Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is set to face the biggest sexual discrimination case in the history of the U.S. according to a top court ruling.
Charging bias in pay and promotion, as many as two million women who have worked in the chain’s US stores since 1998 could unite for the class-action suit that could see the company parting with millions of dollars in lost pay and damages to the plaintiffs.
Representing the female plaintiffs, Brad Seligman, a lawyer for The Impact Fund, a nonprofit group in Berkeley, California, said:
It is time for Wal-Mart to face the music. Two courts now have ruled that Wal-Mart is going to have to face a jury ... We fully expect Wal-Mart to keep appealing but we’re very confident now that two courts have upheld this (class) certification.
The 56-year old lead plaintiff Betty Dukes works as a greeter at a Wal-Mart east of San Francisco. A Wal-Mart employee for nearly 13 years, Dukes said she sued the company because of neglect she and fellow female employees felt when openings for positions were advertised within her store.
Dukes had been promoted to a customer service representative post after having worked as a cashier for three years. She claims that male employees had received similar promotions even before probationary periods after they were hired had expired.
She said:
I had seen males go into the position with less than 90 days experience.
The three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals which gave the 2-1 ruling emphasized that the decision only affirmed a lower court ruling to certify the case as a class action against Wal-Mart, but took no position on Dukes’ claim.
However, in a dissent, 9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld said the case should not be certified as a class, since it could benefit lawyers and undeserving plaintiffs while the rewards to the deserving plaintiffs who were actually discriminated against.
Judge Kleinfeld wrote:
Plaintiffs’ only evidence of sex discrimination is that around 2/3 of Wal-Mart employees are female, but only about 1/3 of its managers are female. Not everybody wants to be a Wal-Mart manager. Those women who want to be managers may find better opportunities elsewhere.
Wal-Mart has earlier been accused of underpaying workers and undermining small businesses with its huge retail outlets. The store however, firmly denied that charge claiming itself to have been a major source of jobs.
In this case, the Bentonville, Arkansas-based Wal-Mart argued that it did not discriminate against women and that the class-action status should be dismissed as the company grants a great deal of autonomy to all of its 3,400 US stores.
The chain was willing to appeal the ruling to a larger panel of the 9th Circuit and the US Supreme Court if necessary.
Ted Boutrous, lead counsel for Wal-Mart’s appeal said:
This was one step in what is going to be a long process, and we are still at a very early stage in this case. We are very optimistic about our chances for obtaining relief from this ruling as the case progresses.
Coldstream Capital Management, which owns Wal-Mart stock, issued a statement through its chief investment officer of Donald Gher, saying the decision was a setback for the retailer and would cheer the company’s critics in the U.S. labor movement.
He said:
Clearly this is a big win for the tort lawyers and for the unions who are looking to cases like this to help bolster their ranks.
However, the news seems to have had little impact on the Wal-Mart shares as it closed 6 cents higher on Tuesday at $48.58 on the New York Stock Exchange.
Via: reuters
