About that class-action lawsuit against Walmart. Where is the proof these females have been discriminated?

Question

I read an article about it and no where were specific examples cited where specific women (deserving ones that is) were discriminated against at any of the store locations.

When I first started reading it I thought they were talking about the top jobs in Wal-Mart’s corporate headquarters but it’s about check out girls and stock boys. Teenager jobs!

Are these jobs worth a class action lawsuit?

Is this suit about discrimination or about something else?

The suit weakly alleges that all of Wal-Mart’s females have been discriminated against meanly by the man employees. As if the Wal-Mart men have secret meetings plotting to screw the women out of a dime more an hour. The suit does not use specific examples but statistics.

What puzzle me are these female employees indicting Wal-Mart or the entire culture? Women traditionally are not as competitive and a lot of the times are happy reaching a certain point in a business and stay put. I am talking broadly here. You can’t get promoted if you don’t apply!

Men tend to be the reverse so naturally when you look at the big picture you will see more of them in top jobs than women. I would counter argue that the man jobs are also likely to have a higher turnover rate where as the females down below have more job security.

Also I shop at Wal-Mart all the time and I see lots of women in charge. The women outnumber the men by about 30 to 1.

I think this is just an attack on capitalism. What do you think? Should the judge have tossed this case?

Answer 1

I agree with you. My wife works part time for Wal Mart. She makes $15.00 an hour, and has turned down offers of management positions, because she would have to work full time.

For the most part, the 1.5 million women named in the class action suit, are without much formal education, i.e., no high school diploma, and would find it impossible to survive in the real world of corporate employment.

It is the right of the accused to face his accusers in a court of law. If the Wal Mart lawyers were smart, they would insist on questioning each and every one of the 1.5 million women named in this suit.

Wal Mart could conceivably drag out this lawsuit for decades. There's not a law firm in this country that has the resources to survive that long, but Wal Mart's pockets are almost infinitely deep. They would have no such problem.

This is indeed, nothing more than another attack on capitalism. And another pointless attack on the largest employer in the U.S.

I think the judge should be thrown out.

Answer 2

There is no class action suit unless there are enough plaintiffs. Walmart is a big target and I am sure lawyers love to go after them because even the setttlement amount is quite decent.

The beauty of it is that if you ask enough people the right questions, they will feel that they have been wronged somewhere.

As it stands, there is no "smoking gun" being listed yet. But the suit allows the lawyers to go around interviewing people and supeona documents and memos. I am pretty sure no managers would be so stupid to be caught writing anything blatant.

So now you look at the distribution of men vs women in certain ranks from top to bottom. This is where if many women at different geographical locations may feel that they are systematically passed over, then there is some unfair practice going on by,say male managers. Again, I doubt these mid to low managers are instructed to pass over women. But at this point, statistics does come in and I don't know the answer to that. IT MAY NOT BE WHAT YOU HAVE DONE BUT WHAT YOU HAVEN'T DONE.

A company as big as Walmart can always be guilty of not doing better. Whether it is discrimination, green, insurance, or unfair competition. I would say lawyers might seek lack of training to the lower management rank on equal opportunities as evidence of insensitivity and not complying to certain practices. Just like the early period of equal opportunities, sometimes you just had to give opportunities to selected group(s) because without these opportunities, this group might just never prosper.

The defense may have to show they have a thorough program to bring up women and minorities. Say there are more women shoppers in Walmart, wouldn't it make sense to have more women employees and supervision? Maybe. Certainly, you don't see stores selling women items hire male salesmen. That'd be suicidal business-wise.

BTW, no women managers at senior ranks would join the suit.

Answer 3

that's now on the US superb court and the case has been happening for added or less 10 years. in case you remember out of your junior extreme civics classes, to get right here it has to have significant advantage and not in any respect precisely the variety of element "the decide must have tossed". -- even if it really is governed interior the employees want, it may change countless the procedures agencies are run. Do extra analyze about the case. there is much and a tremendous number of information accessible. in case you examine the information, you'll stumble on the plantiffs (the employees) admit that this did not / does not ensue in all Wal-Marts. it really is extra previlent interior the Southern US. also, Wal-Mart would not say that what the ladies quite everyone seems claiming did not ensue = they are claiming that the places are decentralized and "company" wasn't area of it and Wal-Mart as an complete business enterprise should not be held responsible. type movements proceedings have little to do with the guy payouts that the employees will obtain. it really is a tremendous in structure. If the employees be triumphant, there'll be a 7 or 8-make sure payout in complete.