Can Wal-Mart be Unionized?
By Montag | Related entries in Corporate Business, The WorldLabor groups will try.
Labor leaders from around the world will meet in Chicago next week to draft a plan to organize Wal-Mart Stores Inc. workers in certain countries, including Brazil, Argentina, Germany and the United Kingdom, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.
Reuters: Labor group to organize Wal-Mart workers
The US isn’t on that list, but the meeting is in Chicago. I imagine the goal is to set up a sort of domino effect by which once the effort is successful in other countries, organization attempts can be made here. Wal-Mart will not sit still for it. Can it be done, nonetheless?
This entry was posted on Thursday, August 18th, 2005 and is filed under Corporate Business, The World. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
August 18th, 2005 at 9:32 am
IIRC, the butchers managed to unionize at a Walmart in the US several years ago. After initial opposition and various attempts at dirty tricks, management recognized the union and negotiated a contract. A few months later, they announced they were phasing out the butcher’s shop in that particular Walmart. I wouldn’t be surprised if they shut down entire stores to stop the contagon of unionization, at least in the US.
August 18th, 2005 at 6:16 pm
Yeah, but what happens when they start shutting down stores in such a way that they start leaving gaps in their area of service? Most Wal-Marts seem to be built so that they overlap neighborhoods they can sell to. I can tick off three stores within a 20 minute radius of where I am right now. I don’t think they’re going to do anything that might potentially lose them their consumer base.
August 18th, 2005 at 7:08 pm
I personally support the idea of unionising at Wal-Mart. More to the point, I disagree with the tactics that Wal-Mart management takes in preventing unions forming which has been alleged to be illegal and has pending court cases over their behaviour. If labor practices of Wal-Mart are bad enought to merit needing a union then by all means the workers should be allowed to organize one.
My opinion on unions is that they should be used when necessary and disband when they no longer serve a useful purpose. SOme companies don’t have unions because there really isn’t a need for one. Contrast Costco with Sam’s Club (a Wal-Mart spin-off to compete with Costco) in terms of labor practices. Costco, pays their employees a fair wage, decent benefits and is still competitive. They have a different philosophy on labor relations. Their employees (direct) don’t need a union since they aren’t getting the shaft. Maybe Wal-Mart could adopt this model and prevent unions by simply being a better corporate citizen and adopt a different philosophy.
August 19th, 2005 at 11:21 am
“Costco, pays their employees a fair wage, decent benefits and is still competitive. They have a different philosophy on labor relations. ”
Yes. In effect, Costco management is the workers’ union. It works this way in the Army, too. And it works well in general. Costco stock prices are doing pretty well, maybe better than Wal-Marts’ IIRC.