U.S. judge may toss suit blaming Wal-Mart for Third World sweatshops
U.S. judge may toss suit blaming Wal-Mart for Third World sweatshops
The Associated Press
Published: December 15, 2006
SANTA ANA, California: A judge is expected to toss a class-action lawsuit blaming Wal-Mart for alleged sweatshop conditions in five Third World countries that supply the retail giant.
U.S. District Judge Andrew J. Guilford, who heard arguments Monday and said he would issue a decision later, indicated he would dismiss all claims against Wal-Mart Stores Inc.
The suit, filed on behalf of garment factory workers in China, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Swaziland and Nicaragua, alleged Wal-Mart broke a promise to enforce its "Standards for Suppliers" demanding foreign companies obey local labor laws and treat workers fairly.
The suit, filed in October 2005, also alleged Wal-Mart misled Californians by promoting the standards policy as reason to shop at its stores. The suit asks for injunctions to protect the workers and enforce the standards.
One allegation in the lawsuit is that Wal-Mart violated the 1789 Alien Tort Claims Act by allowing suppliers to withhold pay from foreign workers.
Guilford wrote in a tentative ruling that he "is sympathetic to the plight of the plaintiffs" but added the alien tort law must be applied narrowly.
"Plaintiffs' theory of liability would have broad applications if accepted," the judge wrote. "Such a rule would support a federal claim for relief whenever any employee was denied pay ... while living under difficult economic conditions."
The suit seeks damages for thousands of workers that could amount to "perhaps millions of dollars," plaintiffs' attorney Anne K. Richardson said.
The main contention of plaintiffs is they have the right as "third-party beneficiaries" to enforce the contracts between Wal-Mart and its global suppliers.
Wal-Mart requires foreign manufacturers to obey its supplier standards, which are included in the contracts, but the retailer failed to conduct proper inspections as promised, the suit said.
If Guilford rules against the plaintiffs, the judge said they could amend their complaint and try again. Richardson said Thursday that she and other plaintiffs' lawyers will likely refile or appeal if the judge tosses the suit.
Plaintiffs' attorney Terry Collingsworth of the International Labor Rights Fund in Washington noted workers in places such as China cannot sue their local employers.
"This is their sole place to try to be heard," Collingsworth said.
Copyright © 2006 the International Herald Tribune All rights reserved
The Associated Press
Published: December 15, 2006
SANTA ANA, California: A judge is expected to toss a class-action lawsuit blaming Wal-Mart for alleged sweatshop conditions in five Third World countries that supply the retail giant.
U.S. District Judge Andrew J. Guilford, who heard arguments Monday and said he would issue a decision later, indicated he would dismiss all claims against Wal-Mart Stores Inc.
The suit, filed on behalf of garment factory workers in China, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Swaziland and Nicaragua, alleged Wal-Mart broke a promise to enforce its "Standards for Suppliers" demanding foreign companies obey local labor laws and treat workers fairly.
The suit, filed in October 2005, also alleged Wal-Mart misled Californians by promoting the standards policy as reason to shop at its stores. The suit asks for injunctions to protect the workers and enforce the standards.
One allegation in the lawsuit is that Wal-Mart violated the 1789 Alien Tort Claims Act by allowing suppliers to withhold pay from foreign workers.
Guilford wrote in a tentative ruling that he "is sympathetic to the plight of the plaintiffs" but added the alien tort law must be applied narrowly.
"Plaintiffs' theory of liability would have broad applications if accepted," the judge wrote. "Such a rule would support a federal claim for relief whenever any employee was denied pay ... while living under difficult economic conditions."
The suit seeks damages for thousands of workers that could amount to "perhaps millions of dollars," plaintiffs' attorney Anne K. Richardson said.
The main contention of plaintiffs is they have the right as "third-party beneficiaries" to enforce the contracts between Wal-Mart and its global suppliers.
Wal-Mart requires foreign manufacturers to obey its supplier standards, which are included in the contracts, but the retailer failed to conduct proper inspections as promised, the suit said.
If Guilford rules against the plaintiffs, the judge said they could amend their complaint and try again. Richardson said Thursday that she and other plaintiffs' lawyers will likely refile or appeal if the judge tosses the suit.
Plaintiffs' attorney Terry Collingsworth of the International Labor Rights Fund in Washington noted workers in places such as China cannot sue their local employers.
"This is their sole place to try to be heard," Collingsworth said.
Copyright © 2006 the International Herald Tribune All rights reserved
posted by Walking Contradiction at 9:38 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home