Today’s Wal-Mart Outrage
From the Modesto Bee:
Directors of local charities reacted with surprise and disappointment Thursday after Wal-Mart Stores Inc. announced it would no longer donate food near or past its expiration date to groups feeding the hungry.
A spokesman for the nation’s largest food retailer said the food will be thrown away to protect the corporation from liability in case someone becomes sick from the donated food. The policy will apply to all 1,224 Wal-Marts, 1,929 Wal-Mart Supercenters and 558 Sam’s Clubs.
Tell me again how much Wal-Mart loves the poor.
[Hat tip: CSI Bentonville]
PS If there’s any justice in the world, people will be talking about this long after today is over. If half the blog space devoted to the “Planet of the Apes” story is devoted to this, I think that will happen.
UPDATE: Oh boy, it’s worse than I thought. From the Sacramento Bee (via Wal-Mart Watch; I’m guessing it’s an update of the same story):
Ernie Brown, a spokesman for Sacramento’s Senior Gleaners, which received about 25,000 pounds of food in 2005 from Sam’s Club on Greenback Lane in Citrus Heights, said most food is fine to eat for days after the “sell-by†date.
He said Wal-Mart’s concerns about liability seem misplaced in light of the Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, a federal law passed in 1996 offering food donors wide-ranging protections from civil lawsuits or criminal prosecution. The law states that donors can be held liable only in instances of “gross negligence.â€
“Lord, we get millions and millions of pounds from Raley’s and Bel-Air and Albertson’s, and they don’t have a problem understanding the law,†Brown said. “Why don’t Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club understand the law?”
[Emphasis Added]
So they’re either stupid or lying. That’s quite a choice; isn’t it?
Wal-Mart does NOT love the poor. That’s just Wal-Mart propraganda. The poor who are Food Bank customers are too poor for Wal-Mart’s love. When those poor buy at all it is the lost leaders or the lowest margin items. Besides, Wal-Mart’ has decided Target’s customers are the ones Wal-Mart wants to have.
Here’s a good statement regarding the Wal-Mart liability excuse from the sister paper to the Modesto Bee, the Sacromento Bee (requires registration tho)
http://www.sacbee.com/content/business/story/14043085p-14874591c.html
Ernie Brown, a spokesman for Sacramento’s Senior Gleaners, which received about 25,000 pounds of food in 2005 from Sam’s Club on Greenback Lane in Citrus Heights, said most food is fine to eat for days after the “sell-by” date.
He said Wal-Mart’s concerns about liability seem misplaced in light of the Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, a federal law passed in 1996 offering food donors wide-ranging protections from civil lawsuits or criminal prosecution. The law states that donors can be held liable only in instances of “gross negligence.”
“Lord, we get millions and millions of pounds from Raley’s and Bel-Air and Albertson’s, and they don’t have a problem understanding the law,” Brown said. “Why don’t Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club understand the law?”
===
I know my local food bank takes expired food and puts it in a pool of other expired foods that is used to feed hogs a farmer has donated which end up providing fresh meat to the participants. Wal-Mart’s position is just absolute greed. It’s hard to hide absolute greed.
And a personal word on the PotA’s issue:
The justice there is the publicity for Wal-Mart’s website ugliness is getting people in general to notice and perhaps see this story too.
Keep blogging!
I understand this feeding frenzy (pardon the pun) over Wal*Mart’s decision about expired food donations. However, if the emotion is taken out of the headline, I think there is a reason for the decision.
You can’t tell me that if a homeless person got salmanilla from a fuchcia bread made at Wal-Mart wouldn’t have a bazillion lawyers beating down the flap of his cardboard box to convince him to sue Wal*Mart for millions because they can afford it. That same lawyer will undoubtedly collect a healthly percentage of the settlement which is likely to be huge because of Wal*Mart’s resources.
Come on . . . get real. Do you really think that Walmart would really just rather throw it away? How is that Greed? For that matter, wouldn’t they be able to write off the donations of expired goods, but not destroyed goods?
Just trying to keep it real!
[...] Wal-Mart: Turning the Hungry Into Customers This was Wal-Mart’s excuse last week for ending its policy of donating nearly-expired food to food banks: A spokesman for t [...]
[...] What????!!!! Aren’t they afraid of lawsuits? [...]
Terri is not correct. The federal Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Act absolutely protects companies from liability when they donate surplus food in good faith.
If this is Wal-Mart’s story, they are lying. They may be selling the food they would have donated on the secondary market.
[...] So many questions: 1. Gift cards???!!! Isn’t that why Tom Coughlin is going to prison 2. Didn’t Wal-Mart just end food donations nationwide? Waht about those lawsuits the company used to justify such heartlessness? 3. If Wal-Mart cut food donations did they just cut their charitable giving overall by a huge percentage too? 4. If you can only use a gift card at a Wal-Mart, is it really a gift for tax purposes? [...]
[...] gets me angry all over again about Wal-Mart’s refusal to donate food that’s near or past its sell-by date. First, it reminds me that the food they refuse to donate is perfectly good. There’s no [...]