Wal-Mart Sues Disabled Woman
 

Does this seem wrong to anyone else? :(

************************************************** ******

Wal-Mart Sues Disabled Ex-Employee
CNN
Posted: 2008-03-29 09:54:15
Filed Under: Nation News, Law News
JACKSON, Missouri (March 29) - Debbie Shank breaks down in tears every time she's told that her 18-year-old son, Jeremy, was killed in Iraq. The 52-year-old mother of three attended her son's funeral, but she continues to ask how he's doing. When her family reminds her that he's dead, she weeps as if hearing the news for the first time.
CNN
"Who Needs
The Money More?"
1 of 7
Debbie Shank, 52, suffered severe brain damage after a traffic accident in 2000. The Wal-Mart employee received about $470,000 from the retailer's health plan for medical expenses, but the company has sued to get the payout back.

Shank suffered severe brain damage after a traffic accident nearly eight years ago that robbed her of much of her short-term memory and left her in a wheelchair and living in a nursing home.

It was the beginning of a series of battles -- both personal and legal -- that loomed for Shank and her family. One of their biggest was with Wal-Mart's health plan.

Eight years ago, Shank was stocking shelves for the retail giant and signed up for Wal-Mart's health and benefits plan.

Two years after the accident, Shank and her husband, Jim, were awarded about $1 million in a lawsuit against the trucking company involved in the crash. After legal fees were paid, $417,000 was placed in a trust to pay for Debbie Shank's long-term care.

Wal-Mart had paid out about $470,000 for Shank's medical expenses and later sued for the same amount. However, the court ruled it can only recoup what is left in the family's trust.

The Shanks didn't notice in the fine print of Wal-Mart's health plan policy that the company has the right to recoup medical expenses if an employee collects damages in a lawsuit.

The family's attorney, Maurice Graham, said he informed Wal-Mart about the settlement and believed the Shanks would be allowed to keep the money.

"We assumed after three years, they [Wal-Mart] had made a decision to let Debbie Shank use this money for what it was intended to," Graham said.

The Shanks lost their suit to Wal-Mart. Last summer, the couple appealed the ruling -- but also lost it. One week later, their son was killed in Iraq.

"They are quite within their rights. But I just wonder if they need it that bad," Jim Shank said.

In 2007, the retail giant reported net sales in the third quarter of $90 billion.

Legal or not, CNN asked Wal-Mart why the company pursued the money.

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."

Jim Shank said he believes Wal-Mart should make an exception.

"My idea of a win-win is -- you keep the paperwork that says you won and let us keep the money so I can take care of my wife," he said.

The family's situation is so dire that last year Jim Shank divorced Debbie, so she could receive more money from Medicaid.

Jim Shank, 54, is recovering from prostate cancer, works two jobs and struggles to pay the bills. He's afraid he won't be able to send their youngest son to college and pay for his and Debbie's care.

"Who needs the money more? A disabled lady in a wheelchair with no future, whatsoever, or does Wal-Mart need $90 billion, plus $200,000?" he asked.

The family's attorney agrees.

"The recovery that Debbie Shank made was recovery for future lost earnings, for her pain and suffering," Graham said.

"She'll never be able to work again. Never have a relationship with her husband or children again. The damage she recovered was for much more than just medical expenses."

This is a sad situation. Walmart doesn't need the money, yet it is within their rights to ask for it back. The question I have; is Walmart exclusively asking for the money or is it an insurance company that is wanting the money back and Walmart has to pay it? I know in my years of working, when you take out insurance it is through an independant company, not necessarily the company you work for. Again, here lies the question, is it worth the bad publicity and should Walmart just pay the money and let it go? Either way, the family loses.

Thanks for posting this Kitty. I'll say a prayer for the family. Greed is the seed of evil.

true sandy what is Also sad is how much the original amount that they received out of a million that is disgraceful, that is just shameful, I sure hope wally world rethinks this move, I for one dont think that amount would make that much of a difference on the stock holders dividends

Sounds about right —for Wal*Mart—.

Well
 

One of his Kids built a Baskeball Stadium right here,in Columbia Mo..They wanted to name it after their Daughter.Well people put there foot down.
And they didn't like it but backed down,the stadium was for MU enough
rich alumni well after all..I just can't imagine how they have the nerve
to do this to a women who lost her son in Iraq,her husband works 2 jobs
as well,helps take care of her,they were working to put there other son
through college but that's out 2,She did what alot of us might do just
didn't read the small print. That's not enough money to take from her.

Ton's of people have been protesting this,it's so sad,her husband looked so
wore out she has short term menory lost and in a will chair,so he lost her and his son,who was protecting our familys..It's legal but it doesn't have to be done,that just wrong..Sue

Sorry Brain, but I have to respectfully disagree. It doesn't stink to be Walmart and they don't just look like the bad guys, they are the bad guys. Just one more item to add to my list of reasons why I don't like to shop at Walmart.

I received a settlement about 10 years ago for a car accident. My health insurance never asked for their money back for any treatment I had received due to the accident.

The settlement, according to the article, was for her continuing care, to cover her future lost earnings etc. Why couldn't Walmart make a generous donation of, oh say $500,000 to the family (anonymously) for her continuing care? That will never happen of course.

Walmart could easily afford to offer better healthcare coverage for their employees. A plan that doesn't include this type of "small print".

This is a very sorry state of affairs.:( People will continue to shop at Walmart regardless of how they treat their employees. So many people just don't understand that until the general population takes a stand and stops spending money at places like Walmart nothing will change. :confused::confused:

I know how much cheaper it is to shop there, but we all pay some sort of price in the end just to save a few bucks in the short term.

Right on Joelle!

Look whats happening out in the streets
Got a revolution got to revolution
Hey Im dancing down the streets
Got a revolution got to revolution
Aint it amazing all the people I meet
Got a revolution got to revolution
One generation got old
One generation got soul
This generation got no destination to hold
Pick up the cry
Hey now its time for you and me
Got a revolution got to revolution
Come on now were marching to the sea
Got a revolution got to revolution
Who will take it from you
We will and who are we
We are volunteers of america




sorry just thinking out loud

That's just walmart for ya. My son works for Wal-mart. Boy I wish he didn't, but with jobs scarce. He is making too much money to try to go somewhere else at this point.

Back a few months ago, we had ice and snow. You want to know what Wal-marts inclement weather policy is? You don't show up, you get fired.

I didn't believe my son when he told me that. So I started looking online.
Sure enough. I also found message board after message board telling horror stories of how they treat their "Associates". If they just had employees, then they couldnt treat them that way. As associates, they can treat them like crap and get away with it.

Walmart could care less about this. They have been sued many many times. They may be shown to be in the wrong, but no big deal to walmat. They just donate to some cause. Get their name in the paper and everything is back to normal.

Wonder if Sam Walton would roll over in his grave if he saw where his corporation has ended up.

DAY

regardless its still a dam shame she gets a little over a third of a million dollar policy, that is what bothers me even that sum was never going to be enough for her to substain herself for life with her troubles, if the policy was for a million then why didnt she get a million the medical and lawyers should of been covered by the insurance companies above and beyond the accident this is what bothers me, you are right what wally world is doing is business and for the mere sum they are going after they are getting some bad PR , I would say it is not worth it, although the PR could be changed in a heart beat by changing their minds. in a business sense if ya want to do it right you milk this for all its worth pull at the strings po everyone off then give in drop the suit maybe up the sum a little and get big glorious PR for next to nothing, that money was long time spent, I am speaking from a hypothetical and business aspect of things not humanitary, these folks know what they are doing, psychology plays so much into sales and advertising, its unreal

my heart and humanitary side say

Get up, stand up: stand up for your rights!
Get up, stand up: stand up for your rights!
Get up, stand up: stand up for your rights!
Get up, stand up: don't give up the fight!

.................................................. .................................................. .

Day1 I was thinking the same thing about SW rolling over in his grave.
and probably not just over this,many more times. The husband had to divorce her so she could get Medicate,sorry that's wrong,I thought they
said it was a Walmart Truck that hit her. Last time I was in rehab
a women and her friend were hit by a walmart truck her friend died
and she will be in a willchair forever and in a lot of pain from waist
up..:( She was still having a hard time last time I saw her. Sue

This is the nature of any business and insurance plans. The more claims that are paid out on will increase the cost of insurance for all people that Walmart employs.

Since she has received a settlement from the company involved in her accident, I don't believe Walmart should have to cover her costs.

If I was to get into an auto accident today and the other driver was at fault. I would not expect my employer's policy to pay for those expenses. I would not have even given my insurance information out. That should have been charged to the person-at-faults insurance company. After all that's why we are required to have auto insurance. Her lawyer should have taken that into consideration when settling this case.

Walmart employees wouldn't have to suffer higher premiums if the company itself absorbed the costs.

If you were to have an auto accident your car insurance pays the costs regardless of who is at fault. I've been through this. Your insurance company is not reimbursed by the at-fault driver or by their insurance company.

Just because the company has the legal right to subrogation does not mean they have to pursue it.

We expect people to have a moral code but apparently we don't expect the same of corporations. The lack of compassion and morality is what makes them evil. To think that Walmart had the gall to also sue the Shank's for reimbursement of THEIR legal fees incurred for this suit makes me physically ill.:(

This woman paid for her health insurance policy thinking that it would take care of her medical expenses. What's next? When we die will our loved ones have to pay the insurers for past medical care out of our life insurance policies?:rolleyes:

No amount of bad pr seems to have any effect on Walmart. If a human being behaved in this manner we would be outraged at their lack of compassion.

I agree with sheryl if joe blow hits my car I am going to joe blows insurance company, not mine. I feel somehow this person had an attorney that didnt do best by her, something didnt work out right the settlement should of had punitive (sp/) for long term care along with cost for legal and medical on top of the policy, this is what bothers me the policy is in itself a sepperate issues isnt it? the original suit was for the medical and lawyers and if it wasnt then why wasnt it done so, this is what is bothering me her best interest were not looked after and i am not saying wally world i am saying lawyers something this serious should of been well covered.

Yeah Frank, I saw this on the news now....She got a million dollar settlement and only banked $470,000. Who got the other half million? THE LAWYER!

This is a tragidy by all standards. This woman needs to be cared for...I'm actually on her side, what's a half million to Wal-mart? Chump change.

On the other hand....how many of us suffer a tragic event in life and get zero? We all find our way, some how, some way.

Wal-Mart should have just dropped it, they have enough bad press and lack of support of their low wage workers.

I worked at walmart long enough to qualify for health care...I was working 40 hours a week, full time and an occasional couple hours of overtime. Less than a week after I fot my health insurance card, in one day I was cut from 40 hours to 32 hours, to 28 hours....and before I left for the day....they were offering me 16 hours, to be worked over 4 days and I had to turn my health insurance card in because I was no longer full time.

Told them where to stick their job, smock, AND health insurance. I haven't worked since, but that's okay, I may not have health insurance but I have peace of mind....of wait....I lost that long ago...oh well.....

It's not just Wal Mart that applies the "policy over people" theory.

When my husband died his employer (General Motors) would not retire him even though he was less than 18 months away from being able to. He had worked for GM his whole life - only job he ever had - and they would not go ahead and retire him because that would mean that I would get medical benefits for the rest of my life. In retrospect they dodged a bullet with me!!

I feel like it had a lot to do with the fact that he was a Union Rep for years.

I still get some benefits - like the employee discount on auto's - but what do I drive now - a Honda!! :)

This story about the Shanks is just one more reason I don't shop at Wal Mart or Sam's Club. Yes, they are cheaper on just about everything but in the long run who wins?

Unfortunately most employers probably have the same clause in their policies. The comment from one of the people on CNN was their employer did also. Just one of many rules most people are unaware of when they take a job.

Ohio had a law at one point that if you were injured on the job, say as a truck driver at a remote work place and sued the owner of the work site and won you had to pay back workers comp. I believe it has been changed, but business doesn`t tend to look to hard to find ways to help employees.

Wal Mart may have the law on it's side & probably most major corporations would take the same approach. Sadly, most of these corporations don't have the moral compass they had in the past.

Now, here's a story of what could, maybe even should be, what a company stands for. One of my best friends husband has a very close friend that is dying of cancer, only has maybe a couple of weeks. He was diagnosed a year ago & has a high level position at the company he works for. His company has paid for every medical procedure, conventional & experimental, that he has needed. He has also received full pay even though he has not been to work in months. His company wouldn't put him on disability because they didn't want his wife to loose all her insurance benefits & retirement after he died. Now, that's a company with heart.

We all are faced with choices every day. I always hope that I go with my heart, not what I can get away with. I bet if these big corporations replaced their PR departments with a Compassion department, they would make even more money in the long run.

they dropped the suit against her to reclaimed the money, good move for wally worlrd, it was money alread spent it was money hard to recoop and it was all bad PR for wall mart. this gives them some good PR and no cost at recooping

Wal-Mart Drops Reimbursement Claim Against Injured Ex-Worker

Dow Jones - April 01, 2008: 05:03 PM EST

BENTONVILLE, Ark. (AP)--Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is dropping a controversial effort to collect more than $400,000 in health-care reimbursement from a former employee who suffered brain damage in a traffic accident.

The world's largest retailer said in a letter to the family of Deborah Shank it will not seek to collect money the Shanks won in an injury lawsuit against a trucking company for the accident.

Wal-Mart's top executive for human resources, Pat Curran, wrote that Shank's extraordinary situation had made the company re-examine the situation.

Deborah's husband Jim Shank welcomed the news. His lawyer said Wal-Mart deserves credit for doing the right thing.

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/...7_FORTUNE5.htm

I"M sorry. But wasn't there an attorney representing this family when they sued the trucking company for the 1 million and was it not the attorney's obligation to advise this family that Walmart had subrogation rights and could sue them to recoup what they paid. It is inconceivable to me that the family was not told all this, so I have little sympathy for them. They chose not to play by the rules of the game, and they lost, well, that's just the way it works in the real world, so no tears please.

Whether they were told or not doesn't change the circumstances for this family. I'm sure they'd rather have things back the way they were instead of the money. Have a heart. . . . . this isn't going to hurt Wal Mart. A little good will towards someone else isn't so bad. Not everything is about "following the rules" - sometimes it's about what's right and what's wrong.