Walmart Sued Over Illegally Opening Bank Accounts For Delivery Drivers (theverge.com) 45
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is suing Walmart and payroll service provider Branch Messenger for alleged illegal payment practices for gig workers. The bureau says Walmart was opening direct deposit accounts using Spark delivery drivers' social security numbers without their consent. The accounts also can come with intense fees that, according to the complaint, would add either 2 percent or $2.99 per transaction, whichever is higher. It also says Walmart repeatedly promised to provide drivers with same-day payments through the platform starting in July 2021 but never delivered on that.
The Bureau alleges that for approximately two years starting around June 2021, defendants engaged in unfair, abusive, and deceptive practices in violation of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, including by requiring Spark Drivers to receive their compensation in Branch Accounts, opening Branch Accounts for Spark Drivers without their informed consent or, in many instances, on an unauthorized basis, and making deceptive statements about Branch to Spark Drivers. Spark delivery workers have been complaining about Walmart's Branch Messenger account requirements for years, which forced workers to use these accounts with no option to direct deposit to a preferred credit union or local bank. Walmart allegedly told workers they'd be terminated if they didn't accept the Branch accounts.
The Bureau alleges that for approximately two years starting around June 2021, defendants engaged in unfair, abusive, and deceptive practices in violation of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, including by requiring Spark Drivers to receive their compensation in Branch Accounts, opening Branch Accounts for Spark Drivers without their informed consent or, in many instances, on an unauthorized basis, and making deceptive statements about Branch to Spark Drivers. Spark delivery workers have been complaining about Walmart's Branch Messenger account requirements for years, which forced workers to use these accounts with no option to direct deposit to a preferred credit union or local bank. Walmart allegedly told workers they'd be terminated if they didn't accept the Branch accounts.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Reporting on reality is an "anti-capitalist political agenda".
Re: (Score:3)
Or course it is. Look at yesterday's top news story about that pedophile Matt Gaetz spending tens of thousands on cocaine and other drugs. Every real news agency covered it on their front page except the Fox tabloid which buried it on the equivalent of page three. In fact, that story doesn't even appear on their web site this morning no matter how far down you scroll. You have to use a search engine to find it [foxnews.com].
So yes, reporting on r
Re: (Score:2)
You believe the vile, perverse crony capitalism practiced in the United States of Corporatism is anything more than a distant relation to actual capitalism?
Aren't you cute!
Re: (Score:2)
'Don't hate the player, hate the game'.
As usually, wrong. Hardly any economic sysems can prevent abuse. It's not the game, it's the players.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently you haven't grasped the idea that there's a difference between understanding a certain amount of corruption is inevitable in any economic system, and actively raising the corrupt to the status of gods, then warping the entire system to accommodate their every whim.
Next time you use "As usually (sic), wrong" in a comment, at least try to understand the basic rules of the game.
Re: News for Nerds (Score:2)
My point was supposed to be, it's the players. Raise the corruption to the point that it's overwhelming. I think that was your point as well. Sorry I didn't write my mind sufficiently clearly to make it. But to call capitalism the cause, I think, is wrong. It's always the players you know that.
Re: (Score:2)
Apologies. Thanks to the way Slashdot arranges comments on my screen, I mistakenly believed your remark was intended for me, not the Anonymous Coward underneath my comment. Please disregard it.
Re: (Score:2)
You've posted here using some form of technology that would probably not be as well developed or as cheap as it is but for the capitalistic engine.
Regulations properly limit behavior, usually (but not always) undesirable behavior. We use economic (is there any other kind?) sanctions (regulations) to limit or restrict bad behavior, or to encourage some behavior. Taxation is a favorite blunt instrument in this, but there are others.
The economic system can prevent abuse, by design or operation, but regulations
Re: (Score:1)
I differentiate between "capitalism" and "the free enterprise system". The former is typically used as a synonym of "corporatism", ie the government hands out licenses for a special thing called a corporation which has "limited liability", such that corporate decision makers are not held personally responsible for their actions/debts/failures. This public/private system is a weak form of fascism.
The free enterprise system is exactly that. It just means that entrepreneurs can engage in economic activit
Re: (Score:2)
I differentiate between "capitalism" and "the free enterprise system". The former is typically used as a synonym of "corporatism", ie the government hands out licenses for a special thing called a corporation which has "limited liability", such that corporate decision makers are not held personally responsible for their actions/debts/failures.
It's indeed valuable to distinguish "capitalism" from "the free enterprise system", but that's not the definition of capitalism.
Capitalism is a system in which the physical means of production (the economic definition of "capital") is privately owned.
Re:News for Nerds (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, good Lord. You think slashdot has an agenda? It doesn't even have real editors (they're hamsters). This ancient, creaky wreck of a site survives only through its eclectic and eccentric accumulation of members since it was first launched on an Altair 8080 (it's still running that software in an emulator on a Commodore 64).
Re: (Score:2)
I would file this under “worker exploitation” but whatever floats your boat.
Re: (Score:3)
Because it's Stuff That Matters.
Re:News for Nerds (Score:5, Informative)
0) Because Wal-Mart continues to try to get into the banking business, primarily to further control and profit from the payments business.
1) Because this behavior should set their banking aspirations bvack at least a decade.
2) Because this is a pattern of Wal-Mart behavior that disqualifies them from entering the banking business for any reason.
And, while we're at it, let's pile on...
3) Because delivery gig workers are cheated at every opportunity, in part because the delivery businessjust can't support a moral business model, and partl;y because it's right there, RIGHT THERE, and enterpreneurs who are actually more like thieves take what they can.
4) Because you probably do not know how often workers are cheated by their employers just by getting paid in a non-traditional means. Everything from, in this example, charging fees just to get your pay, to forcing you into a 'reloadable' debit card you can't withdraw cash from or transfer to another account (this example makes paying your rent from several different employers interesting). And worse.
If fairness, honesty, or just plain dealing aren't stuff that matters, understood. You'll be happier over on Threads.
Re: News for Nerds (Score:2)
If fairness, honesty, or just plain dealing aren't stuff that matters, understood. You'll be happier over on Threads.
So any story about unfairness or dishonesty is suitable for slashdot? Really?
Re: (Score:2)
If fairness, honesty, or just plain dealing aren't stuff that matters, understood. You'll be happier over on Threads.
So any story about unfairness or dishonesty is suitable for slashdot? Really?
No, but a company with 2.1 million employees charging fees for employees using their salaries is at least interesting. And gig economy stories have a pretty strong tie-in to the tech sector as well. I'd say it is at least plausibly on-topic.
Re: News for Nerds (Score:2)
And dishonesty aren't really suitable for slashdot?
Re: (Score:2)
And dishonesty aren't really suitable for slashdot?
??? Not quite sure how you got that from my post. Reread?
Re: News for Nerds (Score:2)
Sorry, I meant to type asking if stories about dishonesty etc. Aren't suitable for/.?
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, I meant to type asking if stories about dishonesty etc. Aren't suitable for/.?
Clearly the answer is "not always". A big corporation being dishonest, quite possibly. Your uncle Jim being dishonest, no. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
I've had several dishonest uncles. They failed to poison the well.
I had a call center do this (Score:2)
The way this works out it's basically a 2 to 3% pay cut.
Re: I had a call center do this (Score:2)
No.
This is about getting an ADVANCE on earned, but unpaid, wages, not access to wages after they are paid out.
Branch charges advance fees on what are effectively payday loans,
Amazing Omission in story (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, it's bad that Walmart forced some drivers to accept payment in a service they didn't choose, BUT, the summary and source reporting fail to explain those "transaction fees", so I went to the source [branchapp.com], and this is what I found:
If you are eligible for an EWA at that time, the advance will be deposited into your Branch Digital Wallet instantly, or to an external bank account with 3-days standard delivery at no cost to you. If you want your EWA funds sent instantly to an external bank account, the following expedited delivery fees shall apply: $2.99 for EWAs in the amount of $25.00 or less; $3.99 for EWAs between $25.01-$74.99, inclusive; or $4.99 for EWAs over $75.00 or more. These fees may be modified from time to time or your employer may have negotiated a different fee structure.
See: 3.4. Amount of EWA and Expedited Delivery Fees., at https://www.branchapp.com/lega... [branchapp.com]
Got that, those are fees for wanting access to their wages early, a loan of money owed but not yet paid, and wanted to be transferred to other outside financial institutions.
They aren't being charged to withdraw their money 'normally' (after money deposited in their account).
PayPal charges a similar fee to 'instantly' transfer funds rather than take longer (2-3 days?) to an outside account - this is nothing new, but possibly a bit more aggressive fee structure.
Re: Amazing Omission in story (Score:5, Informative)
Additionally, to understand what an EWA is, here is their description from the same source:
2.1 Advance Services. Branch offers qualified users access to earned, but unpaid wages, prior to the next scheduled payday through its Earned Wage Access product (âoeEWAâ or âoeInstant Payâ as labeled in the Branch App and on the Website.) EWA services are offered to users through the userâ(TM)s employer and its relationship with Branch. EWAs are made without charge, however, you may choose to expedite disbursement of your EWA by paying an expedited delivery fee. See Section 3 below for additional details.â
So I do a job, I will get paid on payday, if I want payment now, I can get some of my earning in advance, for free (no fee) if I allow the service 3 days to make payment. If I want my pay advance quicker than 3 days, I can choose expedited payment for a fee.
Re: (Score:2)
Delivery drivers aren't employees according to Walmart. Wanting to be paid at the end of day isn't unreasonable for gig workers.
Re: (Score:2)
>> a loan of money owed but not yet paid
In that sense it resembles a payday loan (comes with high interest rates and is intended for quick access to cash). Instead of interest there's a fee of as much as 6% but "your employer may have negotiated a different fee structure". Delivery drivers probably fall into the category of people who are living hand-to-mouth and frequently will need their earnings right away.
Re: (Score:2)
From the link:
"Branch offers qualified users access to earned, but unpaid wages"
That is not a loan. The work was done. the wages earned. This is the payroll company holding onto your wages with the employers blessing. There is ZERO risk of default, they get paid directly by your company, but the fee can be up to 12%. This is not a benefit. This is fucking over your employees for a kickback, pure and simple. You aren't naive enough to think Walmart gets nothing out of this, are you?
The worker already did the
Re: (Score:2)
Still clearly anti-competitive if they aren't allowing the linked transfer account to be a third party bank. And the fees are absolutely absurd for an in-bank transfer.
Also this is a whole bunch of bank shenanigans already. If not for industry opposition Fednow would be the norm to instant settlement transferred, with a fee of less than a nickel per transaction.
Re: (Score:3)
A few jobs back, not naming the company because I actually liked working for them, I received an email from HR about a new program the company had that allowed you to get paid early. Getting paid early is always a good thing, so I looked into it. Like this Walmart example it was essentially the payroll partner trying to get into the payday loan business. When I mentioned this to some of the people that I worked with they were shocked, but they were also smart people, so as the similarities started to sta
Amazing Omission in the Amazing Omission claim (Score:2)
You cite a paragraph about requesting access to wages early without noting that *nowhere in the original claim does it say that the workers actually requested access to their wages early*.
You searched for $2.99, found one match, and stopped, doing no work to see if that was the actually fee in question.
To be specific, the claim says "same-day access" and your citation says "early access". To argue that the workers were requesting "early access" depends on knowing when the workers were told their payday was
California (Score:3)
In this not a criminal act ? (Score:2)
In which case it should be prison time for some at Walmart.
We've got it all backwards. (Score:3)
This is not news. Walmart is, and has for many decades been, pretty much the most vile collection of despicable people and policies and abuses behaving utterly and entirely vile and despicable and abusive outside the tobacco and fossil fuel industries. Walmart is utter garbage and the world would be better off without the entire company and everybody associated with it? In other news, it's Tuesday.
Real news would be Walmart doing something that's *NOT* vile, despicable, and abusive.
Is this not illegal? (Score:1)
Walmart is at it again... (Score:2)
It seems Walmart's playbook of shifting burdens and exploiting workers is alive and well. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) lawsuit against Walmart and Branch Messenger exposes yet another chapter in the company’s long history of shady practices.
Let’s start with the allegations: Walmart and Branch are accused of illegally opening deposit accounts for over a million Spark Drivers without their consent and funneling workers' pay into these accounts. Drivers who didn’t w