Monday, March 28, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court wrestled with a case that can have a far-reaching impact on the issue of gender discrepancies in the work place. Six female employees filed a lawsuit based on the1964 Civil Rights Act. They stated that Wal-Mart supports a culture of gender discrimination. Now mind you, the case is not about the actual discrimination but can these women mover forward and file a class action lawsuit based on being over looked for promotions, pay increases and management opportunities. Thus far, all lower courts have supported the rights of these women to file this class action lawsuit that would represented about 500,000 women at a cost of about $1,100 for each claimant if they were to prevail.
I know that this is possible having been in the same situation as some of these women. Thinking that if I just worked harder and longer hours that I would receive the promotion. In one of my own experiences, after training about a dozen assistance mangers to become retail store mangers, I knew that my knowledge and experience was of values to the company. All those managers I trained immediately moved on to manage their own retail store. However for me, the actual promotion never happened. Did I say that all the manager I trained were not of color. So I can sympathize with these women.
I think if you were to ask any female working in any of the Fortune 500 companies or any company, I would bet that they would have many stories to tell you about the glass ceiling. Something that we all know exist but up until this point was not voiced in a court of law with such thunder.
The Los Angeles Times article written by James Oliphant and David G. Savage on March 30, 2011, reports that the hourly wage earners at Wal-Mart for females to males the ratio is 2:1. Times magazine AP writer Mark Sherman wrote on March. 28, 2011 “that 65% of the hourly workers are women.” This means that the females are responsible for a majority of the sales floor activities, cashiering and dusting, responsibilities. Yes I did said dusting.
“The men make up 86% of management and are responsible for the decision-making, hiring, firing and promotional responsibilities. Not to mention, that the men are paid more money, not just in the position of management but also in all positions. Women within the company are paid less then men even if they have more seniority and better reviews. They receive fewer promotions and wait longer before getting promoted.” This is the issue of the claimants.
The claimants state that Wal-Mart promotes a strong corporate culture of gender bias. This is where it gets tough and even the Supreme Court Justices question this aspect of the case. Or should I say this is where the “male” Supreme Court Justices could not rationalize the discriminatory aspect of the case as it pertains to "legal liability." It was reported that the court is sharply divided along gender lines. Can you image that the U.S. Supreme court is divided by gender. What is this world coming to; I thought justice was blind?
The male Justices’ with the exception of Justice Boutrous, questioned how Wal-Mart could be held accountable for the action of the managers at store level. It seems that since there is not actual “policy” for gender discrimination that Wal-Mart could not be held liable for the action and decisions of store level management. In other words, “the policy states” that Wal-Mart calls for equal treatment with regards to race or sex. As far as the male justices are concerned, this policy statement can relieve Wal-Mart of its legal responsibility.
However, on the other side of this gender divide are the female justices. They feel that allowing local management to determine promotions could result in discrimination against women. Ginsburg a former sex-discrimination lawyer supports the assertion that “gender bias could “creep” into the workplace. It isn’t all that complication.”
The female claimants state that Wal-Mart supports a “culture of gender bias.” They made reference to being treated as less then professionals and do not receive equal pay for equal work and the statistics indicate that this is in fact true.
So how does one know that they are being discriminated against in the work place? I know in my experience I was not sure until I realized who I trained, and that I would never receive the promotion that I know I worked hard for. If I had to explain it I would say, its like looking out of your window and it is a bright sunny day. You dress for this sunny day only to step out of your door and realized that it is 10 degrees outside. You can’t see it from your window because the sunshine deceived you, and once your realize how cold it is, you start feeling the chill all the way down to your bones. Quickly you turn to go back and get a different coat only to realize that you left your keys in the house in your heavy winter coat pocket. This single experience will prevent you from ever being deceived by bright sunshine again.
So I ask. Is a written policy all that is required to legally sweep discriminatory cultural disparities under the rug? Will the good ol' boys be able to pay some high priced attorney to “write” policy in such a way as to enforce the glass ceiling, maintain substandard pay based on gender, age, and or race, thereby maintaining the status quo for the privileged few? Will oppressive corporate culture sustain itself allowing the good ol' boys to remain in charge and responsible for deciding who succeeds and who labors. This case is about more than these six courage women. Corporate Policy should be reviewed and rewritten to accommodate America’s multicultural, multiethnic and multiracial views where everyone should have the opportunity to flourish, collaborate new ideas and concepts in an attempt to realize one’s personal American dream.
Please post any experiences, comments or thoughts that you might have. I would love to hear your personal stories.
All post are moderated.
All post are moderated.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment