Two Plus Two Older Archives

Two Plus Two Older Archives (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/index.php)
-   Politics (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=39)
-   -   Thank you, Wal-Mart ! (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=403968)

Cyrus 12-23-2005 08:58 AM

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

Myrtle 12-23-2005 08:08 PM

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!

Cyrus 12-24-2005 03:26 AM

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.

cardcounter0 12-24-2005 08:20 AM

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.

SheetWise 12-24-2005 01:17 PM

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.

12-24-2005 04:49 PM

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 
[ QUOTE ]
Fifteen hundred bucks per person, on average. Thank you!

[/ QUOTE ]

Minus the lawyers' cut.

Wes ManTooth 12-25-2005 09:10 PM

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.

wonderwes 12-28-2005 02:35 AM

Re: Thank you, Wal-Mart !
 
And now Queen Latiffah is doing their ads. Welcome to the new world.

Wes ManTooth 12-28-2005 02:54 AM

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?

Grisgra 12-29-2005 06:16 PM

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.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:42 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.