« Life's Funnies | Main | Funny Bill Gates Quote »
March 25, 2008
Wal-Mart Sues Brain-Damaged Ex-Employee
You gotta hand it to big companies; they just keep finding new ways to be sociopathic.
The latest example is Wal-Mart. Yes, the big, yellow happy-face is suing a brain-damaged ex-employee. According to CNN (paraphrased):
Eight years ago, Debbie Shank was stocking shelves for the retail giant and signed up for Wal-Mart's health and benefits plan.Shank suffered severe brain damage after a traffic accident that robbed her of much of her short-term memory and left her in a wheelchair and living in a nursing home.
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, but in 2005, Wal-Mart's health plan sued the Shanks for the same amount.
And then, as if these people need more bad news, their son was killed in Iraq and Jim Shank was diagnosed with colon cancer. He even had to divorce Debbie last year in order to maximize her Medicaid payments.
You have to read the full story to get all the details. But I particularly enjoyed the Wal-Mart spokesman's response to why the Shanks couldn't keep the money they won in the lawsuit against the trucking company:
"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."
Translation: We'd sell our own mother for a dollar.
This is corporate greed exaggerated to unfathomable proportions. If this had been the plot of a movie, people would be complaining it was too far-fetched. Yet, it's all true.
In an interesting coincidence, Bob sent me a link to a video showing the virus-like spread of Wal-Mart across the US from its 1962 origins in Arkansas.

Comments
Here's what the CNN ariticle didn't tell you. A more complete and unbiased story can be found at the Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119551952474798582.html?mod=hpp_us_pageone).
Per the WSJ article, Wal-Mart had "sent Mr. Shank several notices that he was to inform Wal-Mart's health plan BEFORE he settled any suit." The Shanks -- probably under bad advise from their attorney -- chose to settle without first contacting Wal-Mart thereby removing Wal-Mart's opportunity to help fight for a larger settlement from the trucking company who caused the injury in the first place. The real bad guy here is the attorny who (a) should have been aware of the subrogation clause in the health care policy (it's in all of them, not just Wal-Mart's), (b) gave bad advise to his clients, (c) charged them a huge fee, (d) is now trying to blaim Wal-Mart, and (e) is not offerring to return any of his fee to his clients.
Posted by: joe at March 26, 2008 6:10 PM
Thanks for pointing that out, Joe. So, it turns out that we have the "perfect storm" of incompetent lawyer and sociopathic corporation that, when combined, help to make shambles out of some unlucky individuals' lives.
On the other hand, would Wal-Mart really have spent significant resources to try and win a larger settlement for this woman, or would it have merely worked to ensure its own costs were covered? Based on the company's reputation and behavior so far, my guess is the latter.
Posted by: Craig at March 26, 2008 9:25 PM
I WOULD NEVER ENTER A WALL MART STORE AGAIN.THIS IS JUST WRONG WHAT THEY DID TO THIS POOR WOMAN IRREGARDLESS OF THEM NOT BEING ABLE TO SUE THE TRUCKING COMPANY A LARGER AMOUNT SO THEY COULD RECOVER THEIR MONEY.THE PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DESCISION TO SUE THIS UNFORTUNATE WOMAN SHOULD ROT IN HELL WHICH IM SURE THEY WILL. JOE SUROWICZ
Posted by: JOE SUROWICZ at March 26, 2008 11:07 PM
This is probably why Hillary Clinton doesn't list her six years on the Board of Directors for Wal-Mart in the 90s on her resume.
Posted by: DWhipp at March 27, 2008 11:15 AM
If you read the WalMart site you'll find a story about how they donated $500,000 to the Clinton Global Initiative Fund. I wonder how much of that was Debbie's money and how Hillary and Bill can sleep at night?
Boycott WalMart!!! My whole family does, now.
Posted by: Art Frame at March 28, 2008 2:56 PM
This is truly one of the saddest stories I've heard in a long time. It also angers me that companies like Exxon Mobile and Walmart who make billions just don't get it. Even if its true that they don't want to take the money from the other employees then, duh Walmart, make a donation to her. Forgive the Shenks debts ($400,000+), make an additional donation to the family (around $500,000) to make life more comfortable for her and her family and so her husband so he does not have to work two jobs. But, since this company is not going to do the right thing, lets force them to do the right thing. Beginning on April 1st, please join me in boycotting Walmart at least for one week. I say we fight back the greedy bozos who run the Exxons and Walmarts. These kind of companies only get it when they have been hit in the pocket. I say its time we hit them beginning April 1st. Tell everyone you know!
Posted by: Brenda at March 29, 2008 12:10 AM
This is just one of the worst situations I have ever heard. I agree with all of you to boycott Walmart. I suggest we send this article to all of your internet friends and get it passed around so that everyone in the world knows.
There has to be an exclusion to every rule or clause in any contract. This is definitely one of them! I hate all of your corporate executives who pursued this. This is really their fault! And I bet they live in a mansion and drive a Mercedes or Jaguar! I just wonder how they can sleep at night.
Posted by: Cathie France at March 29, 2008 2:17 PM
This is disgusting. Her life is over. Her son is dead. Her other son does not have resources now to go to college. Her husband will spend his whole life taking care of her. what happened to treating someone like a human being? They need to sit down and see what the outcome of this will mean to the family. I am not going to go to walmart again. This makes me sick. Ive worked with disabled people and its devastating to the families.
Posted by: Brenda at March 29, 2008 2:18 PM
Youd think that it would appeal to their greed if they helped out this family. People would like walmart even more if they saw them extending a hand to the family
Posted by: Brenda at March 29, 2008 2:20 PM
The subrogation clause in the health care policy usually is very specific - if the person recovers MEDICAL COSTS ALREADY PAID OUT then the health care plan gets it back. Unless Wal Mart's plan also coverzs her current and future medical bills, and unless the money was awarded specifically to reimburse her for medical bills already paid, Wal Mart should not have any claim on the money.
Posted by: Darleen at March 29, 2008 2:24 PM
It seems the real culprit is not getting the anger here. What about the trucking company?? They are ultimately responsible. She is lucky that Walmart Insurance even paid. My health insurance does not pay for auto accidents. When I was in an accident a few years ago I had go through my auto insurance for the medical to be paid. In this case you would think that the trucking companies liablity insurance would have taken care of the medical fees and that her auto insurance would have gone after them to make sure.
Posted by: Terry at March 29, 2008 2:28 PM
Does anyone know the address for the family? I would like to send them some money.
Posted by: Erin at March 29, 2008 2:30 PM
As a group the Walton's are one of the wealthiest families on the planet. Great PR for them to pony up the 400K if Forbes is even close that would be .000001% of their net worth. That means if you had $1000 it would cost you a penny!!
Posted by: donald at March 29, 2008 2:32 PM
Boycot Walmart! TELL EVERYONE YOU KNOW. BOYCOT WALMART...
Posted by: Brenda at March 29, 2008 2:32 PM
lets be human again for a second and not so PC
Posted by: Brenda at March 29, 2008 2:35 PM
I personally boycotted Wal*Mart in the nearest town 24 hours ago and it had nothing to do with THIS story/experience. It has to do with the horrid way a new employee there is treated, demeaned, insulted, ridiculed, and verbally abused by peers, department manager, and store management. I have a lifetime of experience in corporate America and if the sort of "management" used in this Wal*Mart were practiced in ANY place that I've worked, everyone involved would be either fired on the spot, disciplined by at least a significant suspension, and potentially have charges brought against them in a civil suit for allowing or encouraging a hostile workplace, non-compliance with Dept. of Labor law and also with the FDA. I learned that 'Big Wigs' from Arkansas are coming in to "visit" in a few days; trust me, I will go to this Wal*Mart that day, and I will find a way to speak to someone with clout. Add this story about the brain-injured ex-employee, and I'm so far beyond disgusted that words can't express it. Once again, I see the sometimes wide chasm between 'law' and 'justice' but I do know that eventually justice happens. In these cases, I'd really like this to be sooner rather than later.
Posted by: NSchmidtBigelow at March 29, 2008 2:46 PM
I never liked Walmart and I especially don't like them now. Her attorney should have known about her health plan from Walmart and pursued more money for her. I'm not an attorney, but I know that they all get paid back.
I already don't shop at Walmart for other reasons and I will especially spread the word to boycott them now. I wish that family the best of luck and will keep them in my thoughts.
Posted by: Jane at March 29, 2008 2:46 PM
It is truly sad, but the blame is with the attorney for the Shanks. In a car accident, it is always the case that company medical insurance is paid back as part of the settlement. I'm a school teacher and have known that since I was in a minor car accident when I was 17. The Walmart spokesman was right when he said it was an issue of fairness. The cost of the insurance for Walmart and its employees is directly connected to payouts; therefore, every employee would pay for that payout through higher premiums and copays in the long run. Now that that is said, I believe that Walmart could win the good will, if the Shanks paid back the insurance fund and Walmart chose to make Mrs. Shank a recipient of an endowment. They can afford it. It would bring good will, and they could probably work some kind of a tax deduction in the process.
Posted by: Mike at March 29, 2008 2:47 PM
While in human terms this is a tragic situation, but in reality it's the way medical insurance works EVERYWHERE. It is by no means a "Walmart" injustice. If you are compensated for medical expenses through litigation, the insurance company gets a refund for the medical expense part of the award. In the sense of dollars, that's all that happened here. You don't get paid twice for the same expense. That guy is just trying to get paid by everybody who has the bucks to pay. (ie, getting a divorce so medicaid would pay as well?....helllllooooo)
Posted by: PAT at March 29, 2008 2:58 PM
Why don't the blood sucking lawyers work probono
instead of eating up the bulk of the original settlement!
Posted by: Jeff at March 29, 2008 3:06 PM
THIS DOES NOT SURPRISE ME ABOUT WAL MART I THINK THEY ARE ONE OF THE WORSE STORES IN AMERICA. THEY ARE UNCARING ABOUT THEIR EMPLOYEES AND COULD CARE EVEN LESS ABOUT THEIR CUSTOMERS. THEY ARE RUDE, IGNORANT AND DOWN RIGHT HORRIBLE IN TAKING THIS POOR FAMILY'S MONEY. I WILL NEVER, NEVER NEVER GO THERE AGAIN AFTER READING THIS.
Posted by: JOE BEANEY at March 29, 2008 3:06 PM
With this negative publicity Walmart has lost a much larger sum of money in sales. What a poor choice, but greed takes over again. Another customer who will bypass shopping at walmart, and not just for a week, my boycott will be permanent. Another family plus extended family no longer shopping at Walmart.
Posted by: P. Nieuwland at March 29, 2008 3:08 PM
Walmart is nothing but trashy in the way it treats it's employes. They are also one of the biggest out sourceing companies in America putting hundreds of thousands on people in America out of work. So why should any one be surprised about them sueing a former employe to recoop their insurance losses? I bet you didn't know that walmart takes out a life insurance policy on people who match their profileing that may die because of sickness, accident or other conditions. They, the Walmart company keeps those proceeds in the Bank without the family of the one who has died knowing. They are crooked in every way and only from Arkansas, the land of Unicle daddy, aunt mommy would such a company exist.
Posted by: Ken at March 29, 2008 3:10 PM
This is a classic example of why we all need to stand up and take back this country. We have allowed corporate interests to dominate every aspect of our lives - medical, legal, employment and personal. Walmart has been a bad neighbor for years because of its poor wages, poor to non-existant benefits and dismal personnel practices. Everyone SHOULD boycott Walmart and write a message to corporate headquarters. Search "Walmart Corporate Headquarters - Contact" and voice your outrage. Then vote appropriately in the upcoming elections. America will soon be "owned" by a select few lucky enough to rise above the fray. This is not what our Founding Fathers had in mind!
Posted by: Mary Kemen at March 29, 2008 3:11 PM
Walmart is used to taking advantage of their employees, disabled and mentally challenged EMPLOYEES. They disgust me. It is all over the news and you hear about their self-centered ways at least once or twice a year. EITHER DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT OR DO NOTHING!!!! JUST DON"T SHOP THERE IF YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT YOU HERE ABOUT THEM AND START GOING TO THE MOM AND POP STORES THAT NEED YOUR HELP.
Posted by: Kristi at March 29, 2008 3:12 PM
It's always easy to be generous with other peoples money, especially if it involves an entity that (almost)everbody loves to hate just on principle, like big corporations, banks, insurance companies, etc. There's nothing unusual about provisions like this in a health care or disability policy, because it lets the plan recover in instances where it should. If you don't have these provisions, outside legal recoveries are a double dip that should have partially offset what the plan shelled out. Time Warner (owner of AOL) probably has the same provisions in all it's plans. If these media companies are going to spin stories this way, maybe they would like to create a fund for this family themselves, and everyone can chip in.
Posted by: 4real at March 29, 2008 3:12 PM
I was in a car accident (not my fault) in 2004 my fiance died as a result of surgery following the accident. Because the accident was in another state from which I lived I had to have a lawyer in my home state and one in the state inwhich the accident happened. I was hit from behind on a Interstate freeway by persons from another country who had a rental car from Avis Car rental, they had taken out insurance also. My Sears retiree insurance which I pay for also, had paid a portion of my medical bills, I knew when I got a settlement I would have to repay Sears for what they had paid my doctors, After repaying the medical and the lawyers fees I was left with nothing for continuing Dr.s fees, before acepting the offer I had brought this up to the Attorney and he just said well that is why you have insurance,(???) so I too was screwed, but that is the way the system works, I am just thankful to be alive, The people who hit us, immediately went to their central american country and dissapeared. I feel that Avis rental was the bad company they paid more for their lawyers to fight me and my fiances children, than what I got to pay my Dr. bills.
Such is life and the error of the situations.
Posted by: Sharon at March 29, 2008 3:16 PM
This is not only the saddest story heard in a long time, it is also a collection of stupidities and cupidities.
The original attorney for the Shank family was obviously incompetent. The trucking company's insurance should have paid 100% of medical expenses, sparing Wal-Mart's health plan and thus creating no conflict with Wal-Mart. ALso in view of the injuries, the settlement should have been much higher.
Furthermore, how much did this attorney pocket to bring the $1million judgment down to less than half in the Shank's account?
Then there should have been an irrevocable trust created in Debbie's name to make her judgment proof. Simple legal paperwork. Maybe it can still be done.
Last but least declare bankruptcy in her name only. Otherwise family may lose home and other assets.
BUT THEY MUST GET ANOTHER LAWYER!!!!!
As for Wal-Mart, this is the worst kind of public relations - makes them look like heartless ogres without any compassion or conscience. They have a department for charitable activities and could easily do some internal fund-shifting to offset
the health plan obligation. Their P.R. department should be fired!
Posted by: George the wolf at March 29, 2008 3:20 PM
NO MORE WALMART....I HAVE ALWAYS PREFERRED TO SHOP WALMART AND HAVE IGNORED THE REPORTS I HAVE HEARD OF HOW WALMART MISTREATS THEIR EMPLOYEES... BUT... I CAN'T IGNORE THIS REPORT OF WALMART SUING DEBBIE SHANK!!!! I WILL NOT BUY FROM WALMART AND WILL RECOMMEND THE SAME TO ALL MY FAMILY AND FRIENDS.. IF A FUND IS ESTABLISHED FOR DEBBIE I KNOW I WILL HELP OUT..........PAT
Posted by: patrick at March 29, 2008 3:23 PM
This story is crazy! First of all the lawyers for the Shank family retained over 50% of the 1 million that was awarded. WHAT A RIPOFF!!! Give me a break. Their should be a cap on what a lawyers can charge for certain types of lawsuits. It is awful when attorneys reprsent themselves as a help but look at that big price tag to take away from the client. Secondly, the article stated that Mr. Shank had to divorce his wife in order for her to receive medicaid. Now who's paying the bills!! TAXPAYERS!!! While Wal-mart takes the money from the family and taxpayers to recoup less than 1% of the loss againist their net profit. They also state that this is policy and exceptions cannot be made. With this kind of attitude no wonder Wal-Mart's sales are down and consumer confidence is waivering. I wonder what Sam Walton would say to such a minimal amount lost in order to help a family in need. Makes your wonder what has happened to one good turn deserves another. If you do good things for others good thing will be returned to you. Wal-Mart Corporation start showing your workers and consumers that you truly do care about them and their communities and you will see a huge growth in sales and in the confidence of your workers. Remember, What comes around goes around.
Posted by: Colleen at March 29, 2008 3:42 PM
walmart has 10 times the money then they are trying to recoup. if old man walmart was still alive there would be no question he would let them keep the money. this walmart today sucks ask anyone who works for walmart espically in there stores and distribution centers they treat them like 3rd class citizens and expect them to work like dogs yeah they pay good at the dx but the minute you get to the top of there pay scale they will find a reason to let you go even lie about it if need be so they can hire someone new in your place in order to pay them less.
Posted by: mary at March 29, 2008 6:33 PM
BOYCOTT WALMART
Posted by: R. Hechtman at March 29, 2008 6:34 PM
I try to give "all" the benefit of the doubt, however this is beyond belief. I therefore, will boycott Walmart, Sams, etc. I cannot, and will not condone their actions in this case, and hope that others that feel the same, will do the same. Walmarts profits, and they are enormous, and this corporation should be shunned, until they make this situation right with this family. This is another example of mans inhumanity to man, in the form of greed over compassion.
Posted by: Leah Skellenger at March 29, 2008 7:10 PM
The only thing that saddens me more than this story is the fact that I just spent over $100 in this train wreck store today--I feel like a big idiot. I will never buy another item in Wal-mart EVER again. So what if something costs me a few dollars more, it's worth it to see this ugly giant fall on it's ass. Here in northern Virginia, the local Wal-mart hires mostly immigrants who can't speak English, most likely, because they don't have to pay them much. Shame on you Wal-mart for exploiting people, stuffing your pockets at others' expense, and showing absolutely no compassion for human suffering. Mr. Walton would be so ashamed of you and your low morales.
Posted by: Janice at March 29, 2008 8:06 PM
I find it fascinating that somehow your employer or your government is somehow responsible to take care of you instead of you being responsible for yourself. Because Walmart has money you expect them to give it away. This money belongs to the medical insurance plan not Walmarts general budget. Check your insurance plan. Any payments for medical expenses from another insurance or liability settlement have to pay back the medical insurance company. If it was Blue Cross of Unitedhealthcare as the insurer for Walmart they would be the ones suing to get the money back, since Walmart is self insured then it is Walmart who must sue. This of course makes Walmart look bad. The real question is just because a company is large enough to have money should it required to give it away just because they are a big company?
Posted by: Carl at March 29, 2008 9:08 PM
i used to work at wal mart and as some others have found out they r not nice to u at all.
i was fire becuz another employee didnt like the fact i was gay so they told a crock of shit.
like i was smoking for over an hour if they looked on the cameras they would have seen me go in and out the store 6 times to assist customers.
this is just a few things of how wal mart is just one big pile of stinky shit.
this is the most worse things i have ever herd of from any thing.
i think this lady should have kept the money.
Posted by: michele t at March 30, 2008 1:09 AM
lets say this is the craziest story i have ever herd.
but this is nothing unusual coming from wal mart.
just goes to show wat money can get you
to treat employees this way is just in my mind un herd of,\
i once worked for wal mart and i am so ashamed of it .
but there is good out of it like i now know the games they play with people.
and no they dont treat people equal not even the customers
lioke my grandma has to find her own cart and she is 80 some od years old how pitiful.
and the disabled come on they. if any one here ever herd of the henderson twins the first twins to be seperated from the head one works right here in clinton utah they wont even let her be a door greeter becuz of her looks from surgery how pathetic is that.
Posted by: breina at March 30, 2008 1:16 AM
Wal-Mart is almost surely innocent of the accusations suggested in the story and in the posts above. In most cases, Health Plans are separate legal entities from the employers and employees that use them. The administrator(s) are legally bound by the plan documents and *cannot* make judgement calls by the seat of their pants based on what seems equitable in a given case. The plan documents give them no legal right OR practical right to do so. The ignorance of CNN does not imply the guilt of Wal-Mart.
Posted by: Jim at April 2, 2008 8:16 PM

