With boxes upon boxes of documents jammed under rows of courtroom benches, Wal-Mart employees launched a wage-law violation trial against the giant retailer Tuesday in a Dakota County courtroom.

Former and current employees of Wal-Mart and Sam's Club stores in Minnesota accuse their employer of not paying them for all the time they worked. Specifically, the employees said they were forced to work through break times and that managers inappropriately inserted breaks on their time cards. In other instances, they worked off the clock, without pay, before and after their shifts.

Four women brought the case on behalf of 56,000 current and former Minnesota employees of Wal-Mart Stores Inc. All of them at one time worked for either Wal-Mart or Sam's Clubs but claim they were not properly paid for hours worked in violation of the Minnesota Fair Labor Standards Act.

Attorneys for the workers said in opening statements before Judge Robert King Jr. that they have collected more than 1 million documents, including time records, internal memos and timekeeping audits Wal-Mart conducted on its own. Their witnesses will include store workers, high-level executives, store managers and regional and district managers. The nonjury trial is expected to go for months.

Class-action status was granted because the employment practices were seen as widespread and even routine at Minnesota stores.
Wal-Mart attorneys said Tuesday they will wait until the workers have wrapped
up their case before making an opening statement. On a break, Neal Manne, Wal-Mart's lead attorney, declined to comment on the company's strategy. "They'll present their case, and then we will present ours," he said.

But previously in response to this case, a Wal-Mart spokeswoman said all employees were paid for every minute worked.

It's not the first time Wal-Mart has had to defend its workplace practices in court.

In a Philadelphia case, Wal-Mart argued that if some employees missed breaks, they did so by choice. After coming up on the wrong end of a $78 million jury award in that case, Wal-Mart said it was doing everything it could to ensure employees took their breaks.

Dozens of similar cases have been filed around the nation against the Arkansas-based retailer.
Wal-Mart lost a $172 million verdict in California in 2005 over meal breaks. That decision has been appealed.

The company also faces class-action suits in New Jersey, South Carolina and Missouri. It fought off class certification this year in states including New York, Illinois and Maryland. Denial of class-action status means individuals must spend more to sue the company on their own.
In the Minnesota case, Wal-Mart argued against class-action status, but King denied the motion.

The Minnesota case is similar in its claims to the other suits. Wal-Mart managers, with severely understaffed stores and under pressure to cut payroll costs, shaved time here and there, inserting breaks workers hadn't taken on time cards and asking employees to start work right away before punching in or stay late after clocking out, Justin Perl, an attorney for the workers, alleged in his opening statement.

Debbie Simonson worked for a Brooklyn Park Wal-Mart from April 2000 to May 2001. As the first witness, she testified she missed numerous breaks because she had too much work and no one to cover for her. Also, she was asked to work before or after she was clocked in. When asked by one of the attorneys why, when she was asked to work off the clock, she did it, Simonson said: "When your boss tells you to do something, you do it."

She had no time to eat, call her kids or use the restroom. She was a department manager. When she complained on behalf of the workers she supervised, nothing changed. Simonson finally resigned.

The pressure to cut payroll costs started in the boardroom and made its way down to the store managers, whose bonuses were based on how profitable their stores were. "By embracing these measures, they're breaking their employees' backs," Perl said. "That's the Wal-Mart way."

Plaintiffs' attorneys contend there were more than 14 million violations of company policies and state laws regarding meal and rest breaks and off-the-clock work - which amounts to $27 million in unpaid wages. The workers also will seek to double their damages by showing Wal-Mart's actions were knowing and willful. They also will seek punitive damages. The class action covers people who worked at Minnesota Wal-Marts and Sam's Clubs from 1998 to 2004.
"The evidence will show that millions of rest breaks and meal breaks were missed, causing hourly workers to work through those breaks and giving Wal-Mart free labor from these so-called associates," Perl said.

Bloomberg News reports were used in this story. Julie Forster can be reached at jforster@pioneerpress.com or 651-228-5189.