Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 91

Thread: Supreme Court throws out huge discrimination suit against Wal-Mart

  1. #11
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    31,929

    Re: Supreme Court throws out huge discrimination suit against Wal-Mart

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    That's one big huge YAY! from Maggie. Hope the attorneys all worked on contingency. They thought they had a biiig payday. That ruling was huge in that precedent would've been set for future class actions of this kind. For a change, the good guys won.

    Note that individual suits can be filed. And isn't that the way it should be? Each on its own merits.
    Yes, they can, but it shouldn't be, not with the statistics as they were noted by Justice Ginsberg. It's more than a store here and there. Women make up 70% of the hourly work force, but only 33% of management? Something doesn't add up here.

  2. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    dimensionally transcendental
    Last Seen
    08-15-11 @ 04:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,153

    Re: Supreme Court throws out huge discrimination suit against Wal-Mart

    33%??

    The national average for 'senior management' women is 15%.
    http://www.internationalbusinessrepo...management.asp

    Still looking for just 'management'.
    Last edited by Whovian; 06-20-11 at 02:49 PM.

  3. #13
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: Supreme Court throws out huge discrimination suit against Wal-Mart

    Quote Originally Posted by Gina View Post
    Yes, they can, but it shouldn't be, not with the statistics as they were noted by Justice Ginsberg. It's more than a store here and there. Women make up 70% of the hourly work force, but only 33% of management? Something doesn't add up here.
    Before you make a decision, how about more facts? What are we going to have now? Affirmative action for women on a class action basis? No. How about on the merits of the individual? How about ten women or a hundred women win individual suits and then look at the stats?

    The suit began nearly 10 years ago when it was originally filed on behalf of employee Betty Dukes and five of her co-workers. The women claimed they had been passed over for promotions and paid less than male employees.
    Where's that trial? Oh, too small a payday for the attorneys. How about one step at a time?
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  4. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    dimensionally transcendental
    Last Seen
    08-15-11 @ 04:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,153

    Re: Supreme Court throws out huge discrimination suit against Wal-Mart

    ok...

    Slow Progress for Women in Management - The Juggle - WSJ
    A new government report found that women have made few inroads into management positions over the past decade and still face a persistent pay gap with their male counterparts. The findings, released today by the Government Accountability Office, and reported in the New York Times, showed that in 2007, the latest data available, women accounted for about 40% of managers in the U.S. work force. That number is up just slightly from 2000, when women held 39% of management positions
    Ok. WalMart is at 33%, national average in 2007 (last year data was available) was 40%. They need to catch up som, certainly. But I'd be willing to bet there are other huge corporations with a worse number. Where are those lawsuits?

  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    05-06-12 @ 11:12 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    9,800

    Re: Supreme Court throws out huge discrimination suit against Wal-Mart

    Quote Originally Posted by Gina View Post
    Yes, they can, but it shouldn't be, not with the statistics as they were noted by Justice Ginsberg. It's more than a store here and there. Women make up 70% of the hourly work force, but only 33% of management? Something doesn't add up here.
    No, it doesn't but the sky is green in other worlds.

    Please clean out your email box.

  6. #16
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    31,929

    Re: Supreme Court throws out huge discrimination suit against Wal-Mart

    Quote Originally Posted by BDBoop View Post
    No, it doesn't but the sky is green in other worlds.

    Please clean out your email box.
    Done! *blush* I keep a messy in box.

  7. #17
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Supreme Court throws out huge discrimination suit against Wal-Mart

    Quote Originally Posted by Gina View Post
    Yes, they can, but it shouldn't be, not with the statistics as they were noted by Justice Ginsberg. It's more than a store here and there. Women make up 70% of the hourly work force, but only 33% of management? Something doesn't add up here.
    Yes, women can't manage ****, everyone knows this.


    OR, women with managerial experience are choosing other places to apply too. Numbers by themselves don't mean diddly squat. You have to prove that gender is a deciding factor.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  8. #18
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:57 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,982

    Re: Supreme Court throws out huge discrimination suit against Wal-Mart

    Quote Originally Posted by BDBoop View Post
    Supreme Court Wal-Mart: Supreme Court tosses discrimination suit against Wal-Mart - latimes.com

    In a 5-4 vote, justices rule that the lawsuit, which claimed that Wal-Mart discriminated against 1.5 million female workers, did not qualify as a class action.
    The Supreme Court decides in favor of a corporation against average workers?!?!?!?!?!?!?

    And in other breaking news - the sun sets tonight in the west.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  9. #19
    Advisor toddwv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-11 @ 02:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    315

    Re: Supreme Court throws out huge discrimination suit against Wal-Mart

    Edward's Court continues to side with corporations. No shocker here.

    God Has Boobs. It's in the Bible.

  10. #20
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Supreme Court throws out huge discrimination suit against Wal-Mart

    I'm still scratching my head over Justice Scalia's commentary on discrimination as "required" or "prohibited" under the Constitution. I know the 15th and 19th Amendments are about voting rights, but my goodness!

    Justice Scalia in his deciding opinion:

    Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn't. Nobody ever thought that that's what it meant. Nobody ever voted for that.
    Rephrased, the Constitution does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex.

    19th Amendment
    The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
    There's your Constitutional basis for non-discrimination against the sexes right there!!
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 06-20-11 at 03:32 PM.

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •