High stakes in Wal-Mart fight

OLYMPIA — With a key deadline looming, labor unions and their allies are pressing state lawmakers for a vote on legislation aimed at forcing Wal-Mart to spend more on health care for its workers.

On the surface, it might seem odd that unions would want to improve benefits for workers at one of the country's most fiercely anti-union companies.

But this isn't just some sort of altruistic outpouring. This is war.

After trying in vain for years to organize Wal-Mart employees, the nation's largest unions are leading a coast-to-coast assault against the Arkansas-based retail behemoth. Washington has become one of the hottest battlefields.

Wal-Mart officials say retribution — and desperation over declining union membership — is driving the attacks.

"That's what this all boils down to," said Jennifer Holder, regional spokeswoman for Wal-Mart. "They've been unsuccessful at organizing us, so they're waging this multimillion-dollar campaign to slow our growth."

House Bill 2517, Senate Bill 6356


What they would do: Require companies with 5,000 or more employees to put at least 9 percent of their total payroll costs toward health-care benefits. Companies that don't put that amount toward health care would be required to pay the difference to the state.

Union leaders say their main motivation is to stem the erosion of worker benefits and shore up a failing health-care system. But some have painted it as nothing less than a fight for survival — for the unions and for the unionized companies that compete with Wal-Mart.

Union leaders and other critics say the nation's largest private employer is dragging down the standard of living not just for its own employees but for millions of other Americans.

They say the company scrimps on health-care benefits for its workers. As Wal-Mart continues to grow, union leaders say, its competitors are coming under increased pressure to reduce benefits as well.

What's more, critics say, Wal-Mart is essentially being subsidized by taxpayers because thousands of its workers opt for government-subsidized health care instead of a company plan. Two recent state reports show Wal-Mart had twice as many employees on state-subsidized health care as any other company in 2004.

One way or another, unions aim to force Wal-Mart to boost health benefits.

"We don't try to pretend that we're doing this just out of the goodness of our hearts to protect Wal-Mart workers," said David Groves, spokesman for the Washington State Labor Council. "And this isn't just about protecting taxpayers. It's also about protecting good union jobs in the retail sector that are disappearing because of Wal-Mart's business model."

Union efforts foiled

Wal-Mart has 1.3 million employees in the U.S.; about 16,000 work in the state. Despite constant organizing efforts, none of the company's 3,800 U.S. stores is unionized.

Whenever unions have found a toehold at Wal-Mart, the company has chopped off the toe.

Six years ago, shortly after a group of meat cutters at a Wal-Mart store in Texas voted to unionize, the company closed its meat-cutting departments nationwide. Last year, after the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW) successfully organized workers at a store in Canada, Wal-Mart closed the store.

Said Holder: "We don't need a third party to intervene in our relationship with our associates," which is what Wal-Mart calls its employees.

During the past year, the UFCW and other unions have mounted an aggressive campaign to slow Wal-Mart's growth and sully its reputation.

They launched sophisticated Internet-based grassroots efforts such as "Wake Up Wal-Mart" and "Wal-Mart Watch." Whenever the company moves to open a new store, they help rally local efforts to block it.

In Washington, the UFCW recently hired Steve Williamson, executive secretary-treasurer of the King County Labor Council for the past six years, to oversee the union's effort to rein in Wal-Mart.

And nationwide, unions are leading the push for so-called "Fair Share" legislation in more than two dozen state capitols.

The UFCW recently launched at $100,000 television ad campaign in Washington urging lawmakers to pass the legislation.

The battle here is over a bill that would require companies with more than 5,000 employees to put at least 9 percent of their payroll costs toward health-care benefits.

It's unclear how many Washington companies don't meet the 9 percent threshold. But Wal-Mart appears to be the only company affected by a similar measure approved last month in Maryland. A retail trade group sued last week to block that law from taking effect.

Wal-Mart lobbyists criticize the legislation as "purely political" and argue it offers no meaningful solutions to soaring health-care costs.

And the company defends its benefits package by pointing out that whenever it opens a new store, it gets far more applicants than there are openings.

"We must be doing something right," said Wal-Mart lobbyist Amy Hill.

Governor's misgivings

In order to survive in Olympia, the bill must get through either the House or Senate by Tuesday. While it has strong backing from rank-and-file majority Democrats in both chambers, leaders have been unwilling to give the bill a vote.

Democratic Gov. Christine Gregoire has also expressed misgivings about the bill.

"I fully agree with the intention behind Fair Share," Gregoire said. "Large employers should not be sending employees to the [state-funded] Basic Health Plan or to Medicaid. That's just wrong."

But she said she isn't convinced the bill is the right fix.

Wal-Mart has some powerful allies in its corner, including the Association of Washington Business (AWB) and the Washington Restaurant Association.

"Demonizing Wal-Mart has become pretty popular sport for the unions," said AWB President Don Brunell.

But the unions are also backed by a broad coalition that includes the Washington State Hospital Association, the state's community-clinic network, state Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler and the Washington State Senior Citizens' Lobby.

Rank-and-file lobby

Hoping to turn up pressure on lawmakers, dozens of UFCW members last week swarmed outside the doors to the House and Senate.

One was Susan Hedman of Seattle, who took time off from her job at Macy's to spend a day in the trenches of her union's war against Wal-Mart.

"I'm trying to level the playing field for my employer," Hedman said.

Union leaders say the goal is to establish a minimum standard for health care, similar to the minimum wage employers must pay. That would help unions in their contract negotiations, especially since health care has become the No. 1 issue in nearly all of those talks.

"The focus is to force them to become a better employer," said Chris Kofinis, spokesman for UFCW's "Wake Up Wal-Mart" campaign. "We cannot live in a country where Wal-Mart is being rewarded for being irresponsible and other companies are being punished for being responsible."

Ralph Thomas: 360-943-9882 or rthomas@seattletimes.com