Wal-Mart is too nice to unions, too concerned about the environment, and too accommodating to gays and lesbians.

- Inspired by Peter Flaherty of the National Legal and Policy Center

Backstory: In this Newsweek article, http://www.newsweek.com/id/139426, Daniel McGinn writes: "Then there's Wal-Mart, the Arkansas-based retailer whose shareholder meetings are celebrity-packed, high-wattage showcases. Last year's gathering featured the comedian Sinbad and musical numbers by Jennifer Lopez and the cast of "High School Musical." But amid these surprise performances, the most unexpected moment came when shareholder activists were each given three minutes at the podium. Most offered run-of-the-mill liberal criticisms that hit every large company: a Roman Catholic nun urged Wal-Mart to support universal health insurance; several speakers suggested the company rein in executives' huge paychecks. But from the other end of the spectrum came Peter Flaherty, lambasting Wal-Mart for being too nice to unions, too concerned about the environment and too accommodating to gays and lesbians." It's an interesting argument because Wal-Mart has always come across more as conservative than liberal. On another note, do you need to know the values and policies of the place where you shop in order to shop there? For instance, Wal-Mart has done much with its green efforts lately. Do the social policies of a company really impact how consumers relate to it? In other words, does it affect the bottom line?

The social policies of a company could impact how customers relate to it especially when customers have other choices of where to shop. If you disagree with a particular vendor and you live in a place like New York, you've got a lot of other options of where to take your business. But not everywhere is like that.
I'd imagine that for a great number of Wal Mart shoppers, the convenience of having everything you need - clothes, food, housewares, etc - all under one roof is a tremendous benefit. (Not to mention that prices will be much more competitive than at independently owned alternatives.) Legions of shoppers might disagree with some of the company's values and policies...but if the only alternative is buying more expensive eggs, bread and shoes at another store (or stores), and you need to put more $4 gas into the car to get there, it might not make too much sense.

I don't see how anyone can be TOO concerned with the environment. Global warming is a serious issue, one that most major corporations aren't concerning themselves with. If a rich, huge-name enterprise like Wal-Mart spreads the word, more power to them.

What does 'too accommodating to gays and lesbians' mean exactly? Also if a company is concerned about the environment - especially a huge player like Wal-Mart then how can that be a bad thing?

Wal-Mart posted a 10% increase in sales in spite of the poor condition of the economy, one of the only retailers to do so. I think Mike is right on. In more competitive markets, where people have a choice, social policies will absolutely come into play. In many communities, however, Wal-mart is the only choice. It's cheap, and they have everything. And according to these numbers, it seems their bottom line isn't affected by social policies OR a stagnant economy.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/05/13/news/companies/walmart_earnings/index.ht...

Wal-Mart too nice to unions, too concerned about the environment, too nice to gays and lesbians? Is Peter Flaherty out of his mind, or is his connection to reality a long distance call and a bad connection.. I believe it's the 2nd. I've been in business since childhood (got expelled for showing too much initiative for an Indn kid), and Pete & I don't breathe the same air. For which I'm glad. His perspective stinks! So long as we have people like him, W, Karl Rove, & Dick Cheney in any position that appears to have 'power', we will need unions for most companies. There is no such thing as "too concerned" about the environment - we only get one earth. And winkte-ism is a natural function that happens in many species.
Someone asks if the social policies of a company really impact how consumers relate to it; do they affect the bottom line?.. The answer is "yes". I don't spend money at Wal-Mart unless I can avoid it; our company policy strongly encourages our people to buy elsewhere too and we back that with incentives. ITI aren't mainstream, but I don't spend my Indn money where I don't believe it, I, my People, or the environment are SHOWN respect. Actions speak louder than words - this is no mere claim, it's fact. We don't care if we're the only ones doing this, but I'm willing to bet we're not. Buying elsewhere keeps competition alive; it keeps small businesses alive; and you bet every dollar helps. A 'million' is still comprised of single units at its heart..

Yes social and envirnomental policies of a company can and do effect the bottom line through reducing costs and gaining the growing number of conscious consumers. This is exactly why Wal-Mart is making a green effort by hiring the former head of the Sierra Club to help them reduce packaging and green up while sponsoring and attending major green events.

The question we, as consumers who require clean air to breath, water to drink, and a planet to live on, should ask of ourselves and companies going green: "Are you greenwashing or are you socially AND environmentaly responsible?"

For more on socially responsible business and the conscious consumer check out:

Fair Trade: Why Settle For Monetary Success?

--
Kellee K. Sikes,
"Serving social entrepreneurs and social enterprise by aligning people, process, and publicity for growth and success."

Principal, Pioneer Technologies Consulting
www.pioneer-technologies.com

Lee Scott, CEO of Wal-Mart, aims to shop the community. If the community includes unions, environmentalists, and same sex couples then Wal-Mart is simply acting as a mirror. When the community changes so will Wal-Mart. So change the storyline for American Communities and you will also change the storyline for Wal-Mart. Simple really isn't it?

This is the company that will routinely open stores in and around small towns across America, obliterates all the small businesses around it by selling items for extremely low prices and when there is an inkling of a union, the store will shut down rather than risk the workers being unionized. This leaves the small towns with a small business community that is no longer existent, with no Walmart, unemployment and economic depression. Wal-Mart: The High Price of Low Cost documentary says it all.

Wal-Mart is not accommodating. Wal-Mart is a business. Wal-Mart wants you to shop only at Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart is a one-stop spend all your money stop for people across the globe. I think it is disgusting the way they feed off of communities that have no alternatives. They treat their employees badly and when you least expect it they build a new one. I have 5 Wal-Mart Super Centers within a ten minute drive of my house. They each price different products differently and each contain something a little bit different. If Wal-Mart appears to be accommodating it is only to increase their sales and end the life of small businesses everywhere. From the local bakery to the local meat market to the neighborhood clothing store, Wal-Mart beats all their prices. It doesn't matter the quality when you can buy a t-shirt for $3 and if it stretches out you go get another one. There is not quality when it comes to Wal-Mart, only profit. I have watched and expressed outrage as Wal-Mart squelches product lines to do what they Wish. To increase their profits and trample the not so little guys.
Wal-Marts only opinion is to make more cash than any other retail and grocery business.