Women Of Wal-Mart Re-File Discrimination Claims

Last June the Supreme Court handed Wal-Mart a victory when it dismissed the historic class action gender discrimination lawsuit Dukes v. Wal-Mart on the grounds that the plaintiffs lacked a “common question of law or fact” to bind their allegations that Wal-Mart systematically discriminated against women in pay and hiring decisions. The decision was seen as a setback not just for the women of Wal-Mart, but for civil rights litigants battling pernicious, diffuse discrimination instead of the easier to prove overt discrimination.

After the 5-4 decision the plaintiffs vowed they would be back. And they are. Last week plaintiffs filed an amended lawsuit that narrows the class from all of the women who work or have worked at Wal-Mart and Sam’s Clubs stores to those in the retailer’s California regions–taking the class from an estimated 1.5 million to 90,000 women.

Plaintiffs will likely file several more lawsuits coming as they are forced to litigate groups of cases against Wal-Mart as a result of the Dukes decision.

The decision last summer never reached the merits of plaintiffs’ claims, so the issue of whether or not the world’s largest retailer routinely discriminated against women remains an open one. For the past thirteen years Wal-Mart has tried to get the case thrown out on procedural grounds, but the plaintiffs refuse to go away. Justice is still a ways off for these women, but kudos to them for not backing down.

Related Stories:

Wal-Mart Decision Begs For Paycheck Fairness Act

Wal-Mart’s Gender Washing

Photo from monochrome via flickr.


Laura Saxon
.4 years ago

Wal-Mart should not bully people. They should be nice to women and their customers.

Robert Waldbauer
Robert Waldbauer4 years ago

Here's a solution to the WalMart 'problem' -- since Wal Mart employees are the greatest users by percentage of federally funded programs like food stamps and Medicaid because of the very low wages and less than full-time hours per week that is the WalMart standard (They don't have to offer health insurance to part-time employees), why not just have the WalMart Corporation pay a usage tax equal to the amount spent of our tax dollars on those programs to help their employees. This would amount to approximately $3.2 billion dollars annually.
Of course, to not spend that amount, they could switch to all full-time employees, with health care, and a living wage -- approximately $2.1 billion annually...

K s Goh
KS Goh5 years ago

Thanks for the article.

antonia maestre
antonia maestre5 years ago

I have never, nor will ever, enter that store!!!

Gloria Morotti
Gloria Morotti5 years ago

WalMart is not cheap. To start with, they destroy all the small businesses everywhere they build a store. That destroys the local economy and puts people on unemployment. I never shop there. I hope these women win their lawsuit against WalMart.

Winn Adams
Winn A5 years ago

Wal-Mart Sucks. I hope the women keep going with this law suite.

Linda E.
Linda E5 years ago

More power to the Women of Walmart!
We even have to fight the Supreme Court for our civil rights!

Lilithe Magdalene

I am glad they are not giving up.

june t.
june t5 years ago

I hope they win

Valarie Snell
Valarie Snell5 years ago

i hope these brave women succeed