jf02,
To quote the article:
“Under a Supreme Court precedent, a company can close a particular operation without negotiating a closing with a union. But it must negotiate over the effects of such a decision on workers.”
The judge merely ordered them to negotiate the effects of the closing. He ruled Wal-Mart had the right to close the department.
My point is that you parrot the union funded propoganda machines, as those websites you so dutifully linked to.
I say all the power to Wal-Mart, and I hope they continue their massive success in the future.
(P.S. keep your (sic)’s to yourself. A fast-paced forum is not a spelling bee.)