Tax Reform in This Election Year: It's Not Likely
Which Credit Card Rewards Does the IRS Care About?As Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (NYSE: WMT) turns to late-night TV to try to boost its image, the Julie Roehm scandal continues to produce negative publicity, regardless of whether Ms. Roehm is telling the truth. A few days ago, Bloomberg reported that the company was facing a lot of pressure to reach a settlement with Roehm, and put an end to the rumors and innuendo.
Last month, Roehm called for the departure of CEO Lee Scott and others she accuses of violating the company's ethics policy. Some worry that a continuation of the battle with Ms. Roehm could lead to more damaging allegations which, regardless of their verity, could further harm the company's reputation.
In retrospect, there's almost no question that Wal-Mart should have settled the suit months ago, when Roehm was seeking approximately $1.5 million in salary and punitive damages. But now that the issue has been grabbing headlines for so long, a settlement could be seen as an admission of wrongdoing, and could generate even more negative publicity.
At this point, Wal-Mart is in a tough position. If Scott and others truly believe they're innocent of any wrongdoing, is it better to let the legal process run its course, regardless of the headlines generated in the interim? Would a settlement put an end to the negative publicity?
The issue really seems to hinge on what else Ms. Roehm has up her sleeve. If accusing Scott of buying a ring from a vendor was all she's got, then they may not want to settle. But if there's more to come in subsequent legal filings, a settlement is probably in the company's best interests.
Goldman Earnings Sink After Buffett Dividend
Johnson & Johnson's Income Falls 23%
Burberry Shares Leap on Sales Update
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
6-03-2007 @ 11:58AM
sln said...
Maybe what's most important is who Walmarts suppliers really are and who is really working in their factories. Americans would be shocked and appauled at slave and child labor used to make products in "Communist China" ( yes folks, its still Communist!) . Tainted pet foods and cosmetics re the tip of the iceberg. "Communist China" has an economy that benefits a small percentage of Communist party members and leaves out 85% of its peasant and ethnic minority populations.
6-03-2007 @ 10:12PM
Mike said...
Ok SLN... right.
Back here in the world of reality (and at the very least on-topic)...
Problem is that if Wal-Mart truly is in-the-right, they simply can not settle. To do so would invite even more frivolous lawsuits then they suffer today. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry would sue the company knowing that rather than accept bad publicity the company would settle.
Nope. Part of being a company in the public eye is fighting those battles and not giving in.
I would think Rohm's case must be on pretty thin ice if she's pulling THESE cards out of her sleeve.
"Uh yeah I took some stuff from that Ad agency, but look what HE took..."
She's throwing away far more money than she ever could hope to recoup. Those emails seemed pretty damaging to me. I am amazed that her marriage survived, much less her professional integrity.