2001, Betty Dukes from Pittsburg, California, filed a sex discrimination claim based on promotion and pay against her employer Wal-Mart, the world’s largest retailer. What started as complaints to her supervisors over lost promotion opportunities and perceived retaliatory measures against her has turned into what could have been the biggest class-action lawsuit in U.S. history. She filed her lawsuit on behalf of every female who is or has been employed at the company since 1998 (1.5 million women).

Moved forward by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the determination of whether this qualified as a class-action suit or not was recently heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court's decision disqualified the class action status of the case and is a monumental victory for Wal-Mart as a class-action lawsuit would have cost the company billions of dollars. This decision impacted other corporations as well who were facing gender-based pay and other forms of discrimination suits.

The pivotal issue was whether a large employer like Wal-Mart that gives store managers almost complete discretion in evaluating employees for promotions and pay raises can be sued by groups of employees across those stores, in effect, saying that such discrimination was the result of a corporate-level policy. Many legal experts believed there was not enough evidence to suggest this, but the issue of pay discrimination is still a serious one that Wal-Mart needs to address.

In your paper on this issue, you are expected to cover the following:

1. Review and summarize this case, using credible internet sources.
2. Identify and discuss the ethical issues involved when a corporation as prominent and economically powerful as Wal-Mart is accused of discriminating against women in pay and promotion decisions.
3. Discuss what steps organizations can or should take to ensure pay equity among men and women.

Keep the following points in mind:

The case is well researched and major relevant ethical issues are highlighted.

The analysis integrates course material and is presented in a logical, organized manner.

Compose your work in a .doc or .docx file type using a word processor (such as Microsoft Word, etc.) and save it frequently to your computer.

 

Introduction

Betty Dukes, the main plaintiff in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes.  She led a class action complaint against her employer because of discrimination against her and other female workers. The discrimination she claimed was a result of differences in promotion and wages. She and other female employees who currently or previously worked at Walmart claimed gender discrimination in promotions and salaries. Because there were so many people interested in the class action, it was dubbed the most significant class action ever. The case was approved to be heard as a class-action suit by the lower Court. Walmart appealed against the case because it would be unfair and just and therefore requested that it be heard on a case by case instead of a class case (Pino, 2018).

Background

First and foremost, it is regrettable that prejudice against women existed when this case was heard on December 26, 1998. Most essential, women's contributions to our society should be recognized and valued. Women have also played a significant role in the success of the United States of America throughout its history. Betty Dukes, along with other women who worked at Walmart, filed a lawsuit. Employees from stores in Pittsburgh and California are identified in the lawsuit as Walmart locations. Following that, a class-action lawsuit was filed alleging violations of women's rights and their civil rights. The claim was that the Corporation's processes resulted in widespread gender discrimination by not compensating women similarly to their male counterparts. Since both genders worked in the same capacity, these women were within their rights to launch a complaint (Pino, 2018). 

Analysis

The defendant in any lawsuit has the right to contest any claim. This is why Walmart opposes a class action lawsuit being launched against them, and they want the cases to be heard separately. According to the facts, different compensation structures and a lack of promotions for women were inequalities faced by women working in the company. The company's policies allowed for discriminatory stereotypes to exist among their employees. As a result, discrimination against women is classified as is being misled by male superiors in support of lower pay and advancement decisions.

Nonetheless, because it was not simply in Pittsburgh and California, the overwhelming supporting facts were sufficient to continue with class certification under federal requirements. The Supreme Court has long recognized that company policies that promote discrimination can be challenged. Therefore, in this case, the Court's decision would have far-reaching repercussions for female employees and their rights to challenge gender discrimination in the workplace. In this case, the judge ruled that the Corporation could not discriminate against 1.5 million women who had an identical complaint.

Conclusion

Companies that have policies that are anti-discrimination in place are not susceptible to significant class action employment discrimination cases when providing crucial local discretions when hiring. As a result, while plaintiffs may file individual lawsuits against Wal-Mart, only those discriminated against comparably and have definitive proof can join their claims in a class action. As a result, the Court's readiness to consider the merits of these claims to assess whether these claims are eligible for class action treatment demonstrates a novel approach to actions that affects a wide range of cases (Shaughnessy, 2018).