Big Brother Mart

(Page 2 of 2)

Mr. Senser, 47, and his staff of roughly 400, investigate allegations of misconduct, guard Wal-Mart executives and prepare for potential crises of all kinds, from hurricanes to terrorist attacks. (During Hurricane Katrina, they established an emergency response center inside Wal-Mart's headquarters, filled with flat-screen televisions, that resembled one used by the F.B.I.)

Their backgrounds are impressive, if not slightly intimidating. Mr. Senser was a senior officer in the C.I.A.'s office of security, which was responsible for investigating agents considered a security risk. After that, he supervised the development of an internal security department at the F.B.I. when the agency discovered that Robert P. Hanssen, one of its agents, had spied for the Soviet Union and Russia.

Joe Lewis, who runs the internal corporate investigations unit at Wal-Mart, worked at the F.B.I. for 27 years, serving as acting assistant director for criminal investigations. He works closely with Thomas C. Gean, chief legal compliance officer, who was the United States attorney for the Western District of Arkansas.

In an interview, H. Lee Scott Jr., Wal-Mart's chief executive, said that "it has reached the point where there are issues that take specialized skills to get to the bottom of."

Mr. Scott conceded that the team has been unusually busy lately. "You almost have to laugh," he said of executives engaging in egregious conduct. "You can't make this stuff up."

Three weeks ago, for example, Wal-Mart fired a computer technician, Bruce Gabbard, and one of his superiors, Jason Hamilton, after a two-month investigation conducted by Mr. Senser and his staff. They found that Mr. Gabbard, acting alone, had taped phone conversations between members of Wal-Mart's media relations staff and this reporter of The New York Times. Using equipment he bought on eBay, he also intercepted text messages sent from his colleagues' BlackBerries.

Mr. Scott, who personally apologized for the incident, said Mr. Gabbard had tried to uncover the source of leaked internal documents shared with newspapers like The Times "because he thought what was happening to his company was unfair and he was going to do something about it." Mr. Gabbard has declined to comment.

Behind Wal-Mart's response to such cases is a proud preoccupation with sticking to the rules. Inside Wal-Mart's spare headquarters, large signs affixed to the doors of meeting rooms spell out a ban on gifts of any value from potential vendors, whether it is a free plane ticket or a cup of coffee.

No wonder, perhaps, that wasted money ?- from suppliers and Wal-Mart employees ?- is a recurring theme in the company's investigations.

One of the company's biggest investigations was of a board member and former vice chairman, Thomas M. Coughlin, whom it accused in 2005 of dipping into company funds to pay for CDs, beer, an all-terrain vehicle, duck-hunting boots and a customized dog kennel. His total theft, Wal-Mart said, was more than $500,000.

As with Ms. Roehm and Mr. Womack, Wal-Mart spared no detail in its case against Mr. Coughlin, who pleaded guilty to federal charges in the case. Investigators documented dozens of improper purchases that included fiber supplements and doughnuts and, in legal filings, described him as a rogue executive committed to defrauding the company.

But not all of Wal-Mart's investigations involve money, or even high-stakes business matters, prompting employees to protest that the company's investigative arm is, at times, used to intimidate employees who question authority or raise issues their bosses wish to remain secret.

James W. Lynn, a factory inspection manager at Wal-Mart, was fired in 2002 for fraternization with a subordinate after an investigation that extended across several countries.

During the investigation, a company investigator followed Mr. Lynn and a lower-level female colleague who worked in Costa Rica on a business trip to Guatemala City, where he spied on the pair for at least four days ?- even booking a hotel room directly across the hall from the female employee's room to keep watch on the pair. (In the end, both Mr. Lynn and the woman did say they kissed.)

Mr. Lynn, in an interview and in a wrongful-termination lawsuit filed against Wal-Mart, claims he was singled out because he openly criticized the working conditions in the Central American factories he inspected.

"Wal-Mart is the ultimate Big Brother in corporate America," Mr. Lynn said. He disputes Wal-Mart's claim that it investigates every employee the same way. "They are very opportunistic," he said. "If it is someone they want to get rid of, they will go all out. If it's somebody whose career they want to save, they won't."

Sarah Clark, a Wal-Mart spokeswoman, said the company "took the steps it deemed necessary to investigate the allegations of fraternization" and denied the company was motivated by Mr. Lynn's criticism.

Mr. Senser, who arrived after the investigation of Mr. Lynn, said his staff knew its boundaries.

"We are not in the business of prosecuting people, or pursuing an allegation to find a violation of the law," Mr. Senser said. "We operate for the benefit of our shareholders to make sure this company is being appropriately and ethically run. There is a difference."

Years ago I was desperate to get some experience in my chosen field and I worked for a man that made very personal comments about employees personal lives (upon meeting my boyfriend the boss asked him if I was any good in bed), he often made comments about what we wore to work and listened in on all our phone calls. Another woman in the business thought it was his right as the boss and owner to get away with it and said if I didn't like to I should leave. I stayed for a year because I wanted the job experience on my resume, but I never thought a boss should be given such carte blanche. I think WalMart is just being the bigger version of this guy I worked for.

(I just don't personally care what people do unless it affects job performance, I always look at (er) performance. I too was stunned by the level of spy expertise thrown at this at Walmart business. [Shocked]

I think my former boss was acting exactly like Walmart by questioning my personal life and basically spying on me.I have no problem with a company enforcing labor laws, but it seems to me that WalMart has created a situation that goes beyond the office and into a person's personal life. I'm fine with a company making sure no employee violates the rights of another employee, but what about consenting adults not on company time? Where does personal life begin and end? Where does company life begin and end? How much should a company be able to get away with. I'm wondering where the line should be drawn.