Wal-Mart vs. 1.6M female workers: Judge certifies sex discrimination case against No. 1 retailer
Wal-Mart sex bias suit gets class-action status: Record case involves 1.5 million women
Discrimination is wrong. Period. Any questions? It is no less wrong when it is committed institutionally by one of the largest corporations in the world. While this class-action suit does not begin to assert that every manager acts in a discriminatory manner towards women, it would appear that WalMart's corporate culture at the very least implicitly endorses this practice. This is despicable.
This may well be a case where only an 800-lb. penalty will get the attention of an 800-lb. gorilla.
The plaintiffs attribute that state of affairs to discriminatory practices peculiar to Wal-Mart, which the retailer disputes.
While the two sides disagree about many of the "fine points," the judge wrote, "they essentially agree that Wal-Mart managers make pay and promotion decisions for in-store employees in a largely subjective manner."
Further, the judge rejected the retailer's contention that its sprawling operation is so autonomous that it could not properly be sued as one in a single class-action. Rather, [US District Judge Martin] Jenkins concluded Wal-Mart has a uniform corporate culture, which the plaintiffs argue promotes gender discrimination.
The "Wal-Mart Way," as it's called, emphasizes standardized personnel and operational practices, the judge wrote. Every store manager is connected through a real-time computer link to the home office. Centralized control influences all Wal-Mart employees, he found.
In addition, the judge said, the plaintiffs presented compelling anecdotal evidence. In more than 100 declarations, Wal-Mart women testified "to being paid less than similarly situated men, being denied promotion or being delayed in promotion ... and being subjected to various individual sexist acts."
One male store manager told a female employee, for instance, "Men are here to make a career and women aren't. Retail is for housewives who just need to earn extra money."
Among its defenses, Wal-Mart has said its adversaries are trying to hold it responsible for a long-established phenomenon in the American workplace: "The undisputed fact, present in virtually every major corporation, that the percentage of women at the lower level is higher than the percentage at the upper level," according to documents in the case.
The sad thing about all of this is what it says about the state of our society and our collective view of gender roles. Perhaps we should stop patting ourselves on the back as we congratulate ourselves on our progress as it relates to the status and role of women in the workplace.
Given that women have a uterus, there will always be trolls out there who view the place of women in the workplace as transient and temporary. Those women wanting a career may well always be held hostage to the prejudices of male superiors who are simply waiting for them to get pregnant and stay home. After all, why WOULD you devote a lot of time and energy to developing a promising employee who is just going to morph into a housewife?
It is exactly that attitude that is what has WalMart in the position that it finds itself. Until and unless it addresses the prevailing corporate culture and ensures that women are treated fairly and equitably, WalMart will continue to be a target- and deservedly so. It's a sizable and inviting target...deep pockets, anyone??
Perhaps if WalMart is forced to face the music, other companies will be forced to sit up and take notice. Perhaps THEN we will see progress begin to be made. You'll have to pardon me if I'm not holding my breath, though.
