Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

Fifteen hundred bucks per person, on average. Thank you!

[ QUOTE ]
OAKLAND, California (AP) -- A California jury on Thursday … ordered Wal-Mart Stores Inc. to pay $57 million in general damages and $115 million in punitive damages to about 116,000 current and former California employees for violating a 2001 state law that requires employers to give 30-minute, unpaid lunch breaks to employees who work at least six hours.
<font color="white"> . </font>
Wal-Mart attorney Neal Manne said the jury's verdict, reached after nearly three days of deliberations and four months of testimony, would likely be appealed.
<font color="white"> . </font>
He claimed the state law in question could only be enforced by California regulators, not by workers in a courtroom. He added that Wal-Mart did not believe the lunch law allowed for punitive damages.
<font color="white"> . </font>
"We absolutely disagree with their findings," Manne said of the jury's verdict. He conceded that Wal-Mart made mistakes in not always allowing for lunch breaks when the 2001 law took affect, but said the company is "100 percent" in compliance now.

[/ QUOTE ]

CNN

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

[ QUOTE ]
Fifteen hundred bucks per person, on average. Thank you!

[ QUOTE ]
OAKLAND, California (AP) -- A California jury on Thursday … ordered Wal-Mart Stores Inc. to pay $57 million in general damages and $115 million in punitive damages to about 116,000 current and former California employees for violating a 2001 state law that requires employers to give 30-minute, unpaid lunch breaks to employees who work at least six hours.
<font color="white"> . </font>
Wal-Mart attorney Neal Manne said the jury's verdict, reached after nearly three days of deliberations and four months of testimony, would likely be appealed.
<font color="white"> . </font>
He claimed the state law in question could only be enforced by California regulators, not by workers in a courtroom. He added that Wal-Mart did not believe the lunch law allowed for punitive damages.
<font color="white"> . </font>
"We absolutely disagree with their findings," Manne said of the jury's verdict. He conceded that Wal-Mart made mistakes in not always allowing for lunch breaks when the 2001 law took affect, but said the company is "100 percent" in compliance now.

[/ QUOTE ]

CNN

[/ QUOTE ]

...of course they'll appeal....what choice have they, as there are somewhere between 30-40 other class action suits pending against them at the moment.

But.....have no fear, we all know that these frivilous lawsuits are happening because of those leftist 'liberal' lawyers that have nothing better to do.

All Hail Wal Mart.....Bringer of deeper discounts for you &amp; me!

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

[ QUOTE ]
"We absolutely disagree with their findings," [Wal-Mart's lawyer] said of the jury's verdict. He conceded that Wal-Mart made mistakes in not always allowing for lunch breaks when the 2001 law took affect, but said the company is "100 percent" in compliance now.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is an argument often used by persons and corporations - and I think it's funny that the courts do take into account. Does the fact that the defendant stopped breaking the law before the matter came to court mitigates the accusation?

E.g. RAPE
-- Ah, Your Honor, my client wishes to concede that he..uhh made a mistake a year ago in uhh... donating his sperm to available uhhh.. females of the uh...opposite sex but NOW, Your Honor, he most definitely does NOT do that no more.
-- I see. Well, in that case I think we can release the defendant- Yes, officer?
-- Your Honor, the defendant was in jail waiting trial.

Etc.

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

[ QUOTE ]
He claimed the state law in question could only be enforced by California regulators, not by workers in a courtroom.

[/ QUOTE ]

Laws that cannot be enforced in courts? I wonder how far they will get with that one.

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He claimed the state law in question could only be enforced by California regulators, not by workers in a courtroom.

[/ QUOTE ]

Laws that cannot be enforced in courts? I wonder how far they will get with that one.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the law only empowered the regulatory agency to make a rule, then the court cannot decide the issue until the regulator takes a position. A rule doesn't have the power of law.

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

[ QUOTE ]
Fifteen hundred bucks per person, on average. Thank you!

[/ QUOTE ]

Minus the lawyers' cut.

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fifteen hundred bucks per person, on average. Thank you!

[/ QUOTE ]

Minus the lawyers' cut.

[/ QUOTE ]

and taxes, $1500 turns into $36.80.

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

And now Queen Latiffah is doing their ads. Welcome to the new world.

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

[ QUOTE ]
And now Queen Latiffah is doing their ads. Welcome to the new world.

[/ QUOTE ]

who hit more of an all time low; Queen Latiffah or WalMart?

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And now Queen Latiffah is doing their ads. Welcome to the new world.

[/ QUOTE ]

who hit more of an all time low; Queen Latiffah or WalMart?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a push.

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

I fail to understand why you are bitching. Walmart did something against the law. Walmart was sued. Walmart lost the lawsuit and is ordered to provide compensation.

What is the problem here? If you don't like Walmart, there are tons of alternatives.

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

[ QUOTE ]
Fifteen hundred bucks per person, on average. Thank you!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm curious... since the California jury came up with $57 million + $115 million completely unscientifically with no basis whatsoever, why didn't they just award the workers more?

Come on... did these 116,000 people really suffer $1,500 each worth of damages by not taking their 30 minute unpaid lunch breaks?

In protest of this verdict, I'm going to go buy something at Wal-mart.

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

My old employer never gave lunch breaks or breaks for that matter. It's kind of a weak lawsuit. How can the plaintiffs prove $1500 in damages, particularly punitive damages? Therefore, I would argue it's ambitious lawyers who just got a nice payday.

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

[ QUOTE ]
I fail to understand why you are bitching. Walmart did something against the law. Walmart was sued. Walmart lost the lawsuit and is ordered to provide compensation.

What is the problem here? If you don't like Walmart, there are tons of alternatives.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think anyone in this thread is "bitching", and this law suit and its results are not going to change any posters here from shopping or not shopping at Walmart.

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

[ QUOTE ]
In support of china, I'm going to go buy something at Wal-mart.

[/ QUOTE ]

fyp

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fifteen hundred bucks per person, on average. Thank you!

[/ QUOTE ]

Minus the lawyers' cut.

[/ QUOTE ]

So probably about $5 to each employee.