Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have a feeling him and his family are exaggerating the story. I live in south Louisiana and regularly shop at Walmart. There is never anyone sitting in a chair in the restrooms. They have janitor employees who regularly patrol the restrooms pushing a cleaning cart. Our local Walmart uses their disabled or injured employees as door greeters. I have a feeling he was asked to regularly check the condition of the restrooms, not sit in them all day long.
No Walmart fan but actually they need to be commended for providing the "injured" employee a chance to get a full paycheck. They probably could have told him there was no work available due to his limitations, sent him home, and based upon their Workers Comp policy paid him what ever percentage it calls for, normally 60-75%.
It also could be that they feel the "injury" is questionable and this employee would just prefer sitting at home dragging out the case as long as he could. By providing something for him to do, no matter how trivial, making him still get up and come to work could dramatically shorten his recovery time.
Or they could have given him paid time off. Or is that not a thing at Wal Mart?
Or they could have given him paid time off. Or is that not a thing at Wal Mart?
Still think "unions are unnecessary"?
He was still able to work, but just required "light duty". I think most unions would have negotiated a similar arrangement. Had he gone on short term disability, his pay would likely have been reduced. But hey, that Netflix isn't gonna watch itself!
The whole story stinks (pun intended). The article creates an image of a poor old man being forced to sit in a chair in the restroom all day, smelling human excretory byproducts. Walmart's story is more likely - that rather than be sent home he was assigned to keep the restrooms clean as opposed to his normal tasks that required too much exertion for his present condition. In fact, one might argue that had he done his duty (oh crap, another pun. Oh... nevermind!), the restrooms would have smelled great and been a nice quiet retreat instead of the company break room where the head cashier is always popping that popcorn that smells like feet.
Or they could have given him paid time off. Or is that not a thing at Wal Mart?
Still think "unions are unnecessary"?
No they could not! Once an employee claims they were hurt on the job, the Workers Comp company takes over and calls the shots.
I certainly don't have any respect for Walmart but I'm afraid this particular story is slanted to make it sound like Walmart is mistreating another employee when in fact they are doing what they have been instructed to do. It's a proven fact that employees who are "hurt on the job" if required to perform some type of light duty return to work much sooner than those that don't.
Bathroom duty at Wal-Mart....can you think of anything worse other than simply setting foot in a Wal-Mart? Yikes!
If you think cleaning toilets at Wal-Mart is bad, try working in nursing homes or hospitals. I work in a hospital boiler room and on nights and weekends when maintenance isn't on duty I also do general maintenance work. The smells and sights I've experienced are horrible. I keep a tube of Vick's Inhaler in my desk drawer to help eliminate the smells from my nose to allow me to eat lunch. Things I've experienced include rotting flesh, an obstructed bowel finally evacuating and clogging up the toilet completely, and death. Though I work in the boiler room and make well above minimum wage, housekeepers are exposed to the same sights and smells at nearly the same hourly wages as Wal-mart.
No they could not! Once an employee claims they were hurt on the job, the Workers Comp company takes over and calls the shots.
I certainly don't have any respect for Walmart but I'm afraid this particular story is slanted to make it sound like Walmart is mistreating another employee when in fact they are doing what they have been instructed to do. It's a proven fact that employees who are "hurt on the job" if required to perform some type of light duty return to work much sooner than those that don't.
Injured employees who keep working on "light duty" return to full duty much sooner than those who stay home to recuperate. Most HR depts. are fully aware of this. Light duty work reduces workers' comp costs all around, including keeping workers' comp premiums from going up.
There are many "light duty" tasks besides monitoring the bathrooms. Door greeter comes to mind. Many in retail are put to straightening shelves, or wiping shelves and other tasks that don't involve lifting or other tasks that could aggravate the injury or, heaven forbid, cause an additional injury.
Alas, there are those who fake injuries. It's a small percentage, but it does happen. I'm wondering if the bathroom monitoring business wasn't a way to see if this was the case. If it was, it apparently backfired.
Other than wiping the sinks, I'm at a loss at what someone on light duty could do in a bathroom. Cleaning generally involves a lot of bending, mob buckets, etc.
The whole story stinks (pun intended). The article creates an image of a poor old man being forced to sit in a chair in the restroom all day, smelling human excretory byproducts. Walmart's story is more likely - that rather than be sent home he was assigned to keep the restrooms clean as opposed to his normal tasks that required too much exertion for his present condition. In fact, one might argue that had he done his duty (oh crap, another pun. Oh... nevermind!), the restrooms would have smelled great and been a nice quiet retreat instead of the company break room where the head cashier is always popping that popcorn that smells like feet.
The ops topic title is rather disingenuous and seems to be implying that all Walmarts banish all returning injured employees to bathrooms for entire shifts, .. if the actual story is true and not some satirical piece i concur the guy is out for money.
FOX embellishments? It's an AOL (i.e. Huffington Post) article.
The OP's link was to AOL's take on a story originally run by KSLA. KSLA is a CBS affiliate, not a Fox affiliate.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
