Loading ...
It’s about time.
Props to Wal-Mart for finally taking on this group of people that openly considers themselves “special.” Above the rest of us, looming down as if on the padded Mountain of Olympus, with their helmets righteously buckled tight - this group of handi-capable citizens needs to recognize that they are just as culpable for their actions as the rest of us!
While not “naturally” retarded, Debbie Shank is born again. Having been hit by a tractor trailer, Debbie now finds herself a little more special than the rest of us. Not if Wal-Mart has anything to do with it! Despite having been a Wal-Mart employee making sub-Darfurian wages while stocking shelves at the local Jackson, Missouri store, Debbie thought Wal-Mart’s health insurance plan ran like every other policy in existence.
Clean the drool and think again.
While most of us would be lulled into a sympathetic notion that maybe Debbie and her family could use windfall from her lawsuit to compensate for the mounting and ever-rising medical care costs, Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley, who called Debbie Shank’s case “unbelievably sad,” replied in a statement: “Wal-Mart’s plan is bound by very specific rules. … We wish it could be more flexible in Mrs. Shank’s case since her circumstances are clearly extraordinary, but this is done out of fairness to all associates who contribute to, and benefit from, the plan.”
Who has the smug look now Debbie? Not so special huh?
But really, Wal-Mart will be ok. Wal-Mart won a suit against Debbie and her fixed-income family for $470,000, to recover all of their costs from her medical bills. (Costs, that they already wrote off on their balance sheet from several years ago.) Debbie won a suit for $1,000,000 from the trucking company that struck her, which after legal fees amounts to $417,000.
So in the end…wait…uh…that can’t be right. (Insert calculator and antiquated clicking noises)
Wal-Mart expects this woman to pay net $53,000 (plus interest)? In 2007, the retail giant reported net sales in the third quarter of $90 billion. To make matters worse - and this is no bullsh*t - to help manage their debt, their son enlisted and was shipped out to Iraq where he was killed last summer. Now, the family’s only recourse was for Jim Shank to divorce Debbie, so she could receive more money from Medicaid.
I wonder if Wal-Mart will restate their Q3 2007 earnings to $90.000053 billion? With the market in its current state, could this be the push the bears have been waiting for?! Fingers crossed…
4 Comments
This is just about the most stupid article on the subject I have ever read. In the first place, of course, there is no such thing as “sub-Darfur” wages. Walmart pays their employees minimum wage and there’s nothing wrong with that. Minimum wage is for college students who need a job until they get a good job, or for mom’s who just want to make some extra money. It’s not meant to be lived on!
Yes, WALMART is a bloodsucker, but not because of their wage scale. The PROBLEM here is that Walmart is suing this woman - and no she is not retarded you stupid piece of crap - for insurance money that morally they have no right to. It’s a different issue entirely.
>>The PROBLEM here is that Walmart is suing this woman - and no she is not retarded you stupid piece of crap - for insurance money that morally they have no right to. It’s a different issue entirely.
Let me make that more clear. It’s money that WALMART has no moral right to. Obviously the Shanks deserve it.
But let’s not forget the Shank lawyers involved here. The Shanks got a $900,000 settlement from the trucking firm. Guess where half of it went? And now Walmart wants the other half.
So if I take $470,000 from my company’s bank account that I shouldn’t have ever taken and I use it for a wholly noble and just cause, then I shouldn’t have to pay it back?
Walmart was screwed out of money.
This poor woman was screwed out of her health but she received compensation for it and that compensation was supposed to pay for medical bills. Unfortunately, it was not enough to cover them.
The trucking company paid for their part so technically, they are square.
The lawyers took a ton of money that per their fees that this woman agreed to they were entitled. It makes me want to puke that they were entitled to it, but they were.
This leaves Walmart with money owed to them and a woman who spent that money. Walmart can donate the money to her, which would be a wonderful deed and something many of us would do, but they shouldn’t have to.
As Caroline points out, the lawyers took most of the money. They are the bad guys even though they are legit. Debbie Shank can blame herself for working with these lawyers or she can blame her lawyers for not winning her more money.
Caroline - it is more of a satire on how Wal-mart is ruthless in their quest for money.
Joey - she didnt STEAL anything. You pay into an insurance policy for that very reason. So am i to assume that if NOTHING happened to her, she should get all of her years of insurance premiums back?
Of course not, that is not how insurance works. By the same token, Policy underwriters are taking the gamble that nothing will happen to you. If you got into an accident, utilized insurance policies and then received a settlement, your insurance company would have NO standing to recover from you. Why should Wal-Mart be any different…STEAL? come on.
Back to you Caroline - there was a time where employers took pride in taking care of their employees, because of companies like Wal-Mart - those days have ended.
Furthermore, as for the “retard” usage, if you followed through the links that go through CNN and into Reuters, you will see that one of the Wal-Mart VPs was quoted as referencing her as “a retard.”
Thanks for the comments, I know the writing is crass, but i thought the satire would come through.
Post a Comment