Posted On: December 4, 2008, 2:09 pm CST

Posted By: Contractor Specialist

Whether or not the unfortunate individual was covered by his employer's WC (e.g. a security or temp company), or was a totally uninsured subcontractor, his estate can still bring suit vs. Walmart for "failure to provide a safe workplace." Of course, those clever risk managers at Walmart no doubt hung the subcontracting company (if there is one) with an oppressive indemnity agreement with additional insured and waiver of subrogation provisions in the isurance section of their contract. They can then just turn the lawsuit over to the security company and its insurer and tell them to defend under their GL contractual coverage.

It looks like the limit demanded of the subonctractor was not too high and Walmart is worried to a small extent that it will have to pay a few mill above what the subcontractor's GL policy is going to have to pay. (I would not want to be defending this action!)

Walmart has raked in billions by using subcontractors with no benefits, not to mention employees with no or cruddy benefits. They all end up at the county hospital and we all end up paying for their care through our taxes. And now, this one time, this practice may come back to haunt them--just a bit.

What they should really be worried about are UNIONS and UNIONIZING EFFORTS.

Maybe something good will come out of this instance of the fruits of Walmart's unparalleled and unrestrained greed.

I don't shop at Walmart--period!