Wal-Mart Case Study
With Wal-Mart being the site of various lawsuits little perplexity is left surrounding the multitude of cases involving discrimination and violations of the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) laws. In 2006, there was an average of 5,000 lawsuits per year, or about seventeen suits per day; as well as, a video documentary, that was made public knowledge of the aspects involving Wal-Mart’s policies and procedures, and the company’s regard for respect of its employees (Brantner, 2006). After reviewing, two of the most recent cases of Wal-Mart’s discrimination of the company’s employees, one is left to wonder if there is ever going to be a change in Wal-Mart’s compliance with the EEOC laws?
July 2015: EEOC vs. Hodgkins, IL Wal-Mart
In early July of 2015 a suburban Chicago, Illinois Wal-Mart was sued by the EEOC for violating federal law to provide reasonable accommodations to an employee (Nancy Stack) who was disabled due to bone cancer and failure to stop harassment of the employee (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2015). According to Chicago’s District Director (Julianne Bowman), the store initially agreed to give the employee a chair in Stack’s work area and accommodations to her scheduled work hours to comply with her bone cancer treatments for Stack’s leg. The bone cancer limited Stack’s ability to walk and stand. After several months of compliance, the Hodgkins store revoked her accommodations to a chair in her
In 2001, Donnell Battie sued Walmart because a 16-year-old shopper picked up the store’s public address microphone and announced “Attention Walmart customers: all black people must leave the store.” Battie claimed that this incident caused him “severe and disabling emotional and physical harm” and sued Walmart for $1,000,000. Battie’s lawyer argued that his client was a subject of racial discrimination because Walmart did not properly secure its speaker system. The outcome of the case was not stated but Walmart was forced to change the PA systems throughout all its
Is Wal-mart the ideal store to shop it? Austrian economic and business professional Karen De Coster and banker Brad Edmonds believe that Wal-mart improves the lives of people in rural areas because it gives them access to a lifestyle that they would not have if Wal-mart did not exist.
The employees were getting paid a low hourly wage and they were not receiving any benefits. Sam Walton was chasing after power, it might not have been the power of having money, but making sure whenever someone talked about him in a positive way. Employers such as Walton are not generous and they are more than harmful when they stifle activism; for example “[w]hen workers tried to join unions and Wal-Mart ruthlessly crushed them, firing anyone foolish enough to speak out”(Packer,354). This example shows how the employees were powerless while working at Wal-Mart. Consequently, Wal-Mart was not the only company. If the Wal-Mart’s corporate heard anything about any worker wanting to receive more benefits about what was actually happening they would quickly act upon that and fire the employee. In addition, the power that corporate would show when other workers saw this would prevent any further action. While the workforce might be powerless, at least they are protected from the streets. On the other hand, women living in the ghetto who do things for safety is a source of power for them. In both of these situations, they are doing more harm than justice. Joan Morgan explains the struggle that takes place in the black community and more so in the black women’s community. Both groups, the low paying employees and African-American women are born to fail, but sadly either one are doing anything to try changing this problem and allows it to continue. The employees at
EEOC’s role in this case was to file lawsuit against the employer (Exel) on behalf of the
In the case of Dukes vs. Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (Dukes), the court found that there was a lack of significant proof that Wal-Mart had a general policy of discrimination (Schipani,
This paper has gone over the lawsuit that was filed by the EEOC. It also went over who the EEOC is and what their role is in the lawsuit. It also went over how the EEOC’s press release and the Minneapolis/ St. Paul Business Journal articles different. I have learned that
1) Should Wal-Mart be expected to protect small businesses in the communities within which it operates?
“Up Against Wal-Mart” by Karen Olsson, a senior editor at Texas Monthly and who’s article appeared in Mother Jones, introduces her article through the perspective of a Wal-Mart worker. She focuses on the negatives of Wal-Mart by telling the real life struggles of different Wal-Mart employees. “Progressive Wal-Mart. Really.” by Sebastian Mallaby, a columnist for the Washington Post, focuses his article on what Wal-Mart critics say and attempts to defend Wal-Mart by comparing Wal-Mart to other retailers. Even though Karen Olsson and Sebastian Mallaby both examine the negative effects of Wal-Mart, Olsson berates Wal-Mart’s unfair treatment towards employees and the unlivable wages that the world’s largest retailer provides while Mallaby
While researching this topic, so many things were found to be eye opening. One in which is the way that Wal-Mart conducted themselves when they had to manage their employees. How they dealt with promoting them and demoting them. Last year Wal-Mart started a new management style and wanted to promote more family time and create a less workload on each of the managers and employees. Therefore, they changed the schedule to becoming 3 days on and 3 days off which created more room for managers to fall into the field. Managers would be thrown into the position of an area of the store they knew nothing about and expected to understand each thing and help customers find exactly what they
It is somewhat surprising that employers continue to violate employment laws dealing with discrimination. One case, Catterson v. Marymount Manhattan College, litigated and settled in 2013, was especially egregious. According to the EEOC (2013), the college had refused,
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. is the world 's largest retail enterprise, with total revenue of $421.8 billion and a net income of $16.4 billion in 2011. 1 It is also the world 's largest employer, with 2.1 million employees worldwide in 2010 2, not including workers hired by its providers. In my opinion, Wal-Mart provides a clear illustration through which to look at how many multinational companies (MNCs) take part in an illegal and unethical behavior. They use their bargaining power and market control to pressure countries to overlook environmental degradation and violation of national labor laws. They dictate expected pricing for products, particularly through imports from overseas countries. Labor is fulfilled mostly by underage and underpaid employees. In the United States, since 2005, Wal-Mart has paid about $1 billion in damages to U.S. employees in six different cases related to unpaid work. 3 Furthermore, Wal-Mart opposes any form of collective action, even when employees are not seeking unionization, but simply more respect. 4 The fact that Wal-Mart opposes unions exist. The company has a long history of fighting them, to the point of closing stores after employees organize. Managers have been instructed to talk to their teams about why unions are so unwanted in their business. Overseas, the company was involved in a series of scandals, including multiple cases of bribery. In April 2012, The New York Times published a story that
If Wal-Mart has such little regard for their own employees, it would make it difficult for a company to have minimal regard to where their merchandise is coming from. On the documentary, The High Price of Low Cost, informs of the countries and Wal-Mart’s effects on these countries, including its presence for manufacturing in China. The workers work in conditions of extreme temperatures from morning until dawn and provided boarding, which is shared with several others and lined with bunk beds. The board and utilities are deducted from their wages even if the workers choose not to stay on the facilities the board is still deducted from their pay. These workers that are looking for employment to make a better future for their families are
The six women who sued Wal-Mart had physical proof and evidence of the discrimination laid upon them. Some of the evidence were found in the employees’ records whereby Richard Drogin, a statistical expert found out that employees in Wal-Mart are divided into two main groups: hourly employees who occupied the lower levels and salaried manager who occupied the higher levels. Since Wal-Mart promotes predominantly from within, workers typically progress from being an upper hourly employee to management trainee, to store manager or assistant manager, and finally to the district, regional or cooperate manager. Compensation increases from one level to another. In 2001, salaried managers made about $50,000 a year while hourly employees made $18,000.
As stated on the corporate website (2017), “Walmart is the largest retailer in the world, where 2.3 million associates meet the needs of more than 260 million customers every week.” These numbers are huge, and with so many locations around the globe, they have had allegations been made by employees regarding their dissatisfaction about poor work conditions, gender discrimination, low wages, poor benefits, and inadequate health care. Walmart has been criticized for its policies against labor unions and this issue has prompted public outrage, (Johansson, 2005) which is of great concern for the market. The company has also faced criticism for being anti-union, but it has claimed that it is rather pro-associate, whereby employees
In late 1997, Duke began to experience discriminatory actions. After complaining to management, retaliation began. By 2001, Dukes joined 6 other women who received similar treatment in other Wal-Mart stores in California in a suit against the retailer. By 2004, the suit had morphed into a class action suit, including 1.6 million women who were currently or had ever worked for Wal-Mart (Wal-Mart Watch, 2006). At the time, it looked as though this case had the potential to create an important precedent regarding workplace discrimination, the fallout appears to have taken a very different turn, and possibly opened the door to making discriminatory practices harder to