The Supreme Court annulled the collective complaints and each one affected should sue
Good news for WalMart, for large companies, and bad for workers in the American giant.Women who sued for sex discrimination at world's largest retailer, department store chain WalMart, they knew that their struggle was that of David against Goliath. If the U.S. Supreme Court had given the reason, the decision would have affected more people than the total number today that served in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and U.S. Coast Guard. More than a million and half of women would put up against the ropes WalMart. But the Supreme Court said yesterday, unanimously, no. Goliath has won.
The Supreme Court justices argued against class action lawyers for the five women who in 2001 initiated the lawsuit against Wal-Mart has failed to prove that there was a common corporate policy designed to discriminate against women. The workers "have not presented convincing evidence that there is a discriminatory policy regarding payment and promotions nationwide," wrote Justice, on behalf of the conservative majority of the Court.
The court was unanimous in several respects and has been divided in others. For example, four judges (Ruth Ginsburg,, and Elena Kagan) have stated that they had returned the case to a lower court to ensure that workers might try to thrive under another class action legal angle.However, what everyone has agreed on is that "the Court dismisses the lawsuit," wrote Ginsburg, a spokesperson for the Liberal minority.
From now on, women who sought to be vindicated in the Supreme legally able to continue their fight individually, which is a titanic work that eventually would bring them a lot less money and would not involve any pressure on WalMart. Two women who sued the company, Betty Dukes and Christine Kwapnoski, were present at the time of delivery of the decision.
The case dates back to 2001, when Betty Dukes alleged that despite having worked hard and well for six years was denied as a woman, access to training that would have reported higher and better paid jobs, which is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. If the Supreme Court had ruled in favor of the complainants, the sentence would have undoubtedly had consequences that went beyond the economic boundaries of the world's largest retailer-compensation would be billions-as class actions increase the pressure companies to seek arrangements due to the high costs involved in the defense.
The case, known as Dukes against WalMart, have marked a before and after in the history of U.S. labor relations.