Wal-Mart is ramping up its Washington activity to push for comprehensive health care reform, and the world’s largest retailer says it is ready to use its economic muscle to get out in front and influence the discussion.
“We’re willing to take a stand independently and not just do it through our associations,” said Linda Dillman, the retail giant’s executive vice president of benefits, who was in town last week with a posse of Wal-Mart employees bending ears on Capitol Hill.
Long a target of complaints from labor, environmental and health care activists, Wal-Mart has been trying to rehabilitate its reputation in recent years by going green in its stores and becoming more employee-friendly. For instance, the company has begun offering employees a broader range of low-cost insurance options and, as part of its health care reform campaign, is pushing for greater use of electronic medical records – and helping doctors pay for the upgrade.
If you really cared, Walmart, why would you try to sue a brain-damaged woman to collect on health insurance money you doled out?
Walmart (and other super-sized employers) should be leading the effort to not only get health care reform, but to get to a single payer system. Even a company that sucks at providing healthcare, such as Walmart, has to be paying a pretty penny on employee benefits.
is that regardless of whether or not wal-mart does something good or not, you’re going to be opposed to whatever the action is because you plain don’t like wal-mart.
you can not only predict the future, but you base your predictions on mind-reading! I’m impressed.
But he is right, and the post can be discounted accordingly.
I’d check your policy fine print, too, unless you work for the state or a town then no worries, be happy!
<
p>The SEIU’s concern is touching but all they want is more power and more monthly dues (like they really give a sh*t about their members, just like the UAW), so they do everything they can to bad mouth and hamstring Wal-Mart. They’re pissed off because the majority of Wal-Mart workers do not want to be unionized.
<
p>As a shareholder and customer, I don’t want the unions in Wal-Mart either. Do we really need another GM?
I’m not sure I get where you’re coming from WUWM. Your concern seems to be that Walmart is taking a position that it doesn’t really believe in, or that its motives are somehow pretextual. Have I got that right? Why does Walmart’s true motives or purity of spirit matter?
<
p>As for the lawsuit you reference, again, I’m not sure I understand. Maybe I’m missing something, but isn’t this just plain old subrogation that happens, and should happen, all the time? As I understand it, the victim was injured in an accident and received money from the tortfeasor to cover her medical expenses. In that situation, isn’t the insurer generally entitled to that money to the extent it has incurred costs on the insured’s behalf? Or put another way, is the victim entitled to recover twice for the same expenses?
<
p>TedF
<
p>They matter in predicting what WalMart will do next. Look, I’m glad that WalMart is taking steps to improve the fuel efficiency in their trucks and reduce packaging. But, when you understand that they’re doing it to lower their financial costs not to protect the environment, you’ll be able to predict that they won’t switch to more recycled content in their packaging unless it also lowers their costs.
<
p>So, I’m glad Wal*Mart is interested in health care reform, just as I’m glad they’re interested in fuel conservation. But, if you understand why (profit, not selflessness) it helps to understand what they’re willing to do or not do in other situations.
What?
<
p>English, please. Not all of us speak Thomas More’s Law French.
<
p>dude, he said “tortfeasor” uh huh uh huh huh