Court says Wal-Mart must face bias trial

The ongoing class-action suit against WalMart, brought by women claiming they did not receive the same pay raises and priomotions as their male counterparts, is back in the news.

WalMart would really realy like for this to not be a class action suit. In a class action suit, the plaintiffs comprise all possible individuals who belong to the class -- in this case, any woman who has worked for Walmart since December 26, 1998. Class action settlements tend to be quite expensive for losing defendants; the news story is using the term "billions".

WalMart can affort the expensive lawyers, who are attempting to demolish the whole concept of class action lawsuits. however the plaintiffs appear to be in this for the long haul.

The suit is entering into its fourth year, but don't be looking for a resolution any time soon. All that's been settled here is the class action certificantion. The testimony, expert witnesses, etc. are way off in the future.

A lot of employment discriminations suits are settled out of court. But, I really don't think WalMart is likely to settle, since any settlement is going to involve some admission of guilt, as well as a financial settlement. My best guess is that we won't see any resolution for 4 to 5 years, and longer wouldn't surprise me out of a year's growth.

Do I have an opinion? Glad you asked.....of course I do. This is a classic "adverse impact" suit, meaning that discrimination is established by statistical evidence establishing that outcomes are significantly different form men and women (the dreaded "4/5 rule"). Once that's done, Walmart has to prove that their promotion and pay practices are business-related (validity). I haven't seen any of the evidence, but, first, I suspect that there'll be a lot of statistical byplay on the 4/5 rule. Also, it isn't a matter of "guilty" or "not guilty" here. I'd guess that the plaintiffs can establish that there is discrimination going on. What the plaintiffs are going to need, though, is to find something in writing (internal memos, etc.) that establishes that the discrimination is intentional. That's, strictly speaking, not necessary for this type of suit, but it would sure help.

Stay tuned for more developments.

Court says Wal-Mart must face bias trial I'll add a more permanent link later on

Wall-Mart pulls out of Korea - Yahoo! News

Wal-Mart pulls out of Korea - Yahoo! News

What's interesting here -- toward the end of the article, it mentions that Carrefour is also bailing out of South Korea. The British (Tesco) are doing ok, but they're in a joint venture with a South Korean firm, Samsung (whose Shinsegae subsidiary bought the Wal-Mart operation).

The next step, China. The Wal-Mart folks say that the proceeds from the sale of the Korean units will go towards increasing their presence in China. Only problem is that the Koreans are saying the same thing:

"As a result, E-Mart will increase the number of outlets to 102 including seven in China and will take on all 3,356 workers hired by Wal-Mart."

"With the acquisition of Wal-Mart stores, we will secure the ground for our stable business at home. This will also help us step up our operations in China," Shinsegae president Koo Hak-Seo told reporters."

Stay tuned here for updates.....as far as success in China goes, I'd put my money on the South Korean firms.

More bad news for brand counterfeiters in China

I'd always said that the problem of brnad counterfeiting in China wasn't going to go away. Bring out the knife and fork, because I need to dine on those words.

Designer brand pirates told to pack their bags

Starbucks wins China trademark fight

An ongoing discussion in the International Business class has been the problem with China and intellectual property -- specifically, the reluctance of the Chinese government to take meaningful action to crack down on rampant brand counterfeiting, copyright infringment, and the like. Maybe this is a start???

Starbucks wins China trademark fight - Business - International Herald Tribune

Ukrainian President in deeper hot water

Seems that the Ukrainian Parliament is Not Happy with Mr. Yushchenko's recent reorganization of his government. I'm guessing [crystal ball on] we'll see Yulia Tymoshenko running things by next year [crystal ball off].

BBC NEWS: Europe: Ukraine PM rebuff deepens crisis