Court blocks mass lawsuit by women against Wal-Mart

The United States Supreme Court yesterday blocked a massive sex discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart on behalf of female employees in a decision that makes it harder to mount large-scale bias claims against the biggest US companies.

The justices all agreed that the lawsuit against Wal-Mart Stores Inc could not proceed as a class action in its current form, reversing a decision by the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

But they split 5-4 over whether the plaintiffs should in essence get another chance to make their case.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The lawsuit could have involved up to 1.6 million women, with Wal-Mart facing potentially billions of dollars in payouts.

The handful of women who brought the case may now pursue their claims alone - with less money at stake and less pressure on Wal-Mart to settle.

The court's ruling could make it much harder to mount similar class-action discrimination lawsuits against large employers.

The majority agreed with Wal-Mart's argument that being forced to defend the treatment of female employees regardless of the jobs they hold or where they work is unfair.

Justice Antonin Scalia's opinion for the court's conservative majority said there needs to be common elements tying together "literally millions of employment decisions at once". He said that in this lawsuit against the nation's largest private employer, "that is entirely absent".

However, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the court's four liberal justices, said there was more than enough uniting the claims.

"Wal-Mart's delegation of discretion over pay and promotions is a policy uniform throughout all stores," Ms Ginsburg said.

Business interests lined up with Wal-Mart, while civil rights, women's and consumer groups have sided with the plaintiffs.

Both sides have painted the case as landmark moment.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The business community has said that a ruling in favour of the women would lead to a flood of class-action lawsuits based on vague evidence.

However, supporters of the women involved in the action feared that a decision in favour of Wal-Mart could remove a valuable weapon for fighting all sorts of discrimination.

Marcia D Greenberger, co-president of the National Women's Law Center, said: "The court has told employers that they can rest easy, knowing that the bigger and more powerful they are, the less likely their employees will be able to join together to secure their rights.

"The women of Wal-Mart, together with women everywhere, will now face a far steeper road to challenge and correct pay and other forms of discrimination in the workplace."The lawsuit - citing what are now dated figures, from 2001 - said that women are grossly under-represented among managers at the chain, holding just 14 per cent of store manager positions compared with more than 80 per cent of lower-ranking supervisory jobs that are paid by the hour.

Wal-Mart responded that women in its retail stores made up two-thirds of all employees and two-thirds of all managers in 2001.

The company has also said its policies prohibit discrimination and that it has taken steps since the suit was filed to address problems, including posting job openings electronically.

Founded in 1962 and with headquarters in Bentonville, Arkansas, the retailer currently employs more than 1.4 million people in the United States, making it the nation's largest private employer. It also owns the Asda supermarket chain in the UK.

Related topics: