Wisconsin women file regional gender discrimination case against Wal-Mart in wake of Dukes

Courts have already dismissed two such regional cases

The Supreme Court’s refusal to certify a national gender discrimination class action in its 2011 decision in Dukes v. Wal-Mart has not deterred the women of Wal-Mart Stores Inc. from seeking justice for perceived mistreatment.

On Feb. 20, five Wisconsin women filed a complaint on behalf of workers in Wal-Mart’s region 14, which includes parts of Illinois, Indiana and Michigan as well as Wisconsin. The lawsuit accuses the world’s largest retailer of denying female employees the equal opportunities and pay to which they are entitled.

“Women at Wal-Mart were told by management that women deserved less pay and fewer promotions than men because men had families to support,” Nichols Kaster Partner Jim Kaster, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in a statement.

However, in an omen that does not bode well, on the same day the women filed their complaint, a federal judge in Nashville dismissed a similar lawsuit as untimely. Yet another of these regional lawsuits met its end in October 2012, in Dallas.

Read more at Bloomberg.

 

For more InsideCounsel coverage of Wal-Mart, see below:

Wal-Mart files complaint against union in attempt to prevent Black Friday protests

Wal-Mart v. Dukes could help Comcast’s, Amgen’s Supreme Court cases

Wal-Mart hires international compliance chief

Temps file class action against Wal-Mart, workers threaten walkout

Ex-Wal-Mart employee fired for medical marijuana use loses appeal

Wal-Mart gender discrimination case will proceed

Comments

InsideScoop Daily eNewsletter

InsideScoop delivers the latest-breaking news affecting in-house counsel. Get the latest business trends, current corporate litigation, labor developments, technology initiatives and more — FREE. Sign up now!

You have been subscribed! You will receive a confirmation email soon.

See the entire list of InsideCounsel eNewsletters.

Resource Library


Reduce eDiscovery Costs and Risks through Email Disposition

Read this white paper to learn best practices on determining email retention periods with real...

Prepare for the Eventuality of eDiscovery Now and Reap the...

This report presents an overview of eDiscovery implementation challenges organizations may face as well as...

The Fastest and Most Cost-Effective Document Review Available!

Recommind's Predictive Coding is the market's only solution that allows clients the option of reviewing...

Bring the Benefits of Decision Tree Analysis to Your Everyday...

In this on-demand webinar, learn how to counter the challenges of litigation with predictive analytics...

13 Things to do Now to Reduce Risk and Avoid...

We have developed best practices for lowering your e-Discovery costs, shortening the length of your...

7 Simple Strategies for Improving Legal Fee Budgeting Certainty

Understanding the legal fee budgeting paradigm and following seven simple strategies will help you control...

Complimentary White Paper: Best Practices for Meeting Critical eDiscovery Challenges

Packed with practical advice, this white paper discusses best practices for meeting eDiscovery challenges across...

Complimentary White Paper "Key Considerations for Collection Methodologies and Resources"

This white paper addresses the need for companies to reevaluate their current collection policies in...

Moving Matters In-House: How Technology Enables Legal In-Sourcing

Strategically shifting more matters to in-house counsel has proven to be an effective strategy to...

5 Ways to Promote Responsible Content Sharing

Find out five ways that organizations can promote responsible sharing of content among employees by...

View All »

Advertisement. Closing in 15 seconds.