Can Wal-Mart Save Chicago’s Food Deserts?

A few weeks ago, I dealt broadly with issues of food access and distribution, and more specifically, with Chicago’s nutrition deficient neighborhoods known as “food deserts.”

These spheres of food insecurity have become newsworthy again as Wal-Mart gears up for its second attempt to open a handful of new stores, featuring full grocery sections, in the Windy City.

Supporters of the mega-corporation say that opening Wal-Marts in low-income neighborhoods (the proposed location of many of the new stores) will generate hundreds of new jobs and provide much-needed access to healthy food for those living in the city’s now well-documented food deserts. Opponents argue that the retailer should be forced to implement changes in its labor practices—to ensure fair wages and safe working conditions—before being allowed to expand.

On the surface, it seems as though both the city and the corporation should have a vested interest in resolving these issues.

And they do. But here’s the real story.

For years now, Wal-Mart has tried—with the support of Mayor Richard Daley— to gain access to Chicago neighborhoods only to be pushed back out by the politically powerful Service Employee International Union (SEIU) and other labor groups who bemoan the corporation's anti-union mentality and questionable labor practices.

Most recently, SEIU was able oust several alderman opposed to the labor union’s “big box” ordinance which would have required businesses reporting more than $1 billion in annual sales in stores of 90,000 square feet or more to implement wage and work rules.

The aim of the “big box” ordinance and overall goal of SEIU are noble ones: to secure livable wages and safe working conditions for all its members. But at what cost?

With the economy in the toilet and the increasing realization that many people in Chicago live without access to food, it becomes harder to ignore a company that would provide much-needed jobs and healthy food to low-income city residents.

Let me say, I am probably one of the most passionate Wal-Mart detractors out there. The company’s shady labor practices are no secret and everyone knows what happens to small businesses when Wal-Mart comes to town. But even I—as well as other reluctant commentators—can see the value in allowing the company to meet an unjust and unmet need for healthy food and steady jobs in Chicago’s poorest neighborhoods.

Of course, having access to healthy food doesn’t necessarily translate into making healthy food choices. It’s going to take nutrition education and consumer restraint to convince people to buy apples and zucchini instead of potato chips and soda.

But without access, there is no choice.

It seems as though the question we’ve been discussing here on the Poverty in America blog over the past few weeks continues: good food (or in this case, food provided by an ethically-challenged corporation) or no food at all?

(Photo credit: Tom Boese for Brave New Films on Flickr)