business news in context, analysis with attitude

The Associated Press reports that a US District Court judge has ruled against the certification of a class action gender discrimination lawsuit that would have pitted 150,000 female Walmart employees against the retailer.

The judge in the case said that the claims in the suit, which maintains that male Walmart employees get paid more and get promoted faster, were too disparate to be covered in a single class action, and that lawyers had failed to demonstrate systemic discrimination.

The story notes that "the lawsuit filed in San Francisco federal court was a scaled-down version of an initial complaint filed in 2001 that sought to represent 1.6 million women nationwide. But the U.S. Supreme Court tossed out that class action lawsuit in 2011, ruling it found no convincing proof of companywide discrimination on pay and promotion policy. The court also said there were too many women in too many jobs at Wal-Mart to wrap into one lawsuit."

"Though plaintiffs insist that they have presented an entirely different case from the one the Supreme Court rejected, it is essentially a scaled-down version of the same case with new labels on old arguments," US District Judge Charles Breyer wrote.

An appeal of the ruling is planned.
KC's View:
I love this quote from Walmart: "We've said all along that if someone believes they have been treated unfairly, they deserve to have their timely, individual claims heard in court."

It's just that Walmart is going to play this out as long as it can, and make sure that its army of well-paid corporate lawyers are facing off with individuals that they can crush with relative ease.

So, far, the well-paid corporate lawyers seem to be doing a pretty good job. Which you can;t say about the lawyers on the other side.

But at least we're sure that a truckload of lawyers are making sure that the economy is healthy.