The inspector general of the Labor Department has decided to investigate its agreement to give Wal-Mart Stores 15 days' notice before investigating any stores facing complaints of child labor violations, according to department officials.þþThe inspector general's decision comes after lawmakers and children's advocacy groups criticized the department's settlement of child labor complaints against 24 Wal-Mart stores in Connecticut, New Hampshire and Arkansas. Without admitting any wrongdoing, Wal-Mart agreed to pay $135,540 to settle complaints involving 85 youths.þþRepresentative George Miller of California, the top Democrat on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, asked the inspector general to intervene, saying that the department was wrong to give Wal-Mart advance notice before investigating complaints. Noting that Wal-Mart executives had contributed heavily to President Bush's re-election, Mr. Miller said that Wal-Mart had received special treatment and that the department had acted suspiciously in not making the settlement public for more than a month.þþCriticism of the settlement grew last week. The Child Labor Coalition and the United Food and Commercial Workers union called on the department to rescind the settlement, saying the advance notice might enable Wal-Mart to intimidate or retaliate against complaining workers before an investigation was conducted.þþThe New York State attorney general, Eliot Spitzer, found fault with the agreement and added, ÿIf anyone has any information regarding labor violations about Wal-Mart, he or she should contact my office or the appropriate investigatory authorities in their state, knowing that we will not tip off Wal-Mart before conducting our investigation.ÿþþHoward M. Radzely, the Labor Department's top lawyer, said the advance notice would help ensure that Wal-Mart moved quickly to correct child labor violations.þþHe voiced confidence about the inspector general's investigation. ÿThe department is confident that once the I.G. looks at the agreement, he will conclude it was a standard agreement, entered into by career professionals, to further the mission of protecting youth employment,ÿ Mr. Radzely said.þþDavid Pine, a spokesman for the inspector general, Gordon S. Heddell, said, ÿWe are conducting a review, and we don't comment upon ongoing work.ÿ þþGus Whitcomb, a Wal-Mart spokesman, said the company was focused on full compliance with child labor laws.þþSeveral investigators for the Labor Department's Wage and Hour Division who insisted on anonymity for fear of retaliation said giving 15 days' notice would delay inquiries involving youths using hazardous machinery. The settlement mainly involved complaints that workers under 18 were illegally using dangerous machinery like cardboard balers, forklifts and a chain saw.þþThe Connecticut attorney general, Richard Blumenthal, has urged state officials across the country to join him in investigating child labor accusations against Wal-Mart. Of the 24 stores involved in the settlement, 20 were in Connecticut. ÿThe amount of the fine is an embarrassing pittance for a company that just announced $3.2 billion in profits in the last quarter alone,ÿ Mr. Blumenthal said. þþMr. Radzely said the penalties were stricter than Clinton administration child labor settlements with Sears, Roebuck & Company and Foot Locker. He said the 15-day provision was little different from the 10-day notices in those settlements and added that Wal-Mart was given more days because it had so many stores.þþDarlene Adkins, national coordinator of the Child Labor Coalition, which includes consumer, religious and labor groups, said, ÿA grace period before they do any investigation of a child-endangerment situation, that's appalling, especially when you consider that Wal-Mart has a history of child labor violations.ÿ In one incident in 2000, Maine fined Wal-Mart $205,650 for 1,436 such violations. þþMr. Miller and several career department officials said that Wal-Mart had improper control over what the department could say because the settlement stated that Wal-Mart and the department would ÿdevelop the terms of any joint or separate statementÿ about the agreement. Mr. Radzely said that Wal-Mart had no voice in what the department said about the settlement.þþ
Source: NY Times
