|
Wal-Mart expands Chinese
business
Wal-Mart, the
world's largest retailer, is expanding its presence in China after
agreeing to buy a 35% stake in discount store chain Trust-Mart.
BBC/Bvom
02/28/07
[back to top]
The terms of the deal, giving Wal-Mart
an interest in 100 stores in 34 Chinese cities, were not revealed but
analysts have said the business is worth $1bn. Should Wal-Mart
ultimately buy out the group, it would make it China's largest foreign
retailer in terms of stores. Foreign sales currently account for about
20% of the firm's turnover. Based in Taiwan, Trust-Mart was set up in
the mid-1990s and has more than 30,000 staff. 'Important step' Along
with other leading global retailers like Carrefour and Tesco, Wal-Mart
is looking to build its interests in China's fast-growing retail sector.
The firm already operates 68 stores there and said last year that it was
prepared to hire an extra 150,000 staff in the next five years. Wal-Mart
said the latest deal was an "important step" for the business. "Through
this investment in Trust-Mart we have the opportunity to expand our
presence in China, one of the world's fastest growing markets," said
Michael Duke, Wal-Mart's vice-chairman.
[back to top]
Child Labor Isn't Glamorous
By Jim Hightower,
Pulse of the Twin Cities
February 28th, 2007
[back to top]
Darlings! You’ll be ever so pleased to
learn that a new, high-fashion super store has opened in America. It’s
called Wal-Mart. Yes, the stodgy old downscale store has gone upscale,
offering hip new clothing lines like Metro 7!
If you think anything has really
changed, however, you might check the labels on these new glam goods to
see if any are made in Bangladesh. If so, they might have come from a
factory there by the name of Harvest Rich, which produces clothing for
Wal-Mart and others.
There’s nothing at all hip about
Harvest Rich—it’s a sweatshop that uses child labor. In a new
investigative report, the National Labor Committee, a diligent watchdog
group, has documented conditions in Harvest Rich that are grotesque,
even by sweatshop standards. Approximately 200 children between 11 and
14 years old work in this factory, sewing garments under contract to the
Wal-Marts.
The children are forced to work 12 to
14 hours a day, with some shifts going 20 hours. In all of September,
these child laborers got just one day off. For the grueling long shifts,
they are allowed only about four hours of sleep on the factory floor
before being awakened and put back on the machines, sometimes collapsing
from exhaustion. Their wages are as low as six cents an hour. They are
routinely slapped or beaten if they don’t meet their production goals,
make mistakes or even take too long in the bathroom.
Wal-Mart washes its hands of this by
asserting that it has a “code of conduct” for its contractors,
supposedly enforced by apparel industry monitors. Yet, Harvest Rich,
which is certified by this group, shows yet again that corporate
self-monitoring is an abysmal failure even at stopping the most
disgusting practices.
[back to top]
NYSE finds no
violations at Wal-Mart
Union pension fund
sought whether relationships between consultants and the retailer's
management broke exchange rules.
Reuters
February 28 2007
[back to top]
ATLANTA (Reuters) -- The New York
Stock Exchange has advised Wal-Mart Stores Inc. that the company is not
violating any exchange rules, Wal-Mart said Wednesday.
The statement came amid reports that a
union pension fund had asked NYSE regulators to probe whether pay
consultants for the world's largest retailer are too cozy with
management, possibly violating NYSE listing standards.
TheWall Street Journal reported
Wednesday that the secretary-treasurer of the trade union confederation
AFL-CIO made the request in a letter to NYSE Regulation Inc. enforcement
chief Susan Merrill, citing an NYSE rule that says compensation
consultants should answer solely to corporate directors, not to
management.
"The New York Stock Exchange has
indicated that we are not in violation of its rules," Wal-Mart spokesman
John Simley told Reuters.
The AFL-CIO was not immediately
available for comment and a spokesman for the NYSE declined to comment.
Wal-Mart said it had asked the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for permission to omit a shareholder
proposal submitted by the AFL-CIO, which asks for disclosure on how
company uses compensation consultants, from the proxy for its upcoming
annual meeting. The company said it intends to substantially implement
that proposal.
Wal-Mart also said its board is
currently evaluating whether to hire an independent compensation
consultant to advise it on executive compensation.
Shares of Wal-Mart, a component of the
Dow Jones industrial average, rose less than 1 percent in morning
trading in New York, while rival Target (up $1.87 to $61.27, Charts)
shares rose 3 percent.
[back to top]
Vietnamese Co to Provide 1 MLN Fashion Products to
Wal-Mart
Asia Pulse
Wednesday February 28
[back to top]
HANOI, Feb 28 - The Thanh Cong
Textile & Garment Joint Stock Company (TCM) has signed a contract to
supply 1 million high-quality fashion products to the Wal-Mart Stores,
Inc., one of the US's largest distributors of fashion goods.
The products will be delivered in the
third quarter this year.
TCM has set a target of earning
VND1.36 trillion (US$85 million) in revenues in 2007, a year-on-year
increase of 32.8 per cent.
[back to top]
Concord council mulls
Wal-Mart plan
By Tanya Rose
CONTRA COSTA TIMES
[back to top]
CONCORD - Residents questioned city
leaders Tuesday night over a proposed 24-hour Wal-Mart store in North
Concord, arguing that the retail giant would cripple the area with
traffic jams and increased crime. "Wal-Mart is the number-one spot for
police calls in any community," speaker Gregg Davidson told the City
Council on Tuesday. "What happens to the rest of the city when officers
are busy responding to Wal-Mart?" Opponents of the 28-acre Jones Ranch
project fronting Arnold Industrial Way produced a November 2005 memo
written by Concord police Lt. Robin Heinemann, where she expressed
concern over the plans. "I would strongly discourage that this store
operate as a 24-hour operation," Heinemann wrote in her memo. Though the
document was mentioned in general terms in a city-sponsored study on the
project's impact, Heinemann's critical comments were not. A group called
"No More on 4" obtained a copy after filing a records request. Heinemann
continued in the memo: "If for some reason 24-hour operation is granted,
then I would strongly recommend some kind of ground security during the
evening hours. The commercial property owners and/or managers of the
property should fund this bill." She said in the memo that the store
would be a perfect target for criminals because of its easy access, with
Highways 4 and 242 within one block of the site. Heinemann said Tuesday
she could not comment on the memo. But recently, she told the Times that
city planners and police representatives planned to talk with Wal-Mart
officials about a security plan, perhaps similar to a partnership that
exists in Union City where there is a 24-hour Wal-Mart. Those talks have
simply not happened yet, Heinemann had said. City planner Frank Abejo
said the council could limit the store's hours if not happy with the
security plans. City leaders said they would not make a decision Tuesday
on whether to approve the Wal-Mart and the accompanying In-N-Out Burger
and Lowe's home improvement store in light of Mayor Mark Peterson's
request that a vote be put off until March. He is out of town, and
wanted to be present for the final decision, he had said. The project
site is home to a mix of welding shops and other industry -- an area
that some in the community have called an eyesore. Many people living in
the area have said they support the project, saying there need to be
more shopping opportunities in North Concord. "I have the right to
choose where to shop," said resident Chris Beard. "If others wish to
patronize small businesses exclusively, that is their right. They
shouldn't be able to limit my choices due to their self-centered
outlook." But others argue a Wal-Mart would put smaller mom and pop
stores out of business. "The city keeps stating they want to rebuild the
downtown areas, but this project will only force many of the local
businesses to close their doors and make us start all over again," said
Bill Wygal, who owns two Bill's Ace Hardware stores in Concord,
including one in North Concord. The Planning Commission has signed off
on the project. The council is expected to take up the issue again March
6 at City Hall.
[back to top]
Wal-mart grabs
35 percent stake in Chinese BCL
chinaview.cn
2007-02-27
[back to top]
SHENZHEN, Feb. 27 (Xinhua) -- The
world's largest retailer Wal-mart announced on Tuesday in China's
southern city of Shenzhen that it has gained the Chinese government's
approval of purchasing 35 percent stake in supermarket operator
Bounteous Company Ltd (BCL).
BCL, which is based in Taiwan,
operates 101 hypermarkets in 34 Chinese cities under the Trust-Mart
banner. The Trust-Mart stores will continue to operate under the
Trust-Mart name after the acquisition, Wal-Mart said.
"Through this investment in Trust-Mart
we have the opportunity to expand our presence in China, one of the
fastest-growing retail markets," said Wal-Mart Vice chairman Michael
Duke.
"This is an important step in bringing
our additional scale to our China retail business", said Duke.
Wal-Mart, which entered the Chinese
market in 1996, now operates 73 stores in 36 cities in China and employs
more than 37,000 people there.
"This alliance allows Trust-Mart to
offer higher levels of customer services to Trust-Mart's loyal customers
as we benefit from Wal-Mart's expertise in logistics and operations,"
said Trust-Mart chairman John Yu.
"It also will give our suppliers new
opportunities to expand in China and potentially become part of
Wal-Mart's global vendor network," Yu said.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart Waives Millions in Tax Abatement at New Cleveland Location
By Ralph DiMatteo
[back to top]
With the announcement that Wal-Mart
plans to forgo a 10-year property tax abatement in a new location in
Cleveland, estimated at $10 million dollars, the giant retailer hopes
that this will help to ease tensions created by its arrival and its
affects on area "mom & pop" businesses. Cleveland and its new Steelyard
Commons retails complex made the announcement Monday February 19th, with
the city represented by Mayor Frank Jackson, and Wal-Mart by Regional
General Manager Jerry Spencer. It is hope that after other big box
retailers Target and Home Depot will follow suit and waive their right
to the abatements as well which would create a much needed financial
windfall for the city.
Wal-Mart has met increasing pressure
in largely urban markets that it has attempted new openings, due to the
impact that they have on smaller businesses withing the surrounding
area. These smaller businesses claim that their opposition to Wal-Mart's
opening is the fact that they simply cannot match prices or the variety
that a Wal-Mart offers consumers. Spencer tried to ease those concerns
in Cleveland by saying that Wal-Mart is not interested in destroying
rivals, but in helping an area thrive and prosper.
Critic's, such as John Ryan, the
executive secretary of the North Shore Federation of Labor, say that
this is just another advertising gimmick that "sugarcoats" the
devastation Wal-Mart brings to a community.
There was much more detail to the
account of these announcements in Tuesday, February 20th's Cleveland
Plain Dealer, but I wanted to concentrate on the highlights and then
offer an opinion as to how Cleveland may just want to view this
situation.
First, doesn't Wal-Mart at least
deserve the benefit of the doubt here? From the perspective alone that
nearly two thirds of the forfeited abatements will now go the
financially strapped Cleveland schools is enough to get my vote. the
other third will be used to develop something called the Towpath Trail
that will extend into downtown and support smaller businesses along the
way, near Steelyard Commons that sits on the old LTV Steel site.
Understand that Wal-Mart was going to
open no matter what, and that when recently this story of the fact that
these businesses that were opening were entitled to tax abatements
broke, the finger pointing began as to who was to blame, Wal-Mart
stepped up and did the right thing. Wal-Mart had the legal right, as do
the other businesses eligible for abatements, to say, sorry Cleveland,
but no cigar. To their credit, they did not and recognized that helping
to get Cleveland schools back on their feet and the development of
surrounding businesses will ultimately make their location much more
valuable to them and the community years down the road.
Wal-Mart has also made a commitment to
neighborhood grants for further developments in Cleveland and nine other
cities and feels that this is an opportunity to create something for the
Cleveland "beyond the four walls of their store" said Spencer.
It should be noted also that as of
this writing developer Mitchell Schneider has also waived his right to
abatement for the parts of the Steelyard Complex property he still owns,
so hopefully the example set by Wal-Mart and Schneider carries over to
others within this new and vital piece of the rebound the City of
Cleveland and the other businesses will see that an investment in the
community in which you do business is the best investment you will ever
make, because ultimately it starts at a community's roots, its children
and neighborhoods, and works its way up to better jobs, a better way of
life and thriving and prosperous residents.
Here is to Wal-Mart, and Mitchell
Schneider, no matter what happens with the other abatements, we thank
you and hope that you find Cleveland to be worthy of time and
investments and that the City doesn't let you down.
2007 © Associated Content, All rights
reserved.
[back to top]
Legislature lets taxpayers pay for workers' health care costs
By Craig Cole,
Seattle Post-Intelligencer
February 27th, 2007
[back to top]
For three years, I've asked the
Washington Legislature to reconsider the current mindless health care
system that encourages employers to be selfish and irresponsible. This
session they have another chance with bills being considered that would
require large employers to reimburse taxpayers for the cost of providing
their employees with state-subsidized health care.
Brown & Cole Stores were founded
almost a hundred years ago by my grandfather. Last year, we employed
around 1,500 workers, very ably represented by United Food and
Commercial Workers and Teamsters. As a 27-store regional supermarket
chain based in Bellingham, our stores operated under the trade names of
Food Pavillion, Cost Cutter, Food Depot and Save-On-Foods.
I was raised with the American values
that good companies take care of their employees. We worked long and
hard with our union partners to provide living wages and benefits to our
workers and were proud to do so. We made health care payments on 95
percent of our work force, while some of our competitors covered less
than half.
In November, Brown & Cole Stores filed
for bankruptcy protection. We cited competition from low-paying chains,
especially Wal-Mart. We hope to emerge a survivor, but it's difficult
for employers who provide family-wage jobs. We're living proof of the
very real impact that low-way employers have on the local job base that
we all hold so precious.
There is no question that Brown & Cole
was undermined by large profitable employers who have abandoned basic
American values and pay their employees so badly their workers qualify
for public assistance. Using state-funded health care is their profit
strategy. They simply dump their health care costs onto taxpayers.
The largest corporation in the
planet's history bases its business model on inferior wages and
benefits. They're keeping the working poor working -- and poor.
Meanwhile, they earn billions by transferring their health care costs
onto the rest of us, and they set a very low competitive cost structure
that punishes employers trying to conduct business with integrity.
I've brought those concerns to the
Legislature for three years now, urging them to make a change. They
didn't. Since, I've watched Brown & Cole's hard-working employees
struggle with a change that has rattled their lives and the lives of
their families. I wish I could tell you of the personal costs, the pain
endured. I won't. I will tell you that it's the direct result of a
competitive playing field that's not level and getting more lopsided as
the months pass. Those irresponsible employers are costing the state a
ton of money.
I ask the Legislature: Why are you
letting the public pick up the tab? In essence, every state taxpayer
puts money into the pockets of large profitable employers setting a new
low for corporate social responsibility.
As a society, we have established a
framework for commerce and competition that forbids profiteering by
pollution, unsafe working conditions and discrimination. Why do we allow
a public policy framework that rewards a company for misusing its
workers?
Do I blame the companies? Only
partially. I blame a public policy framework that encourages them to
behave that way. Consumers benefit from slightly lower prices, yes. But
workers and all citizens lose.
It's a Faustian bargain: We're giving
consumers better deals while we're hammering workers, their families,
good businesses and our communities. What kind of deal is that?
The dilemma we face is that there is
no real economic incentive to be a good employer, even though company
health care coverage keeps people off the state's rolls. Lawmakers need
to be pragmatic. If more large profitable employers follow down this
path, we'd better provide for the escalating costs of funding an
ever-expanding state caseload.
Until universal health care with
appropriate cost controls is in place, irresponsible employers shouldn't
get off the hook. They'll pay then and they need to pay until then.
The Legislature is considering
legislation that will affect only the very largest and stingiest
employers who can afford to pay -- but don't. Without it, those
companies will continue to degrade the American worker -- and not just
their own. They're forcing all employers into a race to the bottom.
Craig Cole is president and CEO of
Brown & Cole Stores in Washington state.
[back to top]
AFL-CIO
Asks NYSE to Probe Wal-Mart's Pay Practices
By Kim Chipman,
Bloomberg
February 27th, 2007
[back to top]
Feb. 27 (Bloomberg) -- The AFL-CIO,
the largest U.S. labor group, is asking the New York Stock Exchange to
investigate Wal- Mart Stores Inc.'s executive-compensation practices.
The AFL-CIO wants the NYSE to look at
whether Wal-Mart is violating one of the company's own
corporate-governance rules by allowing management, rather than its
outside directors, to hire a compensation consultant who advises on pay
for top executives, according to a Feb. 23 letter AFL-CIO Treasurer Rich
Trumka sent to the exchange.
The labor group, whose member unions
hold more than $400 billion in pension funds, says the NYSE should probe
the matter because the Wal-Mart rule in question is the same as an
exchange guideline stating that a company's compensation committee
should have sole oversight over pay advisers.
``It seems to us that the NYSE's
listing standards are made a mockery of if companies say they are
adhering to the exchange's aspirational standards, but in fact aren't
doing so,'' Damon Silvers, associate general counsel of the AFL-CIO,
said in an interview today.
NYSE spokesman Brenda Intindola
declined to comment.
The AFL-CIO also is considering taking
the Wal-Mart matter up with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
Silvers said.
The labor group has filed a
shareholder proposal asking Wal-Mart, the world's biggest retailer, to
provide more details about its compensation adviser. Wal-Mart has asked
the SEC for permission to omit the AFL-CIO's proposal from the company's
proxy statement.
Compensation Consultant
The Bentonville, Arkansas-based
retailer said today that its compensation practices aren't in violation
of any rules. The company's board also is considering the hiring of an
additional compensation consultant to advise on executive pay, according
to spokesman John Simley.
Wal-Mart will have to reveal more
information about its compensation consultant, including the identity,
in its proxy voting statement as a result of new Securities and Exchange
Commission rules requiring fuller disclosure of pay and the role that
consultants play.
The new regulations were prompted in
part by investor criticism of executive pay and a stock-options scandal
involving almost 200 companies.
In the meantime, the AFL-CIO has been
pressing companies for evidence that consultants are giving independent
advice on the salaries and bonuses of top officials.
General Electric Co., the world's
second-biggest company by market value, said in December that it would
go beyond a new federal disclosure rule on executive pay and tell
shareholders for the first time the full extent of its compensation
consultant's work for the company. The decision followed talks with the
AFL-CIO, GE spokesman Peter O'Toole said at the time.
[back to top]
Wal-mart Briefing,
June 06
By mark osborn
[back to top]
Facts about Wal-Mart
Wal-Mart is the world’s largest
retailer and largest private employer.
Sam Walton founded the firm in 1962 as a single store in Arkansas,
USA.
It now has more than 5,700 stores worldwide.
It employs 1,500,000 workers worldwide.
Wal-Mart is the largest retailer in the USA, Canada and Mexico and a
major competitor in the UK, Germany, Brazil and South Korea.
The FT Global 500 ranked Wal-Mart as the sixth largest multinational
according to the total worth of its shares.
Wal-Mart’s CEO Lee Scott took home $17.5 million in 2004, which equals
$8,434 an hour. An average Wal-Mart worker earns just $9.68 an hour.
The average pay for a Wal-Mart sales assistant is $14,000 a year -
$1,000 below the poverty line for a family of three.
Wal-Mart and union busting
Wal-Mart has over 3,600 stores in the
United States and not a single one is union organised. Wal-Mart says it
employs “associates” not workers.
Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton was deeply
anti-union. In his autobiography he boasted that “we’ve never lost a
union organising election” at Wal-Mart. Sam Walton & John Huey, Sam
Walton: Made in America, Doubleday, 1992 p.129
The Walton family support the
anti-union National Right to Work Foundation. It donated $70,000 from
2000 to 2003. The Foundation works with business to undermine the right
of workers to organise. For example it was instrumental in passing
“right-to-work” legislation in Oklahoma, a law designed to discourage
workers from joining a union or paying any dues.
Manager’s anti-union toolbox
Wal-Mart provides its managers with a
handbook titled, “The Manager’s Toolbox to Remaining Union Free” on how
to prevent and respond to unions in their stores.
“Wal-Mart is opposed to unionisation
of its associates. Any suggestion that the Company is neutral on the
subject or that it encourages associates to join labor organisations is
not true.” Wal-Mart, “Labor Relations & You at the Wal-Mart Distribution
Center #6032.”
Wal-Mart has a systematic method of
tracking workers who have grievances that could lead them to form a
union. The Union Probability Index (now termed “Unaddressed People
Issues”, UPI) is a tactic the company uses to identify any potential
hotbed of union activity.
From the results of an annual internal
survey of workers’ attitudes about working conditions, the UPI rates
stores by their level of employee dissatisfaction. Unfavourable
responses to certain questions, according to a company document, “have
been shown by research to indicate low morale and potential interest in
third-party representation.”
Stores that score unfavourably must
take steps to respond to employees’ issues to prevent them from seeking
help from a union.
When these preventative measures fail
to stop a union drive, Wal-Mart orders managers to call the ‘Union
Hotline’. The warning signs include extensive socialising among
co-workers, more complaints lodged against managers by employees, and
“increased curiosity” in employment policies.
Butchers in Texas
Only five U.S. Wal-Mart stores have
held union representation elections since the United Food and Commercial
Workers’ (UFCW) national organising effort began in 1998. And of the
five elections, only once did workers choose union representation. That
successful vote occurred in 2000, in Jacksonville, Texas, where meat
department workers voted seven to three to be represented by the UFCW.
Some of these workers had previously
worked in other, union-organised grocery stores and appreciated the
better wages and benefits they received as union members.
In 1999, the UFCW started a nationwide
effort to organise Wal-Mart’s meat department employees. In response,
Wal-Mart’s People Division, the department that handles anti-union
efforts, jumped from 12 employees to nearly 70.
According to a complaint issued by the
US arbitration board, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the
company engaged in numerous illegal activities to thwart the
Jacksonville union effort, including:
Interrogating employees about their union activities and sympathies.
Telling employees that Wal-Mart had gone through their files to
determine whether they were for or against the union.
Purchasing new meat-cutting equipment to address employees’ problems
and influence their vote against the union.
Despite heavy-handed pressure from
Wal-Mart, workers in Jacksonville voted to form a union on 17 February
2000.
But 11 days later, Wal-Mart announced
out of the blue that it was discontinuing all meat-cutting operations
nationwide and would instead stock its stores with wrapped meat. The
company then refused to recognise and bargain with the UFCW, arguing
that the Jacksonville meat department employees were no longer an
appropriate unit for organising, separate from the rest of the store.
This effectively smashed the unionisation drive.
Two years later, an NLRB judge issued
a ruling requiring Wal-Mart to bargain over the effects of the
discontinued meat-cutting operations. The judge, however, did not
require Wal-Mart to bargain a contract with the UFCW.
Both the UFCW and Wal-Mart appealed
the ruling to the Board in Washington, DC, where it still remains
pending, more than five years after the workers first voted for a union.
Even if the Board rules in their favour, all of the Jacksonville workers
who originally voted have now left the store.
Shopworkers in Quebec
Wal-Mart entered the Canadian retail
market in 1994 when it purchased the discount chain Woolco, buying all
but 22 stores. All 10 of Woolco’s union-represented stores were among
the 22 stores Wal-Mart refused to purchase.
Wal-Mart opened its store in Jonquière,
Quebec in 2001. Workers approached UFCW representatives to start an
organising drive, and after the UFCW collected union authorisation cards
from what they thought to be a majority of eligible employees, they
applied for recognition with the Quebec Labour Relations Board. Quebec
law grants workers union representation after a majority signs cards,
rather than forcing them through an election process.
When the Labour Board was determining
which employees were eligible for union representation, it found that
the UFCW did not have a majority. The Labour Board consequently
scheduled a union representation election instead of certifying the
union. In April 2004, workers voted against union representation by only
nine votes.
Workers witnessed threatening and
intimidating behaviour by managers, who tried to stop them from
communicating with reps about the union.
Workers would not be cowed, and soon
after the election, more and more signed union authorisation cards. On
August 2004, when presented with cards signed by well over a majority of
the store’s eligible employees, the Labour Board certified the UFCW as
the workers’ representative.
Throughout the autumn and early
winter, Wal-Mart and the UFCW bargained for a contract. It eventually
became clear to the UFCW that Wal-Mart would not agree to any contract.
So in February 2005, the union asked the Quebec Ministry of Labour to
name an arbitrator to impose a contract through the binding arbitration
provision offered in Quebec.
The company responded by announcing it
was closing the Jonquière store, claiming poor sales. The move was both
abrupt and unusual as Wal-Mart rarely closes a store without
subsequently opening a supercentre in the area.
After the store closed, 68 of the
former Jonquière workers filed a complaint with the Quebec Labour
Relations Board, claiming Wal-Mart closed the store in retaliation for
organising a union. In September 2005, the Labour Board agreed with the
workers, and ruled that since Wal-Mart did not intend to close the store
permanently, the closure was intended as a reprisal against union
organising.
The Labour Board has not yet ruled on
the remedy, but it could impose fines on Wal-Mart and may even demand
the company find jobs for the employees at other stores.
Tire and lube technicians in Colorado
Tire and lube technicians initiated an
organising drive in Loveland, Colorado. Workers were frustrated by major
understaffing, high workload and having to miss lunches and breaks.
After the first few weeks of union
meetings, nine of the 16 workers had signed union authorisation cards.
In November 2004, the tire and lube workers filed a petition for a union
election with the NLRB. But it took the agency three months before it
would schedule an election, more than twice as long as usual.
The delay in the election process
demoralised the organising drive. The delay also provided Wal-Mart with
more time to pressure employees to vote against the union. The day after
talk of the union spread, Wal-Mart flew in about 10 staff. They forced
employees to sit through presentations and videos, which suggested that
unions hurt peoples’ jobs and take money out of their pay cheques
without letting them know. Workers were even shown fictional depictions
of union organisers scaring people into signing union authorisation
cards.
But nothing Wal-Mart could do to
intimidate employees had more of an impact than its announcement of the
closure in Quebec. Two weeks after the Jonquière announcement, tire and
lube workers voted 17 to one against union representation.
Between 1998-2003, 288 “unfair labour
practice” charges were lodged against Wal-Mart, accusing the company of
interfering with its employees’ freedom of association. Of these
charges, at least 94 resulted in formal complaints brought against
Wal-Mart by the NLRB.
Among the NLRB complaints were 41
charges of terminating employees for union activity, 59 charges of
surveillance of union activity, 59 charges of interrogation and 47
charges of unlawful promises or benefits to dissuade workers against
organising.
The agency’s prosecution of unfair
labour practices resulted in at least 11 rulings against the company and
12 settlements.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart to pay $1B
for China retailer
Reuters
[back to top]
HONG KONG/NEW YORK (Reuters) --
Wal-Mart Stores, the world's biggest retailer, will pay about $1 billion
to take over a Chinese chain, challenging Carrefour as the largest
operator of super-centres in booming China.
The acquisition of Bounteous Co. by
Bentonville, Arkansas-based Wal-Mart, will be done in phases by 2010 and
could trigger much-needed consolidation in China's ferociously
competitive $1 trillion retail market.
Under terms of the deal, Wal-Mart is
buying 35 percent of Taiwan-based Bounteous, which operates 101
hypermarkets in 34 Chinese cities under the Trust-Mart brand, and will
acquire ownership control of the chain by 2010 if conditions are met.
Terms were not disclosed, but a source
familiar with the situation said Wal-Mart will pay a total of $1 billion
for all of Bounteous.
"It's all about tiering and market
share -- Wal-Mart has a history of buying local operators, and this
could make them No. 1 in China," said an analyst at a European
investment bank in Hong Kong.
Wal-Mart already operates 73 stores in
China and employs more than 37,000 people there.
France-based Carrefour, the world's
No.2 retailer and the largest foreign operator in China, added 20 China
stores last year to bring its total in the country to 90 by the
year-end.
Other players include Germany's Metro,
Britain's Tesco and local operators such as Wumart.
Wal-Mart's China expansion follows
exits last year from its operations in Germany and South Korea.
The company is also close to striking
a joint venture with Bharti Enterprises to enter India, a fragmented
retail market where foreign operators are restricted.
In a statement, Wal-Mart Vice Chairman
Michael Duke called the China investment "an important step in bringing
our additional scale to our China retail business."
Trust-Mart posted 2005 sales of about
13.2 billion yuan ($1.7 billion) at its Chinese hypermarkets, according
to the China Chain Store and Franchise Association, well above
Wal-Mart's 9.9 billion yuan in its Chinese stores.
By comparison, Carrefour had 2005
sales of 17.4 billion yuan at its Chinese hypermarkets, while Metro
recorded sales of 7.5 billion yuan, the data showed.
International expansion has grown more
important for Wal-Mart as U.S. sales growth slows. In its fiscal quarter
ending January 31, total sales rose 10.9 percent to $98.09 billion, but
international sales rose 29.6 percent to $22.73 billion. U.S. sales at
stores open at least one year rose 1.6 percent.
Trust-Mart stores employ more than
31,000 people, and will continue to operate under the Trust-Mart name,
Wal-Mart said, with both companies continuing to open new stores.
Credit Suisse advised Wal-Mart on the
transaction, and UBS advised Bounteous.
Copyright 2007 Reuters. All rights
reserved.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart's Asda could
bid for Sainsbury
Reuters
[back to top]
LONDON - Asda, the British grocer of
Wal-Mart Stores Inc., could counterbid for J. Sainsbury <SBRY.L> should
a private equity consortium launch an offer for Britain's number three
supermarket owner, Citigroup analysts believe.
In a research note, Citigroup said
Britain's second-largest grocer would be in a position to convince
competition authorities it was a better match for Sainsbury than the
private equity team currently considering a bid for the group.
"We maintain that the market is overly
optimistic about a consortium bid, but if one comes, watch out for a
higher offer from Asda," Citigroup analysts wrote in the note published
after Monday's market close.
Sainsbury has been the subject of bid
speculation since private equity firms CVC <CVC.UL>, Kohlberg Kravis
Roberts <KKR.UL> and Blackstone Group <BG.UL> said on February 2 they
were considering an offer. Texas Pacific Group <TPG.UL> later joined the
consortium, according to sources familiar with the matter.
Any bid would be Europe's largest
leveraged buyout at more than 10 billion pounds ($20 billion).
Asda Chief Executive Andy Bond last
week at a newsconference declined to comment on talk he could be looking
at a bid for Sainsbury. He did say he could consider acquiring
convenience stores, an area where Sainsbury and Britain's number one
retailer Tesco <TSCO.L> dominate.
Bankers have said they expect Wal-Mart
<WMT.N> and Asda have looked at Sainsbury because it is the latest
realistic chance for it to catch up with Tesco, which is now double
Asda's size.
Citigroup said it believed a bid was
"still less likely than likely" and Asda would need to let the
consortium bid first in order to "strengthen its argument" with
regulators.
It could then argue a merger of the
two grocers, with respectively about 16 percent of Britain's grocery
market, would create up to $1 billion of synergies. The merged group
would also create a heavyweight competitor to Tesco <TSCO.L>, with its
31 percent of the grocery market.
"The Competition Commission has stated
it is worried that Tesco is so big that no competitor can emerge to
challenge it. If the Commission fears a monopoly situation, it may
settle for a duopoly," Citigroup wrote.
Sainsbury is trading at nearly 37
times 2007 estimated earnings on the bid speculation, compared with 20
times for Tesco and 18 times for the DJ Stoxx index of European
retailers <.SXRP>, Reuters Estimates showed.
Its stock was down 0.7 percent at
522-3/4 pence per share by 1050 GMT, outpeforming a 1.2 percent fall in
the DJ Stoxx index of European retailers.
Copyright 2007 Reuters News Service.
All rights reserved.
[back to top]
Wal-Mart buys 35 per cent stake in Chinese discount market operator
Canadian Press
Tuesday, February 27th, 2007
[back to top | 
