Update: Wal-Mart no longer seeks money from disabled ex-worker

Posted on Tuesday, April 01, 2008 6:26 PM ET

By Rich Gardella and Lisa Myers, NBC News

On Saturday's Nightly News, NBC News Senior Investigative Correspondent Lisa Myers reported on Deborah Shank, a former employee of Wal-Mart permanently disabled in a car accident eight years ago. Wal-Mart's health plan had moved to collect some of the settlement money she won in a lawsuit against a trucking firm in order to reimburse itself for the more than $470,000 in medical expenses it had paid for Shank.

Although it had just contacted Shank's attorney to begin the process of actually collecting the money from Shank and her husband, Wal-Mart announced Tuesday it had reversed its decision and said that it no longer will seek any reimbursement from the Shanks.


Wal-Mart had won its case in several courts over the past few years.  Recently, the Supreme Court declined to hear Shank's appeal.

Both CNN and NBC News broadcast Shank's story last week, generating a large viewer response.

"We have decided to modify our plan to allow us more discretion for individual cases, and are in the final stages of working out the details," Wal-Mart's statement, released Tuesday, reads. "Wal-Mart will not seek any reimbursement for the money already spent on Ms. Shank's care, and we will work with the family to ensure the remaining amounts in the trust can be used for her ongoing care."

Wal-Mart ended its statement with an apology  "for any additional stress this has put on the Shank family."

Jim Shank, Deborah's husband, released a statement in response: "I am grateful that Wal-Mart has seen their error and decided to rectify it. I just wish it hadn't taken them so long, this never should have happened. I sincerely hope no other family ever has to go through this.

"My thanks go first and foremost to my lord and savior Jesus Christ for the strength to bear up under all this. Thanks also to the citizens of the United States - it wasn't me who made this happen, it was the outcry of the people, and if there's a lesson in this story it's that 'we the people' still means something."

Read more on this story here.

Comments

Walmart could care less about her this just became a publicity nightmare. All this is nothing but an accounting problem of how much bad publicity $470,000 can buy you.

Mike VA (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 6:54 PM)

Great News for the "Little Guy!"
Could this be the "Tipping Point" for individuals?

Charles Perez, Irvine, Calif (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:03 PM)

They decided to "modify" their plan.  Pull-eeze.  The plan was never OBLIGATED to go after the money in the first place.  Reserving the right to do so is completely different than having an obligation to do so.

Mary, DC (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:11 PM)

Everyone needs to check their health policy. Your carrier has the same rule in its fine print.

Jim, Greensboro NC (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:13 PM)

BUT it was ok for Jim Shank to admit to "playing the system" by divorcing his wife. Wal-Mart was justified in attempting to collect the monies and the Shanks attorney should now follow and give back the money he collected. After all, why didn't he have the foresight to understand that Wal-Mart of any other insurance company is entitled to reimbursement in accident settlement cases. Tragic yes, put the blame where it belongs.

Roxanne, WI (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:16 PM)

When I first saw this story, I turned to a friend and told them that Wal-Mart would only NOW do the right thing.  Living in northwest Arkansas, I'm here to tell you, this company will not treat people right unless they are called out on it.  Low prices at ANY cost, whether it be to U.S. manufacturing jobs, state and federal Medicaid programs, or disabled ex-employees.  

Hal, Fort Smith, AR (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:19 PM)

WalMart did nothing different than any other employer would have done. The victim here should be looking at her lawyer's competence. He should have known.

CT (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:21 PM)

Wal-Mart donates money to all types of wonderful causes...why in the world they would want to take this womens settlement..when they really didn't have to is greedy.  I have stopped shopping at Wal-Mart for the last several weeks as everytime I walk into the building I think of how gruel it is that Wal-Mart was trying to and remove resources from someone unable to defend, care, or be self suffice in anyway.  I say Wal-Mart raise your candy bars a penny...and after selling a millon for an extra penny more profit you would easily have your money plus some.  Take care of your employees honestly and what is fair.  How silly to pay and work for health care to have to fight a giant like Wal-Mart.  

New Knoxville Ohio (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:21 PM)

Terrible decision, sets precedent meaning healthcare will not only be more expensive, but less likely to be offered at all.  Unfortunate situation, but rules are in place for the good of the majority.  This is the problem with our society, we think we can buffer hardship on an individual basis.  Why didn't the vehicle that hit this woman pay more?  Why did the lawyers take a 60% cut of the settlement?  These are the questions that need to be asked before Walmart is asked to pay an additional half a million dollars for this woman's care.  

Chris (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:23 PM)

It's too bad Wal-Mart had to give in to the pressure.  It's not fair to the other policy holders who abide by the rules of their health insurance contract.  And I can't believe her husband viewed it as Walmart's "error".  He and his wife were the one's who withheld that money.  Jesus said "Give unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's."  He should have paid the amount they owed Walmart, and prayed and trusted God to provide for them.  I'm disappointed in him as a Christian, but I do pray that their financial situation works out.  

Rachel Secrest, Knoxville, TN (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:25 PM)


WALMART ACTED AS THOUGH THIS POOR SUFFERING LADY WAS SPENDING THE MONEY ON VACATIONS AND SHOPPING SPREES.
THE COURTS ALWAYS SIDE WITH THE BIG COMPANIES ANYWAY.

STEVE BABB,QUEENS NY (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:25 PM)

This is neither the Walmart that Sam Walton founded nor one he ever envisioned.  Somewhere along the way they have lost respect for their customers and their employees, and the nation is losing its respect for Walmart.  Only trouble is many people have no good alternative, so incidents like this have no lasting impact on Walmart's bottom line.

Lee, North Dakota (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:30 PM)

Bad publicity, one for the little guys? OK, maybe that's all true, but lets not forget Wal-Mart didn't have to do this, as they did win it in a court of law, know matter how disheartening the verdict was. I wish the big oil companies would take a page from Wal-Mart and bite the bullet for a month or so and stop worrying about their profits [123 billion] and take a hit for the American people, by dropping the prices a buck or so. I'm sure that 30 or 40 billion drop in next quarters profits will still allow them to keep going. I keep thinking we are all Americans and on the same team, but some times I wonder who's team their on??????

Larry@ cox .net Tucson AZ (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:32 PM)

And why did the lawyers take over 50% of the award?  Have they no conscience?  I guess we all know the answer to that one!

L. Peterson, Braintree, MA (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:36 PM)

As much as I hate admitting that Wal-Mart is right, I will.  The trucking firm paid for damages relating to the accident including medical bills.  The lady abused the system by having Wal-Mart pay for the bills.  Wal-Mart may be bad at times, but it only did what is right.  What if Wal-Mart received the money and increased benefits?  I doubt that would have been the case, but I can dream.

Nick R, Oakland, CA (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:36 PM)

I am so glad that Wal Mart did the 360!!! Since reading the orginial article by MSNBC I had stopped shopping at Wal Mart and had convinced several friends to do the same thing.  Mr Shank is right if we all stand up things can change.  My heart and prayers are with the Shanks!

Denise , St. Louis, Mo (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:37 PM)

Walmart has a history of demeaning their employees, as I have seen it done to my father who has worked for Walmart for the past 12 years.  Hes is physically disabled retiree, but they continuously treat him like trash.  They dont take into account his physical limitations, just because he might "appear" to be ok.  He gives them medical letters saying the limitations of his work, but they try to ignore them.

He has just gotten to the point that he just goes to work, gets his low pay, just to have something to do.  This company shouldnt treat its workers like this, but they do on a daily basis.

Every one of their employees should be making $24-26k/year before benifits!  Not the $19k with benefits (they include $5k in medical and stock programs which most workers dont actually do), that Walmart now claims to pay the average worker.  Taking that into account, the average worker is below the poverty line!

Jacob, New Mexico (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:38 PM)

Yes, a tipping point for me.  Too late, Walmart.  You have completely lost my business.  I will be utilizing local grass-roots to get the Walmart in my community shut down.  We don't need a company that treats it's employees so poorly, whose bottom line ignores the welfare of the factory workers in factories of third world countries, a company that basically steals from the wallets and pulls jobs out from under Americans.  Good Riddance to Bad Rubbish, I say.

OhBrandi, Sykesville, MD (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:48 PM)

I see nothing wrong with WalMart looking to recover the ungodly amount of money that was spent on this woman's health care. she had signed paperwork at some point in her career with WalMart agreeing to this very issue. This is business no matter how you look at it. Regardless of how much money WalMart has, this was a justified recovery effort. It is built on principal and nothing more.

Joe R. VA. (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:48 PM)

This Wal-Mark fiasco wouldn't have happened at all if we instated a National Health Insurance program.  The $470,000.00 cost would have been absorbed by the government.  The program isn't perfect, but would be better than what we have available through private insurance companies...  Find out for yourself at: HR676.org

Chris, Santa Clara, CA. (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:52 PM)

Wal-Mart is always about the money. Had this not turned into a publicity nightmare for them they never would have dropped it.

They made the right decision but it wasn't their first choice.

Matt (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:52 PM)

Nobody can afford to alienate a potential customer in today's market.  When word came down that multi-billion-dollar Walmart couldn't let $470K slide, they realized boycotting would be emminent, & so have backed off.  By letting her win the battle, they won the war.  But guaranteed, the next employee to get in a car crash won't be so lucky - without a little press, at least.

Down on Walmart, Proud American (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:53 PM)

Most settlements usually include medical expenses incurred and therefore should re-imburse any insurance company that already had paid these expenses.  Otherwise it is like double-dipping.

mary, IL (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:54 PM)

Good for her! But people need to be aware of the fact that medicare and medicaid are likely to get a cut of any personal injury settlement they get, especially if they may have to rely on those programs for future medical care. It is the law, and has been for at least ten years now, that lawyers have to set aside an amount of the settlement to reimburse those agencies. The amount is based on either the actual amount that is received to pay for future medical expenses or the amount that was negotiated in the settlement.

The life of a disabled for can be pretty awful. Usually you have the poverty level and a lifetime of doctors visits to look for to. You really have to believe that suicide is wrong to survive that type of life.

Debra Jennings (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:58 PM)

The family might want to thank Keith Olbermann of MSNBC..that's how I heard about the issue and he wouldn't let go of it. If it wasn't for him reporting on it, how would we know as he's the only one I heard speaking on it (I could be wrong).  It's just that the news media is not reporting on the public's interest but favors the multinational's. Even the Supreme Court wouldn't hear her case...this does not reflect well on multinational's or this administration! Congratulations on your hard won victory.  

K Flock, Santa Cruz, CA (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:02 PM)

This was the right thing to do- this story kept me up at night-no amount of money can take the pain away from this family but perhaps this gentleman knows his plight touched a lot of hearts.

Rhonda Johnson, Worthington, IN (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:08 PM)

Congress needs to go in and fix this problem.  I am a physician and it is unbelievable how much it is all about the bottom line with these insurance companies.  The decision to drop the case is also about the bottom line.  When my son and I saw the news report we said that we would not shop at Walmart if we could get the same service elewhere.  

Mitchell, South Bend, Indiana (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:10 PM)

Think about who the "big dogs" of the retail sector used to be 20-30 yrs ago...look where they are now. Now it's Walmarts' turn....you can bet that their corporate greed will be their downfall, like all the others that came before them!!

Jules M, Fayette City, Pa (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:10 PM)

Thank you CNN and NBC for bringing national attention to Mrs. Shank's plight.  It is sad that it took public outrage for WalMart to do the right thing.  

Beth, Toledo, OH (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:11 PM)

Union stores are unable to compete with non-union stores such as Wal-Mart because they do not pay their regular employees a living wage. This just proves that Wal-Mart is going to be the downfall of all living wage retail employees, even their own. That lady gave her employer a tremendous service and all she got in return was a disservice. If you shop at Wal-Mart for a rock bottom price, please think of why the price is so low. Spend your money where it benefits your community, the small things we do affects us all.

Chris, Seattle, Washington (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:16 PM)

I have stopped doing buisness with the wal-mart chain due to this story. I hope other's due the same.

Jesse, Bowie tx. (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:22 PM)

It's about time American's started speaking up against mega-corporations!  This government; whether Democrat or Republican, could care less about their people. Now we need to speak up about Big Oil.  This proves that things really must change.

Neelam, Chicago, IL (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:23 PM)

This is the first I heard of this.  Good thing Walmart re-adjusted its thinking.  As a shopper of Walmart, small-minded corporate thinking that would cause Walmart to take from a family going through a terrible situation would definately cause me to shop else where.  Especially with gas prices as they are.   However, you can guarentee that employees of Walmart who receive health benefits will need to read the fine print from now on.  Chances are Walmart will revise its health benefit policy regarding employees receiving settlements for health situations -- where the employees sign and give Walmart entitlement rights to medical settlements.

Me, Anchorage, Alaska (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:25 PM)

Fantastic!!!  One victory for the little guy...Big Bad Walmart finally gave in to the public pressure.  Thanks a bunch NBC.

Lou Chattanooga, Tn (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:26 PM)

This shows that even large successful companies still have executives in powerfull positions who do not see the stupidity in their actions. From the beginning, even if legally they could collect this money, the execs at Walmart should have known better, for moral and business reasons.

Jim, Philadelphia, PA (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:27 PM)

Boycott WalMart because of its unprincipled business practices that have been well documented over the past several years.  It's incomprehensible to believe a company who claims to be family oriented would use such tactics.  I'm taking my business to Target.

Chris, San Clemente, CA (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:28 PM)

A lot of older Americans are on disability and it is amazing the number of creditors that care more about getting what is owed to them then just writing the debt off for humanity sake.  That is why they charge 28% interest to cover for the losses of those who become medically disabled through no fault of their own making.

Rob - Grand Rapids MI (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:28 PM)

This should not be construed a victory for the 'little guy'. It is only a sound business decision for Walmart. The initial damage is already done to this family. Big money buys much.

M. Johnston, Mobile, AL (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:30 PM)

Okay, but will they re-imburse the family for the fortune that was spent for legal counsel over the past 2 years in this legal nightmare? When they do that, then they will be truly a compassionate company. To take no additional money still has eroded the bulk of money awarded for her care, which might be for many years.

Janell Jester, Ooltewah, TN. (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:38 PM)

What amazing news!  While I find it deplorable that Wal Mart put this family through 5+ years of grief, I praise God that someone at Wal Mart finally came to their senses.  The next step is for Congress to step in and enact legislation to prevent this from happening to another family, since the clause in question seems to be a common inclusion.

Krista Allen (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:45 PM)

I glad that Wal-mart had a change of heart.  I was going to boycott Wal-mart and never shop there again.  It's amazing that the power of the people can still make a difference.  Even if Wal-mart had a legal right; sometimes doing what's right goes against that.  This woman has to live on that money for the rest of her life for her care.  

Sharon, Lynnwwod, WA (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:46 PM)

My hat is off to Walmart for this magnanimous decision to spare Debbie Shanks and her family any further pain and suffering. Their actions to collect money from Debbie caused this family a "double whammy" of stress. It just shows that sometimes, even if you are right, it's best to do the "right" thing. Congratulations Shank Family and congratulations to the American people for having their voice heard. We are indeed, "We the people".  Let us stay vigilante to cases such as this and to the important issues in our society. Let us never give up!

Carol Anglin Garden City, Utah (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:46 PM)

I was horrified to hear of Wal-Mart's greedy and myopic actions toward this family.  Even if it was the negative publicity, I am glad to hear they finally did the right thing.  Was their initial decision worth the legal costs & $470,000 worth of bad publicity?  I am sure they aren't going bankrupt from this decision.  Power to the people (and the sensible heads at Wal-Mart that finally prevailed)!

Stephanie Meincke, Hattiesburg, MS (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:47 PM)

I AGREE IT'S ALL ABOUT THE BAD PUBLICITY .. IM SURE IT'S ALREADY COST THEM MILLIONS. THIS IS ONLY TO COVER THE BLEEDING OF THE ADVERSE AFFECT IT'S HAD ON WALMART.. GOOD, THEY DESERVE IT. THEY'VE BEEN CLOSING MOM AND POP SHOPS ALL OVER THE USA SINCE IT STARTED OPENING THOUSANDS OF STORES..

ROCCO L.A. CALIFORNIA (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:53 PM)

It would be nice if corporations would do the humane thing without being forced by bad press. (PS, COUNTDOWN with Keith Olbermann has been talking about this story every day since last week.) Walmart made $11 billion last year, and they can't put a lousy half mil in their employees' health plan? And I'm sure most employees, if they knew about Ms. Shank, would gladly help pitch in with the costs of her care.

Lara D, Princeton, NJ (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:54 PM)

Walmart has contributed to the demise of the American culture we all cherish so dearly.  Walmart won't be satisfied until there are no small business owners left.  We all need to support our locally owned business.  

John W., Iowa (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:57 PM)

Let's see she gets a settlement which includes money for medical expenses.  But wait, she did not pay medical expenses - her employer did.  A sympathetic case does not a rational argument make.  Any insurer would have done the same thing.  Now who is going to make up the $470K loss caused by double dipping?  Look in the mirror.

Tom Rachio, Milwaukee, Wisconsin (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:58 PM)

I guess Walmart found out quickly that the negative publicity they were receiving would translate in much bigger loses than the $470K that they were going to re-coup.  Nothing has changed... Walmart doesn't give one rat about that woman or her family... if they did, they would never have sued her to begin with.  

I personally do not shop there... before it was because of how they have ripped apart small town America up... this only reinforces how they are not good corporate neighbors to anyone, or any town.

Rose Glennon, St. Louis (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:58 PM)

Yes, thank God and thank all of the people who stood up and said that this was just plain wrong.  WalMart should be ashamed of its self and should be greatful for all of the little people that work there!

Pier, Hayward California (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 9:01 PM)

Wal Mart was the company that paid medical bills
while the trucking company and their insurance
company cheated this lady. How about the lawyer
that had her settle. Thank You Wal Mart for all you did for this Lady.You were not the ones who
hurt her but took care of her.  

Lori Independence MO (Tuesday, April 01, 2008 9:12 PM)

Next page


Send a comment

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.): 

 Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private)

About the blog

Deep Background is NBC News’ investigative blog. It covers national security, terrorism, spies, Iraq, and politics, as well as government waste, fraud and abuse. It is edited by NBC News Senior Investigative Producer Jim Popkin.

Recent Posts

Archives


Browse by topic:

Browse by date:

Add this blog to your news reader

msnbc.com weblogs