Blow to Wal-Mart in Sex Bias Suit

[dreamdancer 0]

sexism at work...

Quote

In a major blow to Wal-Mart Stores Inc, a sex-discrimination lawsuit against the retailer can proceed as a class-action case covering more than 1 million female employees, a U.S. court ruled on Monday.

The lawsuit argues that female workers were paid less and received fewer promotions at Wal-Mart than male counterparts, and that the retailer's corporate structure fostered this gender discrimination. Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, had asked the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco to undo class-action certification in what could be the largest sexual discrimination lawsuit in the nation's history.

The lawsuit argues that female workers were paid less and received fewer promotions at Wal-Mart than male counterparts, and that the retailer's corporate structure fostered this gender discrimination.

"It's good day," said Brad Seligman, an attorney for the plaintiffs. "We've been in the Ninth Circuit for five years. It's been long awaited."

Wal-Mart was not immediately available for a comment.

Paul Secunda, an associate professor of law at Marquette University Law School, called the ruling "a huge win for the plaintiffs, and a tremendous loss for Wal-Mart."

"Wal-Mart has potentially huge liability," he said. Given the number of employees involved and many years of pay at issue "the amount of liability can be many billions of dollars."

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/04/26-9

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[rhaig 0]

didn't you just recently post "i don't think it's sexist to admit that there are differences between the sexes"

troll

--
Rob

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

didn't you just recently post "i don't think it's sexist to admit that there are differences between the sexes"

troll

stalker...

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

didn't you just recently post "i don't think it's sexist to admit that there are differences between the sexes"

stalker...

Answer his question!

[VTmotoMike08 0]

Ya know, if you're a big enough company with enough money, someone will eventually find something to sue you for, no matter how much they have to stretch it.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Ya know, if you're a big enough company with enough money, someone will eventually find something to sue you for, no matter how much they have to stretch it.

didn't seem like too big a stretch in this case, at a company rather notorious for marginal working conditions.

[billvon 2,435]

>Ya know, if you're a big enough company with enough money, someone
>will eventually find something to sue you for, no matter how much they
>have to stretch it.

True. Look at Enron. Seems like people were suing them left and right.

[VTmotoMike08 0]

Quote

Quote

Ya know, if you're a big enough company with enough money, someone will eventually find something to sue you for, no matter how much they have to stretch it.

didn't seem like too big a stretch in this case, at a company rather notorious for marginal working conditions.

I don't know all the details but it seems there are so many variables to control before you can actually make a case for sexism. Maybe the courts will sort it out and get a good verdict... or, more likely, the side with the most expensive lawyers wins

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I don't know all the details but it seems there are so many variables to control before you can actually make a case for sexism. Maybe the courts will sort it out and get a good verdict... or, more likely, the side with the most expensive lawyers wins

That would be Walmart, no?

The plaintiffs will have to make their case. This decision mere makes it one trial rather than every single lower middle class would be manager file separately.

The sheer size of the company, as well as its meticulous data recording, should make it easy to show a bias if it exists. And if Walmart has legitimate criteria for selection that aren't gender based, it will have the data to prove that as well. But short of a claim like "women aren't heartless bastards that will keep the bottom line low" (which definitely isn't true), there's not much about retail management that should support a great discrepancy.

[rhaig 0]

I've seen it fall both ways. I work in tech. Men tend to get paid more in the same job. In my experience it's because they change jobs more often. You get a bigger raise when you switch jobs than when you stay put.

I've also seen a woman do a better job than the guy on her team and she didn't get any credit because she didn't stand up for herself and say so. When I and another employee said publicly, "hey... you didn't do that, she did." Then she came to her own defense.

I've heard management say "I think it's because she's a woman". Sometimes they say it in a good way. ("She thinks differently and solves problems differently. I like that. I think it's because she's a woman".) Sometimes a bad way.

Sexism is out there. But there's a whole lot of crying wolf also.

--
Rob

[pirana 0]

Only because the WalMart approach to driving down price seems to so often cross the line into bad behavior - I'm inclined to believe they would systematize just about any practice that reduced costs. It'll be interesting to see if their own documentation does them in; not that i expect to see memos ordering managers to pay women less, but with their number of employees and the data they keep any pattern of discrimination should be obvious. Probably why they have fought so hard to get it stopped before they actually have to provide their data.

My mom worked for them for a few years during the time when they were doing the punch-out-but-stay-here-thing. During lulls in traffic the managers would actually go around and tell people to punch out, and tell them not to leave the store.

In the words of Snagglepuss, I find them despicable.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley