COM 0032.020 2006-2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

These low wages combined with unaffordable benefits have pushed nearly 700,000 of Wal- Mart's workers onto their spouses' health care plan or taxpayer subsidized public assistance. Also before they can be covered, full-time employees must work for six months, and part-time employees must work for at least two years. Wal-Mart's labor turnover rate is 44 percent per year. In California, critics said Wal-Mart's healthcare benefits are often so poor and the coverage is so expensive that many employees chose to go without it and instead get their coverage through state programs like Medicaid and or hospital charity. Wal-Mart has disputed findings that the company encourages its employees to apply for public assistance. However, November 2004 New York Times article cites a study in Georgia that found 10,000 children of Wal-Mart employees were in the state's healthcare program at a cost to taxpayers of $10 million a year. And in California, a study released in August 2004 by researchers at the University of California at Berkeley determined that the healthcare expenses of uninsured Wal-Mart employees were costing the already economically- strapped state $32 million a year in taxpayer funds. A recent PBS documentary on Wal-Mart featured communities in Vermont and California fighting to keep the retail giant out of their neighborhoods, claiming that Wal-Mart could damage their quality of life. A dozen communities, including Oakland and Contra Costa County have passed zoning laws to keep out retailers like Wal-Mart. In Bakersfield, homeowners and union workers successfully fought Wal-Mart's building plans by arguing that the superstore would destroy local business. In November 2004, activists in California went to the ballot with Proposition 72, a statewide initiative that would require big employers, such as Wal-Mart, to offer adequate, affordable healthcare coverage to all of their employees or else pay into a state insurance fund. Wal-Mart campaigned strongly against Proposition 72 and won by 50.9 percent to 49.1 percent. Wal-Mart in putting the local stores out of business is not only offering lower paying jobs and less health benefits but is also facing 38 state and federal lawsuits filed by hourly workers in 30 states, accusing Wal-Mart stores of systematically forcing them to work long hours off the clock unpaid. Low prices for the customer, yes, but also low wages, extra government taxes to pay employees health cost, lost American jobs to China. And the extra wealth goes out of state to the Billionaire Waltons. What is really the cost? Who are really the winners here? Please support Resolution 21-07. Thank you for your consideration of these concerns, Mary Marvin Porter, Island Eyes Video Journalism (Resident of Orchidland) The fish are biting. Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing. http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php 2