Walmart is so evil satan just shakes his head in disgust

[PLATO]

It seems to me that the Shanks' lawyer is guilty of malpractice and should be sued. He obviously did not take into account the fact that $469,000 in medical expenses would need to be covered in any settlement with the trucking company. That is where the problem is. It is likely that liability could have easily been assigned to the trucking company or they would not have settled the case for such a large amount. The fact that the Shanks' lawyer advised them to take a settlement that did not provide for her future care is the "wrong" here.

[Patroklos]

Those damn unions sure are evil for wanting their employees to be able to afford health insurance eh?

The problem is they only worry about the current workers, and only right now. Take a look at GMs pension plan, it is an exercise in stupidly by all involved. Not unlike Social Security.

Its not about just getting benefits and pensions, its about getting benefits and pensions that are sustainable over time.

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Proteus_MST
Not a bad idea,
Especially introducing a fix system of fees per hour of work for lawyers and disallowing them to get a certain percentage of the money they sued for their clients would be nice, as it might put a halt to the masses of ridiculous lawsuits.
Lawsuits like those where people (well, more correctly, their lawyers) got large amounts of money just because Mc Donalds forgot to write onto their cups of coffee that the content might be hot, or just because the manufacturer of a microwave oven forgot to mention that it might be a bad idea to use it to dry your pets

Vesayan's right- the McDonald's Coffee example is an oddity, trotted out any time someone wants to sensationalize how corrupt the legal system is. Frivilous lawsuits get tossed out of court, and their lawyers risk getting sanctioned.

Anyway, the majority of lawyers work for hourly rates. Personal injury lawyers tend to work on contingencies, but most lawyers do not.

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Patroklos
The problem is they only worry about the current workers, and only right now. Take a look at GMs pension plan, it is an exercise in stupidly by all involved. Not unlike Social Security.

Its not about just getting benefits and pensions, its about getting benefits and pensions that are sustainable over time.

Good post. Both the unions and the owners should try to compromise in order to benefit not only themselves, but also future workers and the society as a whole in the long term.

Unfortunately, that's not the American way, dammit. Everyone is supposed to grasp, grasp, grasp-other people and the future be damned

[snoopy369]

1. This sounds reasonable... except for the legal fees

2. He was told to talk to Wal-Mart before settling a suit; he seems to have told them after. Maybe this is the problem? If they'd worked this out before they could have figured something out as part of the settlement perhaps...

You note that they actually got another $119,000 (to the husband for his losses) which went to buying a house. So they are still up about $100,000 on the whole thing ... and the long term disability I imagine they have from Wal-Mart (I'd hope they have automatic LTD for FT employees? Most retailers do ...)

[LordShiva]

Wal-Mart provides cheap prices to millions of Americans, employment to thousands, and livelihoods to millions of poor Chinese.

Teh Evil!!!!11

[uberloz]

The only real problem I see with this situation is that Wal-Mart should have been the one to sue the trucking company in order to recoup what it spent on this lady's medical bills.

Otherwise this is just another example of how people should be extremely vigilant and read very carefully and understand every document they sign.

I also despise that ladies lawyers for taking half her settlement, did you notice that they left her with just less than enough to cover what Wal-Mart needed to recoup for their expenditures?

Do you think that was by coincidence , or that they had read through the woman's employment contract with Wal-Mart and knew exactly what was about to happen?

[PLATO]

Originally posted by uberloz
The only real problem I see with this situation is that Wal-Mart should have been the one to sue the trucking company in order to recoup what it spent on this lady's medical bills.

Otherwise this is just another example of how people should be extremely vigilant and read very carefully and understand every document they sign.

I also despise that ladies lawyers for taking half her settlement, did you notice that they left her with just enough to cover what Wal-Mart recovered?

Do you think that was by coincidence , or that they had read through the woman's employment contract with Wal-Mart and knew exactly what was about to happen?

Certainly the lawyer should have known what to expect and advised his clients accordingly. I don't have a problem with the fee, I have a problem with the quality of representation that they received.

Additionally, I am in FULL agreement that Wal-Mart should have sued the trucking company directly. It needs to be enacted into law that insurors can recover only from the party that created the liability.

[uberloz]

Originally posted by PLATO
Additionally, I am in FULL agreement that Wal-Mart should have sued the trucking company directly. It needs to be enacted into law that insurors can recover only from the party that created the liability.

Wal-Marts lawyers could definately have recovered every penny they needed and it's a very real possibility that Wal-Marts lawyers could have gotten this woman's medical bills paid for by this trucking company for the rest of her life!

It is begining to look as though the husband did a desperate/stupid thing by not using Wal-Mart's legal team. Even though it may have taken longer to get the suit settled, Wal-Mart's lawyers are going to be heavy hitter's in the legal business.

[DirtyMartini]

Originally posted by LordShiva
Wal-Mart provides cheap prices to millions of Americans, employment to thousands, and livelihoods to millions of poor Chinese.

Teh Evil!!!!11

Walmart exploits the labor force both in the US and China, damages the enviroment by selling skads of cheap plastic crap after transporting it halfway across the globe, and drives local retailers out of business by operating at a loss to undercut their prices.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by DirtyMartini
Walmart exploits the labor force both in the US and China

Because Wal-Mart workers work against their will in bonded slavery and would much rather be unemployed/subsistence farmers/fast-food workers

Originally posted by DirtyMartini
damages the enviroment by selling skads of cheap plastic crap after transporting it halfway across the globe

Because consumers are forced to buy what they sell

Originally posted by DirtyMartini
and drives local retailers out of business by operating at a loss to undercut their prices.

Because we'd all be better off paying higher prices at inefficient local retailers, and because we're forced to shop at Wal-Mart even if we value the existence of local retailers

[Vesayen]

Consumers are mostly unaware of the true harm walmart does shiva.

I won't buy anything from that piss hole and encourage others to do the same.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by LordShiva
Wal-Mart provides ... livelihoods to millions of poor Chinese.

Teh Evil!!!!11

Teh Chinese pay us back by trying to kill us all. Sounds like teh stupid to me.

[Kuciwalker]

LordShiva

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Patroklos


The problem is they only worry about the current workers, and only right now. Take a look at GMs pension plan, it is an exercise in stupidly by all involved. Not unlike Social Security.

Its not about just getting benefits and pensions, its about getting benefits and pensions that are sustainable over time.

at the time those plans were set up, the future changes in the size of the big three work force were not expected. Rather different from Social, where the future payouts can be determined actuarially.