Wal-Mart Gets Fined in the US for Not Allowing Employes to Take Breaks

Why will it be different in Mexico where there is even less worker proteccion. Read the story in English and the same news in Spanish:

Wal-Mart Workers Win Wage Suit
Retailer Forced Overtime Without Pay, Jury Finds
By Amy Joyce
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 13, 2006; D02

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. violated Pennsylvania labor laws by forcing hourly employees to work through breaks and beyond their shifts without overtime pay, a jury decided yesterday.

Lawyers for the employees said the decision could result in $62 million or more in damages.

The lawsuit, brought by two employees on behalf of almost 187,000 current and former Wal-Mart employees, claimed that the company made workers in Pennsylvania miss more than 33 million rest breaks from 1998 to 2001. At least 57 other wage-and-hour cases have been filed across the United States against the world's largest retailer, and many of them are awaiting class-action certification, according to company filings.

"I think this proves that Wal-Mart's sweatshop mind-set persists," said Chris Kofinis, a spokesman with WakeUp Wal-Mart, a United Food and Commercial Workers Union-backed group. "There is some point where Wal-Mart will have to listen and it's got to treat its workers with respect and fairness."

Michael Donovan, a lawyer for the employees, would not comment until damages are awarded. He expects that to happen today. In court, the lawyers argued that the company denied breaks to cut labor costs and increase productivity.

"We take matters very seriously when associates say they have been mistreated in any way. However, because the jury is still in deliberation, it would not be appropriate to comment on the matter until a final decision has been made," said Sarah Clark, a spokeswoman for Wal-Mart.

Neal Manne, Wal-Mart's attorney, argued that the company properly paid its employees and that the lead plaintiffs were among a small group of disgruntled workers, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer's coverage of the trial.

Company officials said records appeared to show that workers who did not have breaks did so because they chose not to, or did not sign out, according to news reports.

The company has been trying repair its image after critics cast negative light on the company, claiming it pays poverty wages and offers few benefits.

The case is one of several class-action wage-and-hour suits against the company to go to trial. In December, a jury awarded $172 million to about 116,000 current and former Wal-Mart and Sam's Club workers in California who claimed that they were illegally denied lunch breaks. Wal-Mart is appealing the verdict.

In 2002, a federal jury in Oregon found that Wal-Mart employees were forced to work off the clock and awarded back pay to 83 workers. In 2004, Wal-Mart settled a similar lunch break case in Colorado for $50 million.

One of the pending cases, which accuses the company of paying men more than women nationally, is the largest private employer civil rights class action in history. Wal-Mart has asked an appeals court to overturn the class-action status of the case.

The Pennsylvania case is larger than the California case in that it covers more employees and involves off-the-clock work, missed rest breaks and missed meal breaks. The jury in the six-week trial in the Court of Common Pleas in Philadelphia found in favor of Wal-Mart on the missed-meal claim.

Employees said they were pressured by managers to cut meals short and skip breaks. Two cashiers said they were locked in the store after it closed to restock merchandise.

Staff researcher Richard Drezen contributed to this report.


© 2006 The Washington Post Company


Pagará Wal-Mart 78 mdd por incumplir jornada legal
EFE
El Universal
Nueva York, EU
Viernes 13 de octubre de 2006

Compensará la firma a los trabajadores del estado por no respetar sus horas de descanso y obligarlos a trabajar tiempo adicional sin sueldo

16:33 Un tribunal de Pensilvania determinó hoy que la cadena Wal-Mart deberá pagar 78 millones de dólares en compensación a los trabajadores del estado por no respetar sus horas de descanso y obligarlos a trabajar tiempo adicional sin sueldo.

La demanda colectiva fue presentada por dos trabajadoras que alegaron que la compañía las obligaba a trabajar más allá de su horario normal sin pagarles horas extra y que no respetaba las horas de descanso estipuladas por la ley.


El jurado integrado por 12 miembros ya había fallado ayer a favor de las demandantes, Dolores Hummel y Michele Braun, en caso en que que estaban representados los 187 miltrabajadores que emplea Wal-Mart en ese estado.


Este es el segundo caso que pierde Wal-Mart en los últimos meses relacionado con demandas de sus empleados por no cumplir con la legislación laboral estadounidense.


En diciembre, un tribunal de California determinó el pago de 172.3 millones de dólares a los trabajadores de la compañía a quienes no se les respetaba el tiempo establecido para comer.


El fallo de hoy señala que la empresa sí respetaba este tiempo, de media hora sin pago, en el caso de los trabajadores de Pensilvania.


Según la ley, un empleado que trabaja más de seis horas tiene derecho a dos descansos de 15 minutos cada uno, sin pago, más media hora para comer, también sin sueldo.


Los demandantes aseguraron que la empresa los obligaba a trabajar más allá de sus horas legales y que no les permitía tomarse los descansos a los que tenían derecho.


La empresa alegó que eran los mismos trabajadores los que optaban por no tomarse todo el tiempo de descanso o que muchas veces no firmaban los registros en que se constatan las horas de descanso.


alcr