Legal Advocacy Fund Cases
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Dukes
Case Adopted 01/11
Case Update (2/12): After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June that the Wal-Mart v. Dukes sex discrimination class-action lawsuit was too big to move forward, the lawyers representing the women vowed to create smaller class actions by region. In November 2011, the lawyers filed the first of these amended lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for Northern California. The lawsuit alleges that Wal-Mart's discriminatory practices affected more than 90,000 women currently or formerly employed at Wal-Mart and Sam's Club stores in four regions in California and nearby states. Betty Dukes, a California resident, is the lead plaintiff, just as she was for the larger lawsuit.
Background: In 2001, female employees at Wal-Mart filed a class action sex discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart Stores in the U. S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The lawsuit alleges that female employees of Wal-Mart are denied advancement and training opportunities, paid less than men for the same or comparable work, steered to lower wage departments, subjected to a sexually hostile work environment and retaliated against when they attempt to address sex discrimination.
On December 6, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to decide whether 1.5 million female employees of Wal-Mart can pursue job discrimination claims in one suit or whether they'll have to split up and file against individual stores. The case—the largest employment class-action suit in the nation's history—will be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on March 29, 2011.
In addition to providing financial support, AAUW signed an amicus brief, issued press releases, and attended the hearing on March 29, 2011 and co-led a rally in support of the women of Wal-Mart.
In a disappointing 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 20, 2011, that the class could not move forward. Now each woman will have to file her claim individually or in smaller, reformulated class-action groups.
While the ruling does not determine whether Wal-Mart is guilty of gender discrimination, it will have far-reaching effects on class certification in workplace discrimination lawsuits. AAUW strongly believes in protecting the rights of Americans to bring appropriate class-action suits against discriminatory employers. Such cases ensure that all affected workers can right the wrongs against them and stand together in the face of corporate misconduct. Sometimes, class actions are the only way to force a company to change its unfair practices. Class actions also serve as powerful deterrents to keep other employers from engaging in the same practices.
Just two days before the decision announcement, named plaintiff Edith Arana spoke to AAUW members at the National Convention in Washington, DC. Hear her story through the C-Span recording.
AAUW-Alliance for Justice Plaintiff Reception
AAUW Press Releases
AAUW Profoundly Disappointed in U.S. Supreme Court Ruling on Wal-Mart v. Dukes
AAUW Stands with the Women of Wal-Mart during U.S. Supreme Court Hearing
AAUW Signs Amicus Brief in Support of the Plaintiffs in Gender Discrimination Suit against Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (03/02/2011)
AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund Supports Gender Discrimination Suit against Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (01/21/2011)
AAUW Wal-Mart Panel on C-SPAN
Cameras roll at AAUW convention as a lead plaintiff in the Wal-Mart case speaks out.
- Wal-Mart Discrimination Case Grapples with Implicit Biases against Women (Forbes blog)
- AAUW Dialog blog: Why the Wal-Mart Supreme Court Case Matters (AAUW Dialog)
- Why the Wal-Mart Case Is So Important to Women, Minorities (New America Media)
- 'Janie Q's' Class Warfare at Wal-Mart (Huffington Post)
- Supreme Court Prepares to Hear Landmark Sex Discrimination Case (AAUW Dialog)
- The Women of Wal-Mart Deserve Their Day in Court to Challenge Unfair Pay (NPWF)
- Women: Do You Work Just for the Sake of Working? (Feministing)
