Walmart Ethics: Union Busting and Healthcare Coverage

Introduction

This paper discusses two significant ethical problems at Walmart, examining the ethical, legal, and value principles at stake in each case. Walmart has faced considerable scrutiny and many legal challenges over the past decade — partly because of its massive size and success, and partly because of arguably poor ethical decision-making. Walmart is constantly under societal observation, both despite and because of its popularity.

Walmart and Union Busting

The two most pressing ethical concerns in this workplace context are reflective of the two most common complaints made against Walmart, both of which relate to employee treatment and working conditions. While the author has not personally experienced the stressors associated with these issues, observing colleagues navigate them reveals an undercurrent that shapes the way Walmart conducts its relationship with employees.

Union-busting arguments against Walmart claim that the company spends a significant amount of money each year ensuring that its employees do not join labor unions. Though these tactics are highly secretive and difficult to prove, former workers — and the journalists who have covered them — claim that union busting is rampant and that employees are frequently bullied by management not to join or participate in union activities. Workers who do involve themselves in union activities, the allegations suggest, are removed from the schedule rather than formally fired (O'Loughlin, 2006). The only way to document these activities is through anecdotal evidence, as former employees provide what critics call biased "proof," or through what Walmart characterizes as coincidental business and department closures at sites where unionization was attempted (Farfan, 2009).

The ethical violation here is one of choice, not of legal right. It should be noted that union memberships and formations are not necessarily straightforwardly beneficial to all workers. Although collective bargaining may become possible through unionization, employees in low-wage professions may find that joining a union feels like paying a great deal to receive relatively little. Members are required to pay union dues, attend and support union functions, and — critically — stop work during a strike with limited or no compensation. For workers already stretching limited resources, these obligations offer no guarantee of better conditions, wages, or benefits.

Ethical Dimensions of Unionization

The core ethical violation, therefore, centers on the principle that all employees should have the freedom to choose whether to join a union, and that this choice — or lack of membership — should never be treated as a condition of employment. While mandatory union membership exists in some industries, it is rarely the case in the retail sector. Despite this, many Walmart employees have been adamantly attempting to unionize, most likely because they have been told — through both overt and covert actions — that they cannot do so. Among the reported tactics: Walmart has closed entire stores within a year of attempted unionization and eliminated entire departments across the country when a single store department successfully organized (Farfan, 2009). As Farfan (2009) notes, thousands of workers continue signing union cards even knowing that no store or department that has done so has been allowed to remain open for more than a year.

The reality is that there is simply no conclusive data to substantiate the reported union busting said to take place at Walmart. Regardless of anecdotal evidence, the company's legal actions are largely tied up in settlement proceedings, as Walmart is far more likely to resolve lawsuits out of court than allow complaints to proceed to public trial (Farfan, 2009). The only way to improve the ethical environment surrounding this issue is for Walmart to become more transparent in its actions — particularly as it now promotes ethics as the centerpiece of its corporate social responsibility strategy (Murphy, 2010). Most observers argue that until Walmart permits unionization as a genuine option for employees, workers will continue to fight for it. As Farfan (2009) points out, the greatest challenge to a retail giant of Walmart's scale will come through mass employee action: when more employees than Walmart can easily discredit or remove rise up in response to anti-union pressure, the company will be more likely to relent.

Conclusion

Walmart, as one of the largest companies in the nation, is constantly under scrutiny due in large part to the economy of scale — when Walmart makes a business decision, ethical or otherwise, it makes a large splash rather than a drop and ripple. This paper analyzed two ethical issues at Walmart: union busting, which is difficult to prove and legally permissible, and the denial of healthcare benefits to a large portion of its workforce, which is similarly hard to document and legally allowable. Yet both issues are clearly central to changes Walmart needs to make — not only in image but in practice — given their far-reaching implications for millions of people in the United States and beyond.