Wal-Marts Faulted on Errors in Pricing

Wal-Mart stores in California and three other states have problems charging customers the right amount for their purchases, according to two studies to be released today.

Researchers at UC Berkeley and the University of Illinois-Chicago, funded by a union that is a leading critic of the retailer, found that nearly 9 in 10 stores studied in California fell short of federal standards for accurate pricing.

Although the researchers found more undercharges, which work in customers’ favor, than overcharges, any discrepancy between prices posted on shelves and what is charged at checkout is considered problematic.

For Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world’s largest retailer, a pricing accuracy problem could prove particularly ill-timed. In recent weeks, unions and other critics have intensified their campaign to challenge what they see as Wal-Mart’s unfair treatment of workers and suppliers.

In addition, the company, which promises “Always Low Prices,” is considered retailing’s technology and logistics leader.

“That so many stores violated the standards was interesting,” said Karen Chapple, an assistant professor of city and regional planning at Berkeley who coauthored the study. “It was such a widespread problem. It wasn’t one or two stores; it was almost the entire sample.”

At half the stores surveyed in California, researchers were charged the wrong price on eight or more items out of 90 to 100 purchased. Four stores in the sample of 60 locations had 18 to 26 errors; only three stores in the sample had perfect scores.

Federal standards for pricing accuracy require large retailers to charge the correct price on at least 98 of 100 randomly selected goods. In California, 52 of the 60 stores, or 87%, fell short of that mark, the researchers found.

A similar survey in Illinois, Indiana and Michigan found more than two pricing errors in 66 of the 78 stores sampled. The studies were funded by the United Food and Commercial Workers union, which has tried to organize the retailer’s employees.

Pricing inaccuracy is a problem that plagues many retailers. Cash registers, which read the bar codes on products, are only as good as the information fed to them. Workers also have to adjust shelves to match frequently changing prices.

“Obviously we strive to have accurate pricing both on the shelf and on the items,” said Robert McAdam, vice president of corporate affairs for the Bentonville, Ark.-based retailer, who said he had not seen the studies. “We’re intent on giving our customers the right kind of service. If it’s a problem we can fix, we will fix it.”

WakeUpWalmart.com, an advocacy group funded by the food workers union, said it would call on the attorneys general of all 50 states to investigate the retailer’s pricing and scanning.

A spokesman for California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer said pricing accuracy was an important consumer protection issue.

“The working men and women of California have enough to worry about without wondering whether they are going to be on the wrong end of a pricing lottery when they get up to the Wal-Mart checkout stand,” said Tom Dresslar, who said he knew of the study’s conclusions but had not seen the full report. “It is a serious concern, and if it turns out action is warranted, we will go after Wal-Mart to make sure its consumers are protected.”

WakeUpWalMart.com also said it would distribute more than 1 million fliers the day after Thanksgiving, the traditional beginning of the holiday shopping season, urging Wal-Mart customers to verify that they are charged the posted prices.

Wal-Mart has an obligation to meet federal standards, said Paul Blank, WakeUpWalMart.com’s campaign director, “and in these four states, the studies show they have failed to meet those standards.”

In the California study, the researchers focused on 100 Wal-Mart stores within a 200-mile radius of Los Angeles or San Francisco, where most of the state’s 124 Wal-Marts were located when the study was conducted in the spring. They then narrowed their sample to 60 randomly selected stores.

The researchers bought 90 to 100 randomly selected household goods at each store from nine departments, including sale items.