Share This Page

Wal-Mart pays for union 'peace'

| Sunday, Nov. 25, 2012, 8:56 p.m.

Big Labor ratcheted up the Black Friday Strikesgiving tension this year with professional grievance-mongers and workers picketing at Wal-Mart stores.

Attention, Wal-Mart directors: Mob appeasement never works. The company's management has tried repeatedly to stave off union thuggery through political “partnerships” and capitulation. It has failed.

As you may recall, the discount retail giant shocked many observers in 2009 when it announced it was embracing the principles of President Obama's federal health care mandate. The nation's largest private (and nonunion) employer was joined by its perennial arch-enemy, the Service Employees International Union, and the far-left Center for American Progress.

In their joint ObamaCare letter, the strange bedfellows declared: “As the nation's largest private employer, the nation's largest union of health care workers with over 1 million members and a think tank that has been a leader on health care policy, we have worked closely in support of health care reform since 2006, when we came together to help break the stalemate that had defined the health care debate for too long.”

Wal-Mart, SEIU and CAP together endorsed ObamaCare's employer mandate and “shared responsibility” provisions, which they called “important proposals that should be included in the current efforts to reform our nation's health care system.” These unholy alliances were forged out of Wal-Mart's desperation and political expediency.

Providing cover for the White House on ObamaCare bought Wal-Mart one day of goodwill theater. But SEIU and George Soros operatives have promoted a no-holds-barred campaign against Wal-Mart for decades. The union funded an incendiary “Wal-Mart Watch” website with at least $1 million in rank-and-file employee dues. Wal-Mart foolishly contributed between $500,000 and $999,999 to the Soros-backed Center for American Progress. Then Soros' MoveOn hit team instigated the Black Friday strikes online.

Similar corporate outreach to the Congressional Black Caucus brought rebukes from, you guessed it, SEIU leaders, which blasted Wal-Mart for “undermining standards for all American workers.”

Never mind that Wal-Mart employs 1.3 million people, 250,000 of whom have been there for more than 10 years and 165,000 of whom are hourly associates who were promoted last year.

Nor will the company ever have the sympathies of the president — despite first lady Michelle Obama's comfy seat on the corporate board of TreeHouse Foods. Wal-Mart happens to be the conglomerate's biggest customer.

The TreeHouse Foods position netted Mrs. Obama $45,000 in 2005 and $51,200 in 2006 — as well as 7,500 TreeHouse stock options worth more than $72,000 for each year.

Barack Obama has said nothing about the strike actions, but he made his allegiances clear in 2007, when he told union activists he “would not shop” at Wal-Mart. Company heir Samuel Walton forked over $300,000 to the Priorities USA super PAC, run by former Obama flack Bill Burton. How's that working out?

For the sake of the company's survival, I hope the Black Friday lesson wasn't lost on the rest of Wal-Mart's management and heirs.

When you lie down with thugs, you get up with ... more black eyes.

Michelle Malkin is the author of “Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks and Cronies” (Regnery 2009).

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.