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
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
Court says Wal-Mart must face bias trial
Labels:
412,
employment discrimination,
gender,
Kristin's Predictions,
WalMart
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment