Second Canadian Wal-Mart store gets union.

"That store, which Wal-Mart revealed hasn't been profitable since it opened a few years ago, was automatically certified in August."


Gee a Wal-Mart that isn't profitable,go figure.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/apbiz_story.asp?category=1310&slug=Wal%20Mart%20Union

"Wal-Mart Closes Second Store in Canada that was Unionized"

Get it?

If they are cooking the books, that's a felony. It's also relatively easy to prove because those books are public.

that is the question. Can Wal-Mart be jailed, and the bigger question is, will any jailing result in a change of behavior? Fines don't seem to do much, considering that it is a tax writeoff as an expense of doing business.

Because, thanks to Sarbanes-Oxley, they have to sign off on the accuracy of their accounting. So if they defraud, THEY defraud.

Lock people up for criminal behavior and it will make a dent in it.

trust me, enforcement is arbitrary-like any law that applies to big business.

I'm a Sarbox expert-ask me anything! ;-)

Wal-Mart Operates many stores at a loss, i.e. no profit, when stiff competition is around. Because they can afford it, this is used to drive out competition, even though it violates competition laws, both here and in Canada.

Assuming they will be able to make money later. As a short-term strategy, it makes perfect sense. Long term, you have to cut your losses eventually.

yes it makes perfect sense, but it is illegal, its called undercutting the competition, and as I said, illegal, but hard as hell to prove.

They think it's perfectly "ok" to open up shop across the street and proceed to sell things below cost and subsidize the loss with monopoly power.

It's a sad, sad, world...

the law shouldn't mean shit, I mean, it is the American Way, is it not?

Almost every start-up business on planet earth plans to lose money for a time. That's the cost of starting the business, bringing in new business, etc. So you are saying that only small companies can do that?

No company on the planet, unless they are full of funds, starts off at a loss. They may not make a profit for years, but they have to at least try to break even. They reinvest in infrastructure, or manufacturing, advertisment, whatever. This is not what I'm talking about, I'm talking about using your own Monopoly against smaller businesses by purposefully undercutting the competition in an area for the SOLE purpose of destroying that competition. That is ILLEGAL, plain and simple, if you feel that companies like Wal-Mart should be above the law, that is outragious. This isn't my opinion, this has been law since anti-trust laws have been put in place, unfortunately it has not been enforced, in Wal-Mart's case, yet.

they either unionize or shut down, either way Canadians win.

Or maybe the Chinese to Unionize Walmart. It's the first step towards getting our Unions and decent paying jobs back.