Wal mart respect ?

Glyn

Donating Member
Registered
Wal mart has won this suit on appeal today
,
This is your money at work.

Deborah Shank's story would have been sad enough, considering the devastating injuries she suffered in a traffic accident seven years ago. Nevertheless, Wal-Mart found a way to add a brutal coda.

As chronicled in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal, Shank, a former overnight shelf-stocker for Wal-Mart in southeastern Missouri, was driving her minivan when she was broadsided by a semi and suffered permanent brain damage. Unable to walk without help, she lost the ability to care for herself or interact meaningfully with her family. Now 52, she lives in a nursing home.

Wal-Mart started out as one of the good guys in this story, paying almost $470,000 of her initial medical bills. But three years after Shank's husband sued and settled with the semi driver's employer, the retail giant changed hats. It demanded every penny back, plus interest and legal fees -- more, in fact, than the $417,477 the settlement had placed in a special-needs Medicaid trust fund for Shank's future healthcare expenses.

The company persuaded a federal district court judge and the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals to award it the full amount, even though Shank's family had paid for the lawsuit. Nor did it matter that the settlement covered a fraction of her expenses and losses. Wal-Mart's healthcare plan clearly states that it gets first dibs on any money recovered by injured employees. Such provisions aren't uncommon in health plans, and Wal-Mart isn't the first to enforce one.

Doing what the law allows isn't the same as doing the right thing, however. The company made itself whole at the expense of a helpless former employee who will never be whole again. Instead of having some resources to improve her care, Shank will receive only the basic services afforded her by Medicaid and Social Security. Nor will the trust fund be in a position to reimburse Medicaid (i.e., taxpayers), which stood to collect any unspent money upon Shank's death.

Wal-Mart argues that it's just trying to be fair to those still paying into the company's healthcare plan. Big payouts to insured workers can drive up the plan's premiums. The half-million dollars it spent on Shank's care, however, translates into less than 40 cents per Wal-Mart employee. In its most recent quarter, its stores generated that much in operating income every eight minutes.

Wal-Mart has spent the last few years working hard to rebut healthcare reformers, labor unions, anti-globalization groups and other critics who've argued that it puts profits ahead of humanity. While its advertising campaigns try to put a friendlier spin on the company, its behavior toward Shank tells a different story. If Wal-Mart can't restrain itself, perhaps Congress should prevent health plans from draining settlements won by injured workers with more bills to pay.




What do you think?

Is it Fair?



Is it Right?



Will you continue to give them YOUR business?
 
have to go to walmart, they are a lot cheaper than the competition, and it's a one stop shop... I don't like it, but that's the way it is... at least here
 
not uncommon at all really... as one insurer steps up and assumes immediate patient care, they immediately go after the responsible parties insurance as soon as possible.. in the case of judgments, most insurance policy's state that the insurer is entitled to recoup expenses from any judgment..


IE: you are in a wreck and your personal insurance policy adsorbs medical expenses, a year later the courts find the other guy liable and his insurance company must pay out now... First in line is YOUR insurance company to recoup what they put out on your behalf. (read the fine print in your policy, it is going to be hidden in there somewhere)

I would guess that this story could just be a big media spin on something that happens all the time..
 
firedevil.gif
Our System at it's best.
 
That is becoming the norm lately. There is a company near me that enforced a new rule of not smoking ANYWHERE.. If an employee was caught still smoking they would be fired. I am talking at work, home, car, anywhere.

That was a couple of years ago. The new rule they are working on now is overweight employees. They are going to enforce an "overweight rule" that will cost you your job if you are a "to be determened" percentage over weight. They plan on giving employees a time frame to get in shape or they are fired.


Who is this company? Scotts Lawn.
 
firedevil.gif
Our System at it's best.
it is sad... but I can tell you some other things that are even bigger abuses of the system... but I will look like warchilds avatar... (and the guys in black will come after me)

(go to work for the post office, I can show you how to retire in 6 months on full disability with pay)
 
I despise Wal-Mart more than any of you guys. I also have major issues with companies taking unfair advantage of employees who can do nothing about it.

In this particular case, however, there seems to be no reason whatever for a person to collect twice on the same claim. Why should you be allowed to collect from your company and then also collect in a lawsuit? Makes no sense to me.

Having said that, Wal-Mart shouldn't be able to collect back more than it originally paid out.

It's easy to sympathize with a helpless person but the reality is that it does not behoove any person to dictate how the benevolence of another is to be distributed.

--Wag--
 
have to go to walmart, they are a lot cheaper than the competition, and it's a one stop shop... I don't like it, but that's the way it is... at least here
You know, I understand your point. But when is enough enough?

When is it time to tell these retailers that we have had enough of their crap?
 
Here is the deal... The way I see it... It's employees that have in the past abused the system that have caused this.. You know those lazy folks that just sue to sue..... Big companies have been busted over and over and had to pay out millions to folks that have not deserved a dime. Those folks have driven the system to the point where they have to take actions like this and good honest people are the ones that suffer. I work for a LARGE company and its incredible what has to be done just because of abuses that have taken place by other employees.

Can Wal Mart find a way to help her, yes and I'm sure they will however know this....... The media will never come back and put the story on the front page of CNN

OK lets have it

CAp
 
I despise Wal-Mart more than any of you guys. I also have major issues with companies taking unfair advantage of employees who can do nothing about it.

In this particular case, however, there seems to be no reason whatever for a person to collect twice on the same claim. Why should you be allowed to collect from your company and then also collect in a lawsuit? Makes no sense to me.

Having said that, Wal-Mart shouldn't be able to collect back more than it originally paid out.

It's easy to sympathize with a helpless person but the reality is that it does not behoove any person to dictate how the benevolence of another is to be distributed.

--Wag--
Good point, but I don't see any benevolence. They did what they could by the letter of the law. Yes, it was legally in their favor. The courts say that. Do they need the money that bad after sending our money overseas to get the cheapest price on everything?




Are there NO ethics anymore?
 
i dont understand the whole story but it sounds like wal mart was very generous in giving her $ till all was settled. now its only far to give it back.
 
Here is the deal... The way I see it... It's employees that have in the past abused the system that have caused this.. You know those lazy folks that just sue to sue..... Big companies have been busted over and over and had to pay out millions to folks that have not deserved a dime. Those folks have driven the system to the point where they have to take actions like this and good honest people are the ones that suffer. I work for a LARGE company and its incredible what has to be done just because of abuses that have taken place by other employees.

Can Wal Mart find a way to help her, yes and I'm sure they will however know this....... The media will never come back and put the story on the front page of CNN

OK lets have it

CAp
Yes Cap, I'm afraid your right there,

but it would be nice if they took a dollar and a win as a settlement, this way they could take thew win, and pass the windfall ( not that is is in this case) on to someone who really needs it. Hey, I'm not usually one to get on a soap box, but this really struck a nerve.





Maybe I'm getting soft and mushy in my old age
smile.gif
 
i dont understand the whole story but it sounds like wal mart was very generous in giving her $ till all was settled. now its only far to give it back.
Sorry,no generosity there, she had BOUGHT that insurance.

They are going back after the $$$ on a technicality in my book.
 
Why should Wal-Mart be expected to pay when the trucking company is obviously at fault and should be the responsible party?
 
zzwhip.gif
PM -->
Rayabusa0818 @ Mar. 26 2008 said:
1349966[/ATTACH] PM]
Why should Wal-Mart be expected to pay when the trucking company is obviously at fault and should be the responsible party?
The trucking company DID pay, now Wal Mart wants to take money from the settlement
Exactly, this accident should not cost Wal-mart. They recouped what they had originally paid out.

zzwhip.gif
 
I hate Walmart.

If I can at all avoid it I don't shop there. Besides their less than ethical practices, it's just not worth it to me to save $5 and gain a bunch of stress. I'd rather go to a local grocery store and not have to worry about a million carts piled up on top of my car or waiting in line with all the crazies.

Costco is my new kick for bulk items.
bowdown.gif
 
Back
Top