Why do bad things happen to good people…because of Wal-Mart?

Last November I heard about the case of Debbie Shank and thought after the release of the story to the public and the outcry it was sure to cause that eventually Wal-Mart would change it’s course and DO THE RIGHT THING.

I was wrong.

It seems like Wal-Mart is going to take all that is left of the $417,000 Debbie has that remains from damages she received from a trucking company that was involved in an accident which left her severely brain-damaged. The reason: “fairness“. You see, in Wal-Mart’s health-care clause it allows them to re-coup money received in damages up to the amount that they forked over for her immediate health costs following her accident. This clause is actually very common. But there are a few issues. One, all legal costs and responsibility fall on the party pursuing damages yet then opens up the possibility for other parties to sue for claim on the issued damages. Once again, the legal costs of the now defending party are also the responsibility of the now defendants. Plus, the money the Shank’s received from the trucking company wasn’t going to a new home, car and vacation. Rather, it was set in a trust to handle the nursing assistance she will need for the rest of her life as she has spent the last 8 years in a nursing home and will continue to do so - coverage not taken care of by Wal-Mart now.

On the bigger the issue, however, is why do companies do the wrong thing? Wal-Mart doesn’t need this money. In fact, they make the equal amount they are taking from Debbie every 38 seconds and the CEO makes more than the equivalent in a week. So you tell me, is it really fair? The clause states that they ‘can’ not that they have to. I think to be fair that even when another unfortunate accident like this occurs again, Wal-Mart should take it on the chin in thanks to the service their employees give them and allowed them to rake in more than $11 billion dollars in profit last year.

In the end, even though this is an argument against the company, I must remind myself that there is a family left suffered in this case. Debbie’s husband, Jim, is recovering from prostate cancer and has medical expenses of his own. And a week after a lower court ruled in favor of Wal-Mart last summer, their oldest son was killed in Iraq. I think this family has been through enough even if all they had to deal with was Debbie’s accident.

Just as people should always do the right thing, companies should also do the right thing. I believe there is a fear in the corporate world to take in account personal circumstances and simply rely on legal language and clauses but at the end of the day whether the issue is employees or consumers they are people. So whatever Wal-Mart may now tout giving examples that they do good for their employees, the community, or the world…I will always remember Debbie Shank and how they wronged her.