Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses The Almighty Buck United States Technology

Hundreds of Walmart Employees Say They've Been Punished For Taking Sick Days (vice.com) 255

A new report from the workers advocacy group A Better Balance alleges that Walmart consistently punishes employees for taking sick days, even if they have proper documentation from doctors. From a report: A Better Balance interviewed and surveyed more than 1,000 Walmart workers about the company's absence control program -- which awards disciplinary "points" for absences regardless of reason -- and found the retail giant to be in violation of multiple laws. "Giving a worker a disciplinary 'point' for being absent due to a disability or for taking care of themselves or a loved one with a serious medical condition is not only unfair," the report reads, "in many instances, it runs afoul of federal, state, and local laws." Walmart spokesman Randy Hargrove told the Times that the allegations are false, and that the company "understand[s] that associates may have to miss work on occasion," and that they "have processes in place to assist them." The report's worker testimonials say differently. "I came down with a stomach flu and I had to call in due to vomiting and high fever and got a point cause of being sick," recalls an Illinois employee named Veronica. "I hate the fact we got to worry about getting fired cause we caught the flu."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hundreds of Walmart Employees Say They've Been Punished For Taking Sick Days

Comments Filter:
  • by myowntrueself ( 607117 ) on Friday June 02, 2017 @02:27PM (#54537505)

    There seems to be an inconsistency, on the one hand they are employees and on the other they are associates. Which is it really?

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      They are employees, Wal-Mart uses the term associates to make themselves seem friendlier and that workers are a big "team"

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      "Associate" is just the friendly way to refer to your employees in front of your customers or in other PR situations.
      • "Associate" is just the friendly way to refer to your employees in front of ... "

        It is also demeaning for the employee to be used as a marketing gimmick.

        • by dbIII ( 701233 )
          That's probably part of the point. Talk to some HR people at a large company for a while and you'll see how well "fresh meat" would fit into their conversation instead of the buzzword of the day.
          It was especially annoying dealing with their attitude a bit over twenty years ago at a site where there were a few employee deaths every year. They don't see employees as human. The worst would even see slavery as a good idea and it's only the legal system that holds them back.
    • In the case of Amazon, the term associate is preferred because some of their workers are contractors hired by a third party temporary agency. But I do not know if this is the case here.

    • They're associated by employment.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Calling them peasants turned out to be bad for optics, so they're still workshopping titles to see what will make the wage slaves feel empowered.

      • by Xenx ( 2211586 )
        Wouldn't making them feel empowered be the opposite of what they would want? That could incite a slave uprising... or at least a belief they could apply for a better job.
    • > on the one hand they are employees and on the other they are associates. Which is it really?

      Whatever definition is most beneficial to Walmart at that particular moment.

    • They're "consumables."

    • by taustin ( 171655 )

      It is common to the point of being nearly universal in retail that hourly employees who work on the sales floor are called "associates." This is normal for any day that ends in "y."

      • It is common to the point of being nearly universal in retail that hourly employees who work on the sales floor are called "associates." This is normal for any day that ends in "y."

        So its just another word for employee? Where I come from an associate is more of an equal partner. Like a law firm might be "Smith and associates" where theres someone called Smith and a few other people, Smiths associates, who are more or less partners in the firm.

  • Walmart treats employees like shit...I'm deeply shocked.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    It means that maybe someone should investigate to see if it's true. Let us know when it's more than an agenda-driven allegation. Thanks.

  • by luther349 ( 645380 ) on Friday June 02, 2017 @02:48PM (#54537673)
    they will point you no matter the reason then if they dont like you they will try to add on points for no reason i rember in my entire stay there i missed 1 day and they tried to say i had 6 points. they also play favrets to people who kiss there ass vs those that do not. just me if that company can brake a labor law they do.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02, 2017 @03:00PM (#54537783)

      they will point you no matter the reason then if they dont like you they will try to add on points for no reason i rember in my entire stay there i missed 1 day and they tried to say i had 6 points. they also play favrets to people who kiss there ass vs those that do not. just me if that company can brake a labor law they do.

      Thank goodness they don't have any pesky screening restrictions around spelling and grammar...

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      My son worked at WalMart, was hit by a car on way home. He was not very injured, but had 1 week of rest, then 1 week of light duty. They would not honor the dr's orders, wanted the dr to call HR. (try and get an ER dr to do that). So after the week of rest (as his points ticked away) he was fired.

  • It says so right above the non-compete clause

  • by ErichTheRed ( 39327 ) on Friday June 02, 2017 @02:57PM (#54537753)

    There was an article a couple days ago about how white-collar employees in the US are afraid of using their vacation time...this seems like a good bookend to that. The bottom line is that there are very few nice, generous employers anymore. I work for one that actually treats us pretty well; we have on-your-honor sick days and reasonable amounts of vacation. However, stores like this are necessary to show once in a while that employers will take advantage of you at any turn, and some of them are quite bad.

    You see stuff like this a lot in low-margin, low-paying employers with what they consider a disposable workforce. I'm sure Amazon is guilty of this with their warehouse workers, delivery drivers, etc. I guarantee that with steady jobs getting scarcer every day, and a constant narrative depicting business owners as superhuman infallible beings, nothing is going to get better. People are going to be happy to have any kind of job that gives them a steady paycheck, and that's even more true for those at the low end of the skills curve.

    When I see stuff like this, it makes me wish labor unions were more powerful like they once were. Unions would never have backed down on something like this, and union members were happier because of it. All those coal miners and manufacturing workers voting last November should realize that they would have been much better off had they been represented by a strong union. Working families used to be able to survive on one income, and now that's very difficult for most people to do. I'm still hoping the pendulum swings back the other direction before things get bad enough to have another revolution or civil war on our hands in the US.

    • "The bottom line is that there are very few nice, generous employers anymore"

      The margins for doing business in many retail spaces have been going down for quite some time.

      I'm certainly no expert in employee relations. I worked in IT for telemarketing company for several years. Draconian rules much like this were put in place there because employees regularly abused the system due to alcohol/drug addictions, poor decisions, and the stress of the job. Basically, lots of people couldn't bear to come in t

      • by asylumx ( 881307 )

        The bottom line is that there are very few nice, generous employers anymore

        I actually wonder how the assumption came to being that there were ever more than a few. I mean, you go back only 100 or so years and you're smack in the middle of the industrial revolution where the 40-hour work week didn't exist yet. It's debatable whether it really exists today...

        • I wonder how the assumption came into being that this was generosity rather than the self-interest of an actual capitalist in maintaining the productivity of their workforce so that they can reap the profits.

          Oppressing the proles is inefficient.

    • Working families used to be able to survive on one income, and now that's very difficult for most people to do.

      A lot of that is driven by inflation caused by dual-income families. Once a certain number of people had that extra income, their spending was kept in check by raising prices.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by barc0001 ( 173002 )

      >I'm sure Amazon is guilty of this with their warehouse workers, delivery drivers, etc.

      Here's an older article written by someone who went in to see the environment at an Amazon fulfillment center and talked with other workers. I can't imagine it's gotten better since.

      http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/mac-mcclelland-free-online-shipping-warehouses-labor

      Some of it is just f-d right up:

      ""You look way too happy," an Amalgamated supervisor says to me. He has appeared next to me as I work, and in t

  • Walmart employees 1.4 million people in the USA.
    • Nevermind, I see it's hundreds of employees out of just 1,000 surveyed. I suck.
      • by tsqr ( 808554 )

        Nevermind, I see it's hundreds of employees out of just 1,000 surveyed. I suck.

        Or maybe you don't suck. From the "A Better Balance" report: "Based on our conversation with Walmart employees as well as survey results of over 1,000 current and former Walmart workers who have struggled due to Walmart’s absence control program..."

        I would expect a survey of workers "who have struggled due to Walmart's absence control program" to turn up a lot of complaints.

  • In case anyone was wondering how we ended up with two WalMart-related front page stories so close to each other on one day...
  • The fact that they have an official "absence control program" tells you just about all you need to know.

  • really bad idea (Score:5, Insightful)

    by roc97007 ( 608802 ) on Friday June 02, 2017 @03:15PM (#54537925) Journal

    Penalizing workers for staying home when they're sick is a really bad idea. Because, naturally, people will come to work sick rather than risk a penalty, potentially spreading the illness to other workers and to customers. This seldom ends well, either for the parties involved or for the company.

    • by Kjella ( 173770 )

      Penalizing workers for staying home when they're sick is a really bad idea. Because, naturally, people will come to work sick rather than risk a penalty, potentially spreading the illness to other workers and to customers. This seldom ends well, either for the parties involved or for the company.

      Assuming people are actually sick. Here in Norway I've had several not-that-close acquaintances admit/reveal that they use sick leave kinda like a quota, they keep enough for actually being sick but if the rolling window is about to expire they get "sick" and use it more or less as an extra day off. Or at least their threshold for being sick becomes very, very low. And it annoys some other friends of mine that either have too much of a moral spine or are in management positions because they know some people

      • Re:really bad idea (Score:4, Interesting)

        by roc97007 ( 608802 ) on Friday June 02, 2017 @07:57PM (#54539873) Journal

        In counterpoint, I realize this is only another data point, and doesn't necessarily mean anything, but a few years ago in a different company, we had a guy in the department who was actually physically coughing up blood (as personally witnessed) but refused to leave his cube because (as we all knew) downsizing was on the horizon and he didn't want to be seen as a slacker.

        The rest of us who were in close proximity went to management and threatened to all go home sick if *he* didn't. They finally escorted him out of the building.

        And then a few weeks later we were all outsourced, but oh well...

        One of the things I can say about that company is that I never coughed up blood while I was there.

      • by dbIII ( 701233 )
        Nice story but not very likely since it requires too much planning from your mythical slackers thus rendering them not very slack at all.
        Maybe you should have worked on that fiction a bit more before publication.
        • Ok wait. I'm not defending him, just observing from my own experience that there is a certain type of slacker, let's call him "wally", who will put a significant amount of energy and creativity into finding new ways to game the system. It isn't laziness, it's .. let's say, aggressive slacking. I don't know how prevalent it is, but I've personally observed this.

          I was talking to my daughter last night why the take-and-bake pizza took 45 minutes to pick up from the store. I called ahead, and what they made

          • by dbIII ( 701233 )
            In the pizza case - have you ever considered that inexperienced workers under minimal supervision who care very little about their job make a very large number of mistakes?
            I've learned that with fast food it's best to have a very simple order and to check it before you leave (eg. frequently no tomato in ham cheese and tomato). Also avoid the low turnover items, especially ones where it's not obvious when they are undercooked.

            and she said it's a "thing" amongst young workers now

            Exaggerated anecdotes about w

  • by DarthVain ( 724186 ) on Friday June 02, 2017 @03:25PM (#54538003)

    My work started doing this recently. Not all that happy about it. To make matters worse, the implemented it retroactively 2 years before the program actually existed, so I'm already half way through the program. They call it "Non-disciplinary", however if you advance into the program too far you can be let go, which sounds pretty disciplinary to me. I believe I effectively do not have any sick days anymore, I'll just go to work sick from now on, unless I get hit by a bus or something, at which point work will probably be the least of my worries.

    I expect it is a bargaining ploy to the Union. i.e. "You wanna get rid of it? How about those pensions?"
    Though Walmart doesn't even have that I suppose.

  • Not just Walmart (Score:5, Informative)

    by Dr. Jest ( 10116 ) on Friday June 02, 2017 @03:26PM (#54538013)

    I honestly thought this was more normal. I'm not saying it's right. However, I've worked at a software company that had a points-based attendance policy and they actually denied me a raise one year because I called off for illness a few times. It was the worst kind of phone support job and I was a lot younger but I didn't think this was unusual. I definitely thought it was unethical, though. Also stupid, as it encouraged sick people to come in and get everyone else sick, which happened all the time.

  • Who is doing the assigning of these "points"? Is it Management? Do the managers get assigned points when they call in sick? Who assigns the points then, other managers, or lower level workers?
  • by Hydrian ( 183536 ) on Friday June 02, 2017 @03:45PM (#54538183) Homepage

    And non-US workers wonder why US works don't use vacation and sick days when they have them...

    Companies that get caught doing this need to made an example of. Major fines. The fines can't be small enough for a business to chalk it up to the 'cost of doing business' because that's what they do already.

  • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Friday June 02, 2017 @03:46PM (#54538189)
    to tell everyone that if you couldn't find a replacement you had to come in sick. This was at a restaurant. At the time it didn't occur to anyone to call him on it, but this was the 90s so the economy was good and it wasn't enforceable.

    Every call center I ever worked in had sick people non-stop. Everybody was always sick because nobody could stay home when they got sick.

    This is just how it is when you work in low pay industries in a bad economy. If you want it to stop you're gonna have to pass laws, but I'm guessing most people don't want it to stop. They might be uncomfortable with the idea of sick people forced to work or be homeless but they're much more uncomfortable with paying 5% more for stuff. Especially when they're getting paid less and less just like everybody else...

    Walmart's even got a phrase for it: Save Money, Live Better. You're not destroying worker solidarity and driving working families into an endless cycle of poverty. You're Saving Money, Living Better.
    • "I'm guessing most people don't want it to stop"

      It goes to show you that most businessmen aren't actually capitalists. A capitalist should be working to maximize their profits, but instead these guys are getting distracted by minimizing the profits of others.

      "they're much more uncomfortable with paying 5% more for stuff. Especially when they're getting paid less and less just like everybody else... "

      They'd be making more if they maintained the productivity of their workforce. Someone who doesn't believe in

  • ...for puking on a customer?

  • If you have FMLA, there is more protection. Some of these examples sound like sickly people or people with kids that inevitably get sick and need care. Neither are not necessarily FMLA cases. Anyone stop to consider some of those workers who frequently call in and are habitually tardy, the points are adding up, and when they call in it pushes them over the threshold? Shit my wife's employer dings more employees for "patterns of behavior" (subjective, because they feel like fucking with you) than objecti

  • https://news.slashdot.org/story/17/06/02/185219/walmart-is-turning-its-employees-into-delivery-drivers-to-compete-with-amazon

    I commented on the one linked here about how unlikely it would be that Walmart's attempt to force employees to use their own vehicles to deliver its merchandise would in fact be "voluntary".

    This is exactly how it will be.

  • The real problem is employers who treat their employees like children. "Bring a note from the doctor." Kind of like when you were a kid and if you missed school you had to "bring a note from your parents."

    Mine thought it was stupid, and gave me a blanket note at the beginning of the year saying that if I was absent it was with their permission. Trust. Instill it, then build on it.

    Look at the potential for personal information leakage from a doctor's note. They just look up the doctor, and if it's a specia

    • The real problem is employers who treat their employees like children. "Bring a note from the doctor." Kind of like when you were a kid and if you missed school you had to "bring a note from your parents."

      Well, given you behave like one, it kind of makes sense.

      • Au contraire, unlike you, I'm not a sheeple. I flat out refuse to get a doctor's note for an employer, same as I refused to give my employer the court's jury duty paper explaining that I would be absent for 4-5 weeks for a murder trial. If they don't trust me, I don't want to work for them.

        There is absolutely NO legal requirement to provide a doctor's note to an employer for an absence. It's my private business, my time, same as on days off and non-working hours. You're continuing to show you're a fool who

      • You also completely failed to address the topic, because you can't refute my observation that requiring a doctor's note is an invasion of privacy., so you childishly avoid the question the same way a 5-year-old who's told "No" does when they don't get what they want - mommy says "No", 5-year-old changes the topic to "You're a big meanie."

The 11 is for people with the pride of a 10 and the pocketbook of an 8. -- R.B. Greenberg [referring to PDPs?]

Working...