The relationship between Wal-Mart and its “associates” is based on the concept of ‘respect for the individual’. The question is: which individual? The company that employs over 1.1 million workers worldwide, every once in awhile has a little nasty affair that they don’t like to talk about. Take the case of David Clark, who used to work at Wal-Mart. Two years ago, David’s home was raided by Wal-Mart employees and the cops. The entourage seized more than 400 items that they claimed David had taken illegally. David sued the company for wrongly accusing him of theft. It turns out that David repaired merchandise that had been damaged from his workshop at home. The items that Wal-Mart seized included property he bought, electronic items he was fixing for customers, and some goods that Wal-Mart gave him. David was never charged with theft, and the judge in his trial determined that only 37 of the items belonged to Wal-Mart in the first place. The jury which heard the case, ruled that Wal-Mart was liable for defamation and invasion of privacy. And best of all, the jury awarded David Clark $1,650,000. It would have taken David roughly 71 years of working at Wal-Mart to make that much money. Now THAT”S respect!
Somehow I don’t think David Clark is going to use his new-found wealth for a shopping spree at Wal-Mart. Just another “associate” story you won’t see Mr. Smiley talking about on the network TV ads.
