OT: Wal Mart sues disabled woman

Like WalMart really needs that $470K, but the couple doesn't...

Cathy

Oh, yeah.

If they're so concerned about "fairness" to the "associates" (love that description), why don't they put it to a vote among them all?

I don't know. You have as much information as I do.

In message news:U snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com, "Cathy F." burned some brain cells writing:

It's interesting that you listened to the dollar amount, but you didn't listen to the rest of the details in the story. It was not Wal-Mart who asked for money back, nor who sued, but "Wal-Mart's health plan". Listen to the story again.

Of course, that didn't stop CNN from showing Wal-Mart logos and stores during the story, or citing Wal-Mart's "net sales" (not profits) either (as if that's even relevant here). CNN also fails to mention exactly who Wal- Mart has their health plan with. That's the party that asked for the money and who sued.

What do you think of this couple gaming the system by divorcing so that the wife (oh excuse me, EX-wife) gets more taxpayer money from Medicare?

CNN's parent, Time-Warner, had revenues of $46 billion. Why don't they pay Mrs. Shank the $470K? After all, who needs the money more, Mrs. Shank or Time-Warner's executives?

At least it knows how to handle greedy deadbeats.

Sorry, I've been like this ever since I became a registered Republican a few weeks ago.

I listened twice. If you don't think WM has any leverage with its insurer, you are a silly person or a child. One phone call from Lee Scott would end this charade.

You've obviously never seen what nursing homes cost. I don't mean reading about it in the news. I mean staring at the paperwork on your desk.

Did you get the secret decoder ring? Yes? WTF is George Bush talking about???

And Walmart has zicho control over which health plan(s) it offers its employees??

Cathy

None at all. They are their insurer's biggest customer. Without them, the insurer would cease to exist. But, WM has no leverage.

Simple, yes?

Duh. :-)

I meant: it has no control over which plan(s) it offers, to begin with? (Not over the plan, once in place.)

Cathy

I know what you meant. I was being sarcastic or something. Of course WM could make this problem vanish in a heartbeat. Their biggest stores gross that kind of cash on a busy weekend.

Wal-Mart is probably worried that it would set a legal precedent and that they would never be able to recover money from people who get double paid.

Wal-Mart may be self-insured (as are many very large companies) and they only pay the insurance company to administer the plan. However, there are legal precedents that come into play that makes it difficult (and possibly illegal) to change the rules once they are set up (unless the same rules apply to everyone).

Do you know the difference between gross and net?

Is Hillary still on the board of directors at WalMart? Maybe the timing of the story was meant to damage her.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

So how much money have you sent the Shanks? How much has George Soros or Barbra Streisand sent them? Is there not a time for people to help out of sense of community? You don't have to like WalMart, but they (or their health insurance policy) are under no obligation to do anything according to their policy. If you really were concerned for the people, you would be sending them money and/or collecting money and sending it to them. I doubt you have.

I love people who want to be generous with other people's money. But there's a lot of that going on these days.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

The social justice crowd, the lefty liberals. I don't see any collections being made either. Spending other people's money, that is the democrat way.

Of course, Bill. What course of actions do you think would be better for WM's image, assuming its typical customer was capable of understanding the story?

zzzzzzzzzzzz..........

In message news: snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com, "Cathy F." burned some brain cells writing:

I'm not sure why you think anyone would take you seriously, what with your misspelled and irrelevant rantings that don't address anything else the normal people here are talking about.

plonk, madam.

"My misspelled & irrelevant rantings?" How do I even start to address that statement/accusation?

Good thing you're plonking me. Thank you.

Cathy