Jill

Wal-Mart to pay $54.25 million to settle Minnesota lawsuit

The Associated Press • December 9, 2008
MINNEAPOLIS — Wal-Mart Stores Inc. will pay up to $54.25 million to settle a class-action lawsuit that alleged the discount giant cut workers’ break time and allowed employees to work off the clock in Minnesota.

Wal-Mart and attorneys for the plaintiffs announced the settlement today.

The class includes about 100,000 current and former hourly workers who were employed at Wal-Mart Stores and Sam’s Clubs in Minnesota from Sept. 11, 1998, through Nov. 14, 2008.

Wal-Mart has also agreed to maintain electronic systems, surveys and notices to stay compliant with wage and hour policies and Minnesota laws.

In July, a Dakota County judge ruled against Wal-Mart in the lawsuit, saying the Bentonville, Ark.-based retailer violated state labor laws 2 million times by cutting worker break time and “willfully” allowing employees to work off the clock. Court proceedings had been scheduled for next month to determine punitive damages.

Man-Made Wetlands Filter Wastewater From Facility.

The AP (12/5, Felberbaum) reports, "Eventually the birds, foxes, turtles and deer stumbled upon a man-made wetlands that naturally filters wastewater from the nation's biggest tobacco maker. The nearly 50 acres of wetlands are part of a $7 million science experiment," which is "using more than 150,000 plants to filter wastewater discharged by Philip Morris USA's Park 500 facility." This "project along the James River...became fully operational over the summer" and now "is creating a habitat for many animal species -- a stark contrast from the industrial city of steel buildings and towers less than a mile away." The AP notes, "Wastewater first flowed into the wetlands in March and more than 15 species of plants like bullrush and duck potato were installed shortly afterward, followed by more than 70 varieties of animals that come and go with the seasons." About "1.8 million gallons of treated wastewater a day moves through a series of ponds with native trees and shrubs. The plant life and microbes absorb mineral nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorous before the water reaches the river."

Lawmakers Urge Government Enforcement Of Chemical Ban In Toys.

USA Today (11/25, Szabo) reported, "Congressional supporters of a new law meant to protect children from dangerous chemicals are trying to make sure that the government enforces the legislation as they intended." The legislation was passed in August as "a landmark consumer safety law that raises standards for toys and virtually bans several hormone-like chemicals called phthalates in products for children under 12." Last week, a staff attorney at the Consumer Product Safety Commission "released a legal opinion stating that stores may continue to sell toys with phthalates, as long as those items were made before Feb. 10." But, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), co-author of the ban, said that, according to this statement, "that could allow toys with phthalates to remain on the shelves for years, with no way for parents to know which toys contain the chemicals." She added that "lawmakers wanted toys with the controversial chemicals to be off the market when the law takes effect Feb. 10."

Federal Regulators Decide Some Toys With Banned Plastics To Stay on Market.

On the front page of its Business section, the Washington Post (11/19, D1, Shin) reports, "A new federal ban on the use of the controversial chemical phthalate in teethers, pacifiers and other children's products won't apply to goods already in warehouses or on store shelves," the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) said on Tuesday. Under the decision, "it will be illegal to sell products made after the ban takes effect Feb. 10 that contain certain types of phthalates, chemicals used in soft plastic that have been linked to reproductive problems." The ban, "passed in August as part of a landmark product safety law, is supposed to remain in effect until a panel finishes a scientific review of phthalates." But, according to "consumer advocates and several Hill staffers who worked on the provision," the "decision violates the intent of the law." Consumer advocates also claim that "the decision will cause confusion for consumers," asking, "How will parents know whether the rubber ducky they're buying was made today and not in March?" Notably, "the decision came as a relief to makers of children's products...who faced the prospect of having to test products and components at great expense."

Japan's Princess Takamado pours tea for Britain's Prince Charles during the prince's visit to Nagano.

Yes, the AC does affect fuel efficiency. But Consumer Reports figures it amounts to only one mile per gallon, and edmunds.com says you could end up burning more if you open the windows and increase air resistance.

So to achieve maximum fuel efficiency, motorists should avoid using the air conditioner at speeds below 40 mph and travel with their windows down.
...
Drive at speeds over 55 mph with windows down and you'll decrease fuel economy by up to 20 percent or greater.
...
It's all in your speed.

Since organic farms often yield less per acre than factory farms, organic food requires more land, leaving less room for forests that absorb carbon dioxide and wilderness areas that promote biodiversity.

The study, published in today's issue of Science, reported that organic farming methods used 50% less energy, 97% less pesticide and as much as 51% less fertilizer than conventional methods.

After two decades of cultivation, the soil in the study's test plots was still rich in nutrients, resistant to erosion and readily water absorbent. Overall, organic crop yields averaged about 20% less than conventionally farmed crops, although the differences covered a wide range. Potato yields, for example, were 58% to 66% of those produced by conventional means. The production of wheat reached 90% of a conventional harvest.

...

To measure the benefits and drawbacks of each system, the researchers set up 96 small plots on a site near Basel, Switzerland where they grew wheat and potatoes on a seven-year crop rotation cycle.

After three cycles, Fliessbach said that the advantages conferred by the organic system could be divided into "below ground benefits" and "above ground benefits."

Below-ground benefits included a rich diversity of microorganisms, which in turn led to better soil structure, more efficient plant growth and superior water absorbency. Higher counts of beneficial insects such as earthworms contributed to soil fertility and reduced fertilizer requirements by half.

Above ground, organic farming proved resistant to the classical scourges of farming crops : drought and erosion. It also eliminated the problems of pesticide and nitrogen fertilizer pollution.
...

In April 2001, Washington State's Reganold published a six-year study in the magazine Nature, concluding that organic apple farming was not only better for the soil and the environment than its conventional counterpart but had comparable yields, higher profits and greater energy efficiency.

The VSA is a voluntary initiative for 4-year public colleges and universities. Developed through a partnership between the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) and the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges (NASULGC), the VSA is designed to help institutions meet the following objectives:

• Demonstrate accountability and stewardship to public
• Measure educational outcomes to identify effective educational practices
• Assemble information that is accessible, understandable, and comparable

thetim

princess_nicci