uncharted.ca

He successfully tried and subsequently settled the third-largest sex discrimination class action recovery in history ($107.25 million), Stender v. Lucky Stores, 803 F.Supp.259 (N.D.Cal.1992)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 29, 2011
CONTACT:
Casie Yoder
(202) 223-3111 x1451
cyoder@ufcw.org



MAKING CHANGE AT WALMART STATEMENT ON DUKES: SUPREME COURT MUST RULE TO ENSURE EQUALITY IN THE WORKPLACE

Jennifer Stapleton, Assistant Director of the United Food and Commercial Worker’s Making Change at Walmart campaign, issued the following statement in response to this morning’s Supreme Court proceedings in the Walmart Stores v. Dukes case:

“This morning, before the U.S. Supreme Court, legal representatives for the more than one million women of Dukes v. Walmart Stores stood up for the right to fairly challenge the years of inequality these women experienced in the workplace.

“Making Change at Walmart stands with all Walmart associates as they strive to secure the respect in the workplace they deserve. However, Walmart’s response to this case – that the company is too big for justice – threatens not only the rights of the women of Dukes, but the rights of all workers, male and female, who seek fair treatment and respect at work.

“Making Change at Walmart is committed to the idea that all workers should receive equal treatment. Walmart’s promotion practices stood in the way of this goal – resulting in women being paid less and promoted at lower rates than their male colleagues. The Supreme Court must rule to uphold the certification of the women plaintiffs as a class, allowing the case to move forward as a class action lawsuit. A jury can then consider the merits of the charges brought against Walmart.”

About Making Change at Walmart:
Making Change at Walmart seeks to promote the American values of equality, dignity and respect in the workplace. The campaign is making change by working directly with Walmart Associates to claim the respect on the job they deserve, holding Walmart corporate managers accountable to hourly employees and the public for their practices and joining with community leaders in major cities across America to make sure that any new jobs offered by Walmart meet strong standards for healthy, growing communities.

###
The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW) represents more than 1.3 million workers, primarily in the retail and meatpacking, food processing and poultry industries.

WASHINGTON—A sex-discrimination class action against Wal-Mart Stores Inc. appeared unlikely to survive after Tuesday's Supreme Court arguments, where justices suggested the lawsuit was unfair both to the retail giant and hundreds of thousands of women who allegedly were victimized.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court appeared closely divided on Tuesday during arguments over the theory put forth by the plaintiffs in an enormous sex discrimination class-action suit against Wal-Mart.

Even Supreme Court justices who sharply questioned Wal-Mart’s pay and promotion policies regarding female employees expressed concern at Tuesday’s oral argument about how the largest gender discrimination class-action suit in history might proceed.

Supreme Court justices, sharply divided along gender lines, appeared poised to reject a nationwide class-action suit that accuses Wal-Mart Stores Inc. of sex discrimination.

Led by Justices Anthony M. Kennedy and Antonin Scalia, the majority of men on the court questioned how Wal-Mart could be held liable for illegal sex bias when its 3,400 store managers across the nation decide who gets promoted and who receives pay raises

A gender gap emerged at the U.S. Supreme Court as the court’s three female justices tussled with their male colleagues over a nationwide discrimination suit against Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (WMT)

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan all voiced at least qualified support yesterday for the class-action suit, which claims women across the country were victimized by Wal-Mart’s practice of letting local managers make subjective decisions about pay and promotions. The dispute marks the first gender-bias case the court has considered with three women on the bench.

In perhaps the quickest decision in its history, the United States Supreme Court ruled on April Fools Day that the free market could not withstand compensating victims of sex discrimination and that the nationwide class action case brought against Wal-Mart – for which oral arguments were heard March 29 – must be reversed.

According to the 5-4 opinion written by Justice Alioto, class action suits for discrimination are not available “absent a written statement promoting a purely discriminatory hiring policy.” Alito had signaled his view that sex discrimination should not be actionable during oral argument, when he stated that if a company’s pay and promotion is “typical of the entire American work force,” then it should be immune from a Title 7 claim.

Women and labor activists denounced the ruling, saying that the nation’s highest court has overturned fifty years of legal precedents in order to promote discriminatory hiring practices against women, racial minorities, and other groups covered by Title 7.

“Once we allow discrimination to become actionable, employers could be punished for honestly believing that women workers are entitled to lower pay, or that they are only working for ‘pin’ money. Even when gender-base stereotypes are not always true, they are part of the fabric of American society. It makes no sense to blame Wal-Mart for simply implementing the longstanding retail industry practice of paying women less than men, and promoting them less.”

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court gave corporations a major win Wednesday, ruling in a 5-4 decision that companies can block their disgruntled customers from joining together in a class-action lawsuit. The ruling arose from a California lawsuit involving cellphones, but it will have a nationwide impact.