When someone mentions the phrase "evil corporation," Wal-Mart is probably the first name that comes to mind. Let's face it; it doesn't have a very good track record.
It is known for questionable hiring practices, eliminating small businesses, and generally being a very unscrupulous group. That's why when a class-action lawsuit was brought against Wal-Mart alleging gender discrimination, it wasn't much of a shock.
The case began when one woman, Betty Dukes of California, filed a sex discrimination claim against Wal-Mart, claiming that she has been passed up for raises and promotions, despite being a quality worker. She believed her gender was the reason for this.
The case wasn't just about her, however. Dukes sought to represent 1.6 million women, including every woman who has worked for Wal-Mart since late 1998. Her intention was to show that the corporation as a whole was engaging in sexist practices.
What began as a personal issue had grown much larger, largely because pooling together funds from women across America will afford Dukes, and others who claim to have faced gender discrimination, a better team of lawyers. It's the only realistic way to approach a lawsuit against a giant corporation; however, it may not be allowed, pending a Supreme Court decision.
The Supreme Court is expected to decide whether or not the case should even proceed in court, which could create a precedent for future class-action lawsuits.
Due to the Court's tendency to rule in favor of business interests in recent cases, it is widely suspected that it will rule in favor Wal-Mart, denying the suit's class-action status.
We believe this is the right decision, but it is unfortunate for the women who Wal-Mart may have discriminated against. While we cannot say for sure if Dukes has a legitimate claim of sex discrimination, we do know that it will be very difficult to prove that Wal-Mart, as a whole, is sexist.
The case of Dukes relates to how the employers at her Wal-Mart behaved, not how the entire company as a whole runs its operation. Even if other women working at other Wal-Marts faced similar discrimination, it still wouldn't prove that the entire organization discriminates against women.
It would merely prove that there is sexism in a number of branches of a very large chain. The same could probably be said about many large companies. It is difficult to control what goes on at every store of a conglomerate like Wal-Mart. Unfortunately, individual employees usually don't have the financial resources to afford a lawsuit by themselves, so filing a class-action suit is oftentimes the only option.
Wal-Mart has its share of problems, and they have been made very public. In this case, however, we don't think the entire corporation should be on trial for things that are not dealt with at the top level of the business.
That decision would be a tough one, however, because it would leave women like Dukes in a catch-22.
