The largest retailer in the world, Wal-Mart has always promised to bring low-cost goods to suburban and rural Americans. Recently, the company has announced plans to build four locations in the District of Columbia. However, given the company’s poor labor practices, historical intolerance of unionization, and damaging effects on the surrounding community, the D.C. Council should demand that Wal-Mart amend its predatory business practices before it opens its doors in the District.
Wal-Mart has perfected a business model that relies on low wages and temporary labor. Instead of providing healthcare for its retail employees, Wal-Mart has encouraged its employees to sign up for Medicaid. If the employees at a Wal-Mart store choose to form a labor union, a right that is protected by federal law, the company shuts down the store—a zero-tolerance policy for labor unions that is not acceptable.
Wal-Mart stores have also led to reduced wages in the communities they enter and have driven away small businesses who treat their workers more responsibly. A new study by Hunter College found that the presence of a Wal-Mart in a neighborhood pushes wages downward and reduces benefits for workers in surrounding businesses. In light of this, the D.C. Council should require Wal-Mart to sign an enforceable Community Benefits Agreement, requiring the company to pay decent wages, offer basic benefits, and respect the rights of its workers in order to do business in D.C.
Wal-Mart executives and some city officials have argued that the locations of the proposed Wal-Mart stores would provide greater access to fresh produce and groceries in neighborhoods lacking adequate access to these goods. However, the City Council has already taken steps to address this very problem through the FEED D.C. Act. Passed in late December, this legislation provides tax incentives and grants to bring full service grocery outlets to food deserts in the Washington area. While it remains to be seen how far-reaching these measures are, they carry none of the negative consequences of the opening of a Wal-Mart.
Right now, the negative consequences of Wal-Mart’s business model outweigh the few possible benefits—benefits that the District is already working to bring to the city in alternative ways. If Wal-Mart is to come to D.C., the City Council must do what it can to ensure the company respects its workers and treats them fairly. Groups like the AFL-CIO have already begun protesting at the offices of the City Council and are lobbying to get Wal-Mart to sign the Community Benefits Agreement. This agreement would go a long way towards blunting the negative impact the superstore may bring to D.C. neighborhoods. These efforts are important to the vibrancy of the city, and they deserve student support.
What Wal-Mart does do – that very few other businesses I’ve patronized manage – is provide meaningful employment for people with mental and development problems. I’ve done a lot of shopping in my time, and Wal-Mart is one of the only places where I’ve come across workers who appear to have Down syndrome, for example. Personally, I value that.