Wal-Mart Meets Union Opposition to China Job Cuts
source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1240312 ... #printMode
By MEI FONG * APRIL 22, 2009, 4:09 A.M. ET
BEIJING -- Wal-Mart Stores Inc.'s plans to restructure its large Chinese work force hit a stumbling block amid objections from China's state-backed All-China Federation of Trade Unions.
Wal-Mart last week said it would trim a level of management, affecting 2.5%, or 1,400, of its employees. They are being asked to relocate to other store outlets or face pay cuts.
The move angered local union leaders, who asked Wal-Mart to hold off implementing the plan. They also requested meetings among trade union officials and Wal-Mart representatives.
"Wal-Mart should consult with labor unions and the employees who are involved, instead of using such a tough way," said Yang Fengzhi, a union leader in Changchun, the capital of Jilin province in northeastern China.
Wal-Mart spokesman Jonathan Dong said in an email, "We have kept and will continue to keep both the unions and local governments informed of our plans." He added, "The communication with the associates and their understanding of the program has been good, and we are confident of their support."
Wal-Mart's restructuring plans could lead to a tussle between the world's largest retailer, which typically resists efforts to organize its work force in the U.S., and China's labor movement, empowered by stronger labor laws implemented last year. The new laws have led to a flurry of lawsuits by laid-off employees against their former companies.
Wal-Mart employees' unionization in China is considered a landmark of sorts. While Wal-Mart employees are organized in some other parts of the world, these unions were primarily inherited through acquisitions. Following strong pressure from the government, Wal-Mart allowed a union to be formed in China in 2006, though union leaders outside China have questioned the Chinese trade unions' independence from the government.
The new laws require companies to consult trade unions a month before implementing large-scale layoffs. In many cases, the new laws also require employers to pay higher job-termination costs. Wal-Mart insists its restructuring moves aren't layoffs. "The purpose of this voluntary redeployment program is to support the company's robust growth plan in China. We need the talent, experience and expertise of our associates as we expand into new areas. It also provides associates with enormous professional growth opportunities," Mr. Dong said.
Despite the global financial crisis, Wal-Mart has continued to expand in China, one of its fastest growing markets. It has opened 23 stores in the country this year. It opened a total of 30 stores here in all of last year.
The company had 246 retail units in China as of March 31, including Wal-Mart supercenters; bulk discounter Sam's Club stores; and Trust-Mart hypermarkets, a Taiwanese chain in which Wal-Mart took a 35% stake two years ago. Wal-Mart has more than 54,000 employees in China, not including workers at Trust-Mart.
—Kersten Zhang contributed to this article.
_____________________________________________
pls refer to the previous thread Wal-Mart Plans Moves, Pay Cuts for China Staff
本篇报导与之前沃尔玛欲在华裁员的文章结合起来看，很清晰的看出这个世界零售业巨头一贯的强硬作风。本文可从两条线对比：
1）中国相关部门针对沃尔玛裁员的反应；2）沃尔玛在经济危机时期在华的表现与商业操作；3）被裁员工群体
文中涉及到中国相关部门有All-China Federation of Trade Unions（中华全国总工会）及其下属分支机构，报导中使用了以下的词汇：
state-backed、asked Wal-Mart to hold off...also requested meetings...从这些词汇的使用可分辨出有政府支持的国内工会力量（在后文称海外工会力量并不认可中国工会组织的有效性，使用了question这个词）似乎并不被沃尔玛所在意，政府对在华经营的零售机构沃尔玛仅能做到ask和request（前者是表示要求的普通词汇，而后者还有请求的含义，并不具备强硬的姿态）。
联系前文和本篇中对沃尔玛的报导，有如下词汇：
stumbling block（绊脚石）、informed of our plans（知会、通知）、confident of their support（做过沟通，肯定会支持我们的裁员行动）、insists its restructuring moves aren't layoffs（员工重组不是裁员）、the purpose of this voluntary...growth opportunities
这些词汇表意较明显：1）沃尔玛的裁员是拦不住的；2）对管理机构只需要一个通知，颇有先斩后奏之意；3）有信心政府还得支持我们裁员；4）粉饰一下裁员的行动。
第三方面，则是对前员工及相关问题的描述，比如称在中国的劳工组织形成只不过能算是一个标志性事件（of sorts解释为in some respects but not entirely or truly，即“算作”的意思），并且籍境外劳工组织之口质疑中国组织的合法地位（questioned the Chinese trade unions' independence from the government），颇有文革时给人扣帽子打倒在地的味道——沃尔玛应当撒泡尿照一下自己，它在美国等“法制健全”的国家是如何遵照法律执行相关劳工法的？此外，还称一小撮被辞退员工要起诉他们的前雇主（flurry of、against their former companies），文字的表达上似乎用了中性客观的表述，但给读者的印象是被解雇员工是忘恩负义的。如此，这些弱势群体在被解雇之后，一是其利益代表机构的工会被宣称为没有合法地位，二是自身被渲染为道德弱势的一方。
最后，再以沃尔玛对中国内地的贡献（主要以数据列举出它对当地经济的促进）来反衬官方机构和被裁员工的无理。