<div style='font: 12pt Arial; text-align: left; '>For example, the 39 hour limit? They do that so they don't have to pay overtime. With your job, this wasn't a problem. The average number of people coming in was probably pretty steady and they were able to schedule you without much of a problem. However, the stock people's work is not always steady. They could have a large shipment of products come in and be forced to stay until everything is out on the floor. The supervisors are then in a bind, they know that everything can't be put out in one normal shift yet they also know that no overtime is allowed *and* that they must get all of the products out before the shift is over. What do they do? They must stay at their budget with the workers that they have, so they typically make the workers clock out and then finish their work or the supervisors themselves are forced to do the same. Thus you have people working overtime but with no pay. I find this unacceptable.
Also, do you know of the benefits that workers get from labor unions? More and better healthcare, better wages, more vacation time, more job security. People in unions are better able to support their families and thus society as a whole benefits. Wal-Mart's view of unions? Evil. They stomp them out every chance they get. If the workers at any store attempt to unionize, they are either punished in some way or are "let go" for unrelated reasons. If, by chance, they do succede in their attempts to unionize a store, then the history has been that Wal-Mart closes that location citing unrelated causes. As of right now, no Wal-Marts are unionized (to my knowledge).
I have other specific examples, such as people being asked to return to work one week after heart surgery, etc. but just believe me that Wal-Mart is in general a poor example of business supporting workers' rights.</div>
