attone for ALL of its antiworker activities not just do a few pro-environment good deeds. The environment really needs its good deeds and Wal-Mart employees really need good health care, etc. Incidentally, The Pentagon should rename itself War-Mart.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

enviro award for WalMart?
Posted by: edith on Oct 20, 2006 3:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm choking. Green award for a company with huge stores and parking lots that transform fields, as was done twicenear my home (two WalMarts withing 10 miles of each other(!), to a concrete desert of cars, pollution, ugliness and commercial activity? When a WalMart is built, other businesses do plan to open in the same or adjacent shopping areas, so the sprawl is even worse.

It's not just the physical pollution and of course the worker exploitation. The WalMart culture destroys smaller, often family-owned businesses. So organic "towns" vanish in favor of amorphous auto and road defined "malls" and shopping strips. Trees and fields swapped for concrete so Red China and its American peddlers can make a buck.

And the skids are greased by WalMart's lawyers and lobbyists like the Clintons and the big developers who control local politics in the suburbs that dominate American life today.

If Orwell were alive today, he'd have Wal Mart featured in some chapters of 1984.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: enviro award for WalMart? Posted by: staringatthesun
What's new, the fake libs have ignored and even opposed HEMP for 70 years !
Posted by: SDres11 on Oct 20, 2006 5:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So why be surprised when they get sucker-punched by Walmart again !

Oh, and some of them bought into the Paris Hilton "tax cuts" that the Waltons BRIBED them with !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wal Mart's 'Green' Democrats
Posted by: mylesh on Oct 20, 2006 5:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm glad AlterNet has the courage to print the obvious that the Democrats are as paid off by corporations as their Republican counterparts. The irony here is that opposite the page on the article, and opposite this posting, is an advertisement to elect Democrats rather than having 'them' steal it.
What's the difference? Republicans steal. Democrats pander. And both ignore the workers.
Myles Hoenig,
campaign manager for Ed Boyd, Green Party candidate for governor (Maryland)
www.edboydforgovernor.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A disquieting incident
Posted by: ggmurray on Oct 20, 2006 6:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This week a new Super Walmart opened in my town. Since I have long appreciated shopping at the now-closed regular Walmart in the next town, I showed up on opening day to see what the new store could offer.

It's a good thing I have my own electric scooter to get around, because the store is immense! Almost every kind of errand you could think of, except maybe a quiet place to rest and pray, is offered there. The sheer stimulation of all those products and services is nearly overwhelming. Still, I did find a few things I was looking for.

After purchasing the items, I was on my way out, when I passed by a hair salon. How convenient. I did need a haircut, and the price was very reasonable, so I stopped and got one. Turns out the salon - and all the little shops along the outer wall - are separate companies that sublet space from Walmart. My hairdresser said she likes her company and that the benefits are good. I was glad to hear this.

One thing though. There was an older woman also getting her hair done and I couldn't help overhearing her conversation with her hairdresser. She just had surgery the day before - don't know what kind - was employed by this same Super Walmart we were in, and was going back to work the next day! I thought that was odd, and silently hoped it wasn't because of some Walmart policy about sick days. You never know.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A disquieting incident Posted by: BlueStateBitch
» RE: A disquieting incident Posted by: leno87
Someone has to pay for the "green-washing" of Wal-Mart
Posted by: fork on Oct 20, 2006 6:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Surely you didn't think it was going to come out of profits or the pockets of executives.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

perspective
Posted by: mwildfire on Oct 20, 2006 7:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wal-Mart IS doing significant things for the environment, and that IS extremely important. Praise is due. But it should never be uttered in a complete sentence without "while at the same time, they are screwing their employees and that is unacceptable..."
Last night I heard a rumor that Wal-Mart managers are forbidden from associating with ordinary workers, even on their own time. Is that true?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Your DLC Dems in Action
Posted by: NoPCZone on Oct 20, 2006 7:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Giving Wal-Mart a pat on the back for making some token environmental changes that will save them money is kind of like congratulating an abusive husband because he only beats his wife 2 days a week now instead of 5.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who cares?
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Oct 20, 2006 7:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'll tell you that one of the biggest problems the 'left' has is constantly trying to advance their causes throught the cult of personality these 'celebrities' attempt to maintain. Instead of trying logic, educated spokespeople, or marketing we tie our ideas to 'celebrities' who often are not that smart, change opinions based on whatever is 'hot' at the moment, frequently have mental-stability problems, and can quickly become a 'has been'. Its a crazy strategy if anyone wants to make long-term gains. Yes, it provides quick, cheap new stories but they fade quickly and the people we are trying to convince look at most of the 'celebrities' and think 'if that idiot supports it why should I' 'he can't even pick a good script'.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» It's not OUR strategy Posted by: SteveB
For Wal Mart the bottom line is everything
Posted by: sausage on Oct 20, 2006 8:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So Wal mart's going "green" is it? So what's the meaning behind this? Is H. Lee Scott transforming from a button-downed CEO to hemp cloth clad and sandal wearing eco-hippie?

No. It's good for Wal Mart's bottom line.

If re-cycling and the efficient use of energy can reduce Wal Mart's expenditures, so much the better. If going "green" means a decline in Wal Mart's overall corporate liabilities, then H. Lee Scott is all for going "green."

And if going "green" is good for Wal Mart's corporate image, then H. Lee Scott is all for it. And if Wal Mart can entice a few tie-dyed greenies through its frontdoors because it has gone, to great fanfare through the megaphone of a complient media, "green," then H. Lee Scott is all for it.

Corporations going "green" to bouy the bottom line is one of the great leitmotifs of eco-politician/saleman/investor Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Going "green" at the corporate level translates into less red ink on the balance sheet.

So going "green" for H. Lee Scott simply means more greenbacks for him and the Walton family, and Wal Mart's biggest shareholders. I can well imagine that the liberal celebrities alluded to are counted among those shareholders.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Walmart greenwashing; British Petroleum greenwashing...
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Oct 20, 2006 8:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Everyone's doing it. Recall all those "BP Solar" ads? BP - making a new energy revolution? They had ads in National Geographic claiming that "It's time to go on a low-carbon diet".

See the Center for Media and Democracy, publishers of PRWatch: http://www.prwatch.org/node/5082

"BP is the most successful oil company at greenwashing its own image. Unfortunately for BP, the recent news about its massive oil leak in Alaska and the shutting down of its corrosive pipelines have revealed the truth -- it really is all about oil profits. "

The same is true for Walmart - where do they get their products from? Indonesia, China, Mexico, Central American banana republics - all produced in sweatshops at pay rates denominated in pennies, with no environmental protections for the local area and no human rights for the slaves/employees.

Recall Bush's pre-2000 statements: "I want to be the environmental President". The shills in the corporate media just nod and repeat - like trained parrots.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Chrade
Posted by: willymack on Oct 20, 2006 9:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Arkansas is a slave state. Not officialy, but the mind set that allowed people to think it was OK to enslave other human beings is alive and well there. The family that controls Wal-Mart is an anachronism-a throwback to the bad old days of slavery. They haven't the slighest intention of doling out any money for ANYTHING that doesn't earn them a handsome profit. Fair and equitable treatment of their employees, the enviornment, or the public good are not only the LAST things on their minds, they're not on their minds at all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If Walmart really wanted to help...
Posted by: ggmurray on Oct 20, 2006 10:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It would join with the millions of Americans who are longing for a universal health care plan, and put it's muscle behind every legislative effort toward that end.

Personally, I don't think every company should be on its own to figure this one out. Everyone should help to pay for it, companies included, but this is too big to handle except in a big way - like Medicare.

I still believe government is capable of designing a good health care program - when its heart and mind are in gear. Other countries have figured this out, so we know it's not rocket science, just political will.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wal-Mart should NOT provide health insurance
Posted by: theracerace on Oct 20, 2006 3:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I know that the people who support forcing corporations to provide their employees heath insurance are well intended. However, these programs are the worst thing for the cost of healthcare and make it impossible to generate sufficient public support of for national health insurance.

These awful program also help to enslave employees by restricting their ability to leave a job. Sure, there's COBRA, but it is super expensive doesn't last forever. Even if you can keep your coverage, you'll get screwed by your pre-existing conditions at some point when moving to a new job.

By forcing employers to give your employees health insurance you only empower the employer. Honestly, I don't know why this was ever made a part of employment compensation. Why don't they offer car insurance and maybe pay for your living quarters - taking the cost out of your paycheck just like they do in the Chinese factories that make all of Wal-Mart's crap.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Good point. Posted by: Lincoln fan
It's Not Either / Or
Posted by: Cybern1 on Oct 20, 2006 4:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People, governments and businesses sometimes do the right thing for the wrong reasons. Credit is still due for doing the right thing. If Wal-Mart, or anyone else, does something good, which also brings them profit; fine. They should be given credit for what they do right and criticized for what they do wrong. What they do right doesn't lessen what they do wrong, and what they do wrong doesn't lessen what the do right.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» WalMart is Like a Pimple Posted by: edith
And speaking of workers...
Posted by: nihilozero on Oct 20, 2006 7:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, USA workers have it so tough -- they can hardly afford many of the plastic trinkets that people, sometimes children, are forced to make in sweatshops around the globe. Benefits? Some of the workers in the sweatshops only have to work 16 hour days -- does that count? And really, when you consider how much of that junk from Wal-Mart comes from strip-mines or petro-chemical plants, there is no way they can be considered environmentally sound -- nevermind Wal-Marts relationship to the landfills.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

SLAVE LABOR
Posted by: gellero on Oct 21, 2006 12:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I know how we can stop the 'slave labor' and environmental damage in the third world Wal-Mart sweatshops. Let's send our troops over there, eliminate the government, change their laws, and send those poor ignorant exploited workers back to the farm where they really belong, planting rice, to be sold at a fair price to Rice-a-Roni and Uncle Ben. Eco-colonialism is the way to go. Save the planet and teach the Commie exploiters in the People's Republic, and the Capitalist exploiters in the rest of the turd world the way a progressive society should be run. And why not? Those backward people could not possibly know what's best for them and the world. Let Anglo/American Eco-Colonialism conquer and lead the world out of ignorance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We should all shop at Wal-Mart.
Posted by: WitchyNy on Oct 21, 2006 11:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I shop each week at Wal-Mart for a few items.

I talk to the workers. One woman was homeless. She lived in a hotel room with 4 other Wal-Mart workers...and they had children too. They took turns baby-sitting, while the others worked their shifts. They are all tying to save enough to rent a house together.
But even together, they don't make enough to cover the first and last months house rent, Security deposit, and utilities deposits, while paying for the hotel room.

Workers tell me they don't get breaks for hours..even to use the restroom. I tell them about organizing, the wages at Union stores like Costco, workers rights, how to organize, to register to vote.
Sometimes I give them handouts printed off the Internet about other Wal-Mart workers trying to organize.

These people may be uneducated, but they are not stupid.

Once a manager overheard me and came up to me and started YELLING about how bad Unions were. She sounded like a robot, programmed to do this.

Plant seeds, my radical friends. Plant seeds where ever you go.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wal*Mart's Acres for America program--a step in the right direction
Posted by: tlannin on Oct 22, 2006 8:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
True, Wal*Mart management needs continuous pressure in order to understand that progress in one area doesn't excuse it from regressive behavior in another. Social and environmental justice are linked together, and PR efforts to greenwash become pretty transparent.

The problem with Wal*Mart, however, is one that runs deep in consumer culture, and this article can only touch the surface. The majority of people who shop at Wal*Mart do so because they are just as obsessed about low prices as Wal*Mart's management. The cost-cutting mindset drives everything at that company, and environmentalist angst and whining isn't going to change it anytime soon. Too many environmentalists expect change overnight, and their methods are arrogant and confrontational and therefore counterproductive as a result. Successful organizations such as Environmental Defense know how to get a seat at the table with corporate leaders whose behavior needs to change. Social and environmental change generators need to know how to negotiate with their opponents in such a way to make them partners. Believe me, I sit at the table with the Big Boys (and Girls) and have reached consensus on tough policy issues.

At a recent sustainability forum in Charlotte, North Carolina, I asked Carlton Owen, an environmental consultant, to speak about how he convinced Wal*Mart to participate in the Acres for America Program. I wanted to hear his story and decide for myself whether what he did was greenwashing or proven good work. Essentially, Carlton convinced Wal-Mart to offset its damaging eco-footprint by greater than two to one in the program's first year. Over 321,000 acres became permanent conservation easements for forests, fish, and wildlife. No other company has come close to achieving so much in so little time. Eventually, 1.8 million acres will be preserved, an area almost twice the size of Glacier National Park. One man's determined effort, which relied on skilled negotiation and shared understanding, enabled Wal*Mart to listen and alter a major aspect of its culture. He didn't sell out, he simply worked his ass off to change corporate behavior radically for the general good.

It's easy to demonize Wal*Mart because it has treated its employees pretty poorly in the past. It needs to be held accountable for its ethical practices--or lack thereof--like any other organization. Yet Wal*Mart isn't going to stop growing anytime soon, and its entrance into the Chinese superstore market confirms that.

We must continue putting on the pressure, but we must also invite Wal*Mart-type leaders to the table using strategies and methods they understand. Shaming and pointing fingers pisses people off and makes shared understanding and agreement difficult to impossible. It also grows the divide between progressive thinkers and traditional businesses.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]