Consumer Law

The Wal Mart Case ? Another Reason For More Women on the Supreme Court!

By Joe Consumer

Reports are staring to come in about today?s Supreme Court oral argument in Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, the case brought by women alleging massive, company-wide discrimination against the world's largest retailer.  The issue is whether they can continue to sue as a class - the largest class-action employment lawsuit in U.S. history. 

As Nan Aron at the Alliance for Justice wrote, ?if Wal-Mart succeeds, not only will women at Wal-Mart be unable to change pay and promotion disparities, but future lawsuits related to employment discrimination, civil rights, antitrust violations, and consumer protection will be significantly hampered, discouraging cases brought by large groups of people against broad-based corporate malfeasance.?  (See here, here)    

Well, it may succeed thanks to the men on the Court, who are in the majority, even though every lower court decision said it shouldn?t.  Bloomberg reports,

Today?s arguments suggested the court might divide roughly along gender lines itself, with the three female justices --Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan -- emerging as perhaps the strongest supporters of the class action. Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Samuel Alito voiced skepticism.

Kennedy at one point told the lawyer for the women that their complaint pointed ?in two directions,? alleging both that the company had a companywide problem and that its local managers had unfettered discretion. ?I?m just not sure what the unlawful policy is,? Kennedy said.

Let?s hope Mr. Justice Kennedy figures that out.  As Dan Rather reported earlier,

Among the claims:  One reported that a male manager told her "women should be home barefoot and pregnant and women weren't qualified to be managers because men had an extra rib." Another stated that a senior vice president told her that she would not advance because she did not "hunt, fish, or do other typically-male activities" another was told that her male co-worker received a larger raise "because [he] had a family to support."

But then, there?s Mr. Justice Antonin Scalia, who ?described as inconsistent the argument by the plaintiffs that Wal-Mart had a strong corporate culture that fostered stereotypes of women while at the same time giving local store managers too much discretion in pay and promotion decisions.?

In sum, we?re hoping for the best for Betty Duke and just happy this horrible chain store, which is rushing to reopen in Quake-damaged Japan, continues to stay out of New York City.  As the New York Times wrote, ?in New York, an indisputably Democratic city, Wal-Mart faces a big challenge, both from lawmakers, like Ms. Quinn, and from unions, who accuse the retailer of endangering small businesses and mistreating its workers.?

Full post as published by ThePopTort on March 29, 2011 (boomark / email).