GUARDIAN– Let’s get this right: the world’s biggest boss, supported by
companies as diverse as Altria, Bank of America, Microsoft and General
Electric and backed up by the godfather of big business (the US Chamber
of Commerce) has persuaded the US supreme court that thousands of women
workers can’t possibly share enough of an interest to constitute a
class?
It’s hard to know which part of the court’s decision in Dukes v Walmart hurts equity most: the assault on class-action jurisprudence generally, at a time of shrinking tools for workers seeking redress, or the defeat of history’s biggest gender-based claim before a court that, for the first time, includes two women, one of whom (Ruth Bader Ginsburg) made her reputation in sex discrimination law.
Dividing 5-4, in Dukes v Walmart, the supreme court on Monday dismissed the plaintiffs’ claim that companywide policy gave local managers too much discretion in pay and promotion decisions, leaving Walmart employees at thousands of Walmart and Sam’s Club stores vulnerable to gender stereotypes. (The company changed the format of its name since the case was filed.) The plaintiffs “provide no convincing proof of a companywide discriminatory pay and promotion policy,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the majority.
Read full article about Walmart: Too Big to Sue?
© 2011 Guardian
Photo by flickr user Walmart Stores
