The ITT List
Wednesday Jul 7, 2004 1:56 pm
The Women of Wal-Mart
Today Wal-Mart asked the San Francisco Federal Court of Appeals to review Judge Martin W. Jenkin???s ruling that a sex discrimination case against the monolithic corporation be considered a class action lawsuit. The class could include as many as 1.6 million employees???almost every woman who has worked for Wal-Mart since December 1996.
Wal-Mart???s reputed discrimination against women is an issue that even 1992???s Miss America Carolyn Sapp is behind.
The former beauty queen launched a Web site Wal-Mart versus Women to spread the word about the corporation???s gender discrimination. The site features news and ways to get involved in the issue. Who would???ve thought?
In a June 2nd article The Labor Research Association connects the discrimination to the fact that Wal-Mart???s labor force is not unionized. Cynthia Green writes, "Wal-Mart has denied all claims of gender discrimination, but the alleged infractions are of a piece with the company???s history of union bashing."
And indeed union bashing is a priority for Wal-Mart, according to a recent article by Liza Featherstone in The Nation. Featherstone quotes a Wal-Mart manger???s handbook: "The entire management staff should fully comprehend and appreciate exactly what is expected of their individual efforts to meet the union free objective.... Unless each member of management is willing to spend the necessary time, effort, energy, and money, it will not be accomplished. The time involved is...365 days per year...." This is only one of many jaw-dropping tidbits from Featherstone???s piece.
The SF Court of Appeals has not commented on Wal-Mart???s request for a review yet, but hopefully this case will go forward as a class-action suit that can begin to chip away at the bad labor practices that have been institutionalized by the world???s largest employer.
Wal-Mart???s reputed discrimination against women is an issue that even 1992???s Miss America Carolyn Sapp is behind.
The former beauty queen launched a Web site Wal-Mart versus Women to spread the word about the corporation???s gender discrimination. The site features news and ways to get involved in the issue. Who would???ve thought?
In a June 2nd article The Labor Research Association connects the discrimination to the fact that Wal-Mart???s labor force is not unionized. Cynthia Green writes, "Wal-Mart has denied all claims of gender discrimination, but the alleged infractions are of a piece with the company???s history of union bashing."
And indeed union bashing is a priority for Wal-Mart, according to a recent article by Liza Featherstone in The Nation. Featherstone quotes a Wal-Mart manger???s handbook: "The entire management staff should fully comprehend and appreciate exactly what is expected of their individual efforts to meet the union free objective.... Unless each member of management is willing to spend the necessary time, effort, energy, and money, it will not be accomplished. The time involved is...365 days per year...." This is only one of many jaw-dropping tidbits from Featherstone???s piece.
The SF Court of Appeals has not commented on Wal-Mart???s request for a review yet, but hopefully this case will go forward as a class-action suit that can begin to chip away at the bad labor practices that have been institutionalized by the world???s largest employer.
