Case Study Walmart's Hard Pill To Swallow Antidiscrimination

878 Words4 Pages
Walmart’s hard pill to swallow: Antidiscrimination
Walmart, a US-based multinational retail corporation operating a chain of departmental stores, hypermarkets and grocery stores, is the world’s second largest public corporation. The corporation has faced the brunt of workplace prejudice allegations. Six women who worked for Walmart have sued the company for its inferior pay packages and promotion scope as compared to their male counterpart despite having better qualification, performance, and experience. According to these women’s 2010 court of appeals opinion, they were paid lesser than their male counterpart and had to wait longer for a promotion to an in-store management position. They demanded that Walmart must compensate its female workers
…show more content…
During the late March 2011, the Court heard the first oral arguments. On 20 June 2011, the Court issued its ruling, reverting the ruling of the court of appeals.
In October 2011, the plaintiffs reopened their complaint with the federal court in San Francisco. This time, they claimed gender bias on the behalf of employees in California. Again in June 2012, about two thousand female workers of Walmart brought discrimination charges against the company to the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. However, issuing an order in August 2013, the US federal court denied the women class certification. It was finally decided that every woman must pursue individual claims against the company.
Aftereffects
This issue has brought a world of change to the company. Earlier, there was no written antidiscrimination policy in the company, which ultimately led to tons of misconceptions. To prevent such issues and lawsuits, the company finally came up with a written antidiscrimination

More about Case Study Walmart's Hard Pill To Swallow Antidiscrimination

Open Document