STOCK QUOTES     More market data...

Wal-Mart workers' suit wins class-action status

By Shirleen Holt
Seattle Times business reporter

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive Most read articles Most e-mailed articles

Stocker and sales associate Georgie Hartwig figures she's in for about the same, not counting unpaid inventory and holiday hours.

Greeter and fitting-room attendant Bella Blaubergs said she was locked inside the store after clocking out and was forced to go without meal and rest breaks to finish her work.

The women, who say the retail giant engaged in a "systematic scheme of wage abuse" against its hourly employees, scored a victory of sorts when King County Superior Court Judge Terry Lukens granted class-action certification for the suit, their lawyers said yesterday.

The class-action lawsuit spans nine years and covers about 40,000 current and former employees at more than 30 Washington state locations, including Sam's Clubs and Supercenters.

It alleges that Wal-Mart routinely:

• Pressured hourly employees not to report all their time worked.

• Failed to keep true time records, sometimes shaving hours from employee logs.

• Failed to give employees full rest or meal breaks.

• Threatened to fire or demote employees who would not work off the clock.

• Required workers to attend unpaid meetings and computer training.
 
"Wal-Mart is one of the largest employers in the United States. It can afford to pay its employees for the work they perform," said Beth Terrell, a lawyer with Tousley Brain Stephens, the Seattle firm bringing the case.

Wal-Mart denies the claims but has not decided whether to appeal the class certification, a spokeswoman said in a prepared statement.

"These types of allegations are counter to everything the company stands for," said Christi Davis Gallagher. "Wal-Mart's policy is to pay associates for every minute they work. Any manager who requires or even tolerates off-the-clock work would be violating company policy."

The suit spans Sept. 10, 1995, to the present. It claims that Wal-Mart has a strict "no-overtime" policy that it enforces by punishing workers who put in more than 40 hours a week without authorization. Yet store managers assign more work than can be done in a 40-hour week, the suit claims, forcing employees to work off the clock to complete their tasks or risk losing their jobs.

Hartwig worked at the Colville store between 1994 and 2000. She says she worked two to five hours over her recorded time every week because her workload was so heavy. She also said she saw hours "disappear" from her time records, a claim that lawyers said is echoed by other current and former Wal-Mart employees.

State wage laws basically require employers to pay hourly workers time and a half after 40 hours a week.

The lawsuit claims that managers reprimanded and sometimes humiliated employees who accounted for overtime. In the Auburn store, for example, the manager punished employees who violated the no-overtime policy by posting their name next to the time clock.

The company is facing 40 wage-and-hour lawsuits as well as a gender-discrimination class-action case filed on behalf of 1.6 million current and former women employees. Wal-Mart lost a similar wage-and-hour case in Portland, Ore., two years ago.

The case is expected to go to trial some time next year. The suit seeks back pay, which Terrell says could be "in the tens of millions of dollars," as well as undisclosed damages. Unlike other class-action lawsuits, which require class members to sign up or "opt in," Lukens' order includes all former hourly paid employees.

Shirleen Holt: 206-464-8316 or sholt@seattletimes.com