The United States Supreme Court has a hot potato in their hands. Last Tuesday, it decided to examine the case of Wal-Mart, the retail chain that is the country's largest private employer and is accused by a group of women of systematically discriminating against its female employees. The plaintiffs provide testimony and statistics showing that female employees at Wal-Mart earn less than their male colleagues and are also given proportionately fewer promotions.
It comes down to one simple fact: 70 percent of Wal-Mart workers are women, but only 15 percent have achieved a managerial position. Therefore, the plaintiffs have been suing for a decade to be heard as part of a class-action lawsuit, due to the discriminatory culture of the company that affects all employees. If the Supreme Court accepts the case in such terms, all companies in the country are going to get very nervous (the decision will be known before the summer). Therefore, 20 major companies, including General Electric and Microsoft, have expressed their solidarity with Wal-Mart before the judges.
What is at stake is not only a multimillion-dollar compensation. If they win the lawsuit, Wal-Mart would have to compensate 1.5 million employees, a real drain on the firm. The added problem, even more disturbing and revolutionary, is the legal precedent it would set. The Supreme Court judges know it, and clearly expressed it when they opened the case last Tuesday.
How many companies would face similar lawsuits then, they wondered? Wal-Mart is a typical company, said Judge Samuel Alito to the lawyer for the plaintiffs. “You would say every single company is in violation of Title VII [of the Civil Rights Act]?” he asked.
This case is definitely a hot potato because of its enormous potential to transform the labor market and also curb the interests of private enterprise. Betty Dukes, a 61-year-old black woman, is leading the lawsuit in a country that is very sensitive to any type of discrimination, which is prohibited, in fact, by the Civil Rights Act. Thus, the reply to Alito's question to the counsel for the plaintiffs was without hesitation, “That could very well be the case.”
El Tribunal Supremo de Estados Unidos tiene una patata caliente en las manos. El martes pasado decidió examinar el caso de la cadena de tiendas de WalMart, el mayor empleador privado del país y al que un grupo de mujeres acusa de discriminar
* "Pedí lo justo en un mundo de hombres"
La noticia en otros webs
* webs en español
* en otros idiomas
de manera sistemática
a sus empleadas. Las demandantes aportan testimonios y estadísticas que demuestran que las empleadas de WalMart ganan menos que sus colegas masculinos
y ascienden también
en mucha menor proporción. Baste un dato sencillo: el 70% de los trabajadores de WalMart son mujeres, pero solo el 15% alcanza un cargo directivo. Por ello, las denunciantes llevan una década pleiteando, para que se admita como colectiva su demanda, dado que forma parte de la cultura discriminatoria de la empresa y afecta a todas las empleadas. Si el Supremo acepta el caso en tales términos (antes del verano se conocerá su decisión), todas las empresas del país se van a poner muy nerviosas. Por eso, 20 grandes compañías -entre ellas, General Electric y Microsoft- han expresado ante
los jueces su
solidaridad
con WalMart.
Lo que está en juego no es solo una multimillonaria indemnización. De ganar el pleito, WalMart debería compensar a 1,5 millones de empleadas; una auténtica sangría para la firma. El problema añadido, aún más inquietante y revolucionario, es el precedente jurídico que sentaría. Los jueces del Supremo lo saben y el martes pasado, cuando abrieron el caso, lo expresaron claramente. ¿Cuántas compañías afrontarían entonces demandas similares?, se preguntaron. WalMart es una empresa típica,
le dijo el juez Samuel Alito al abogado de las demandantes. "¿Diría entonces que todas las firmas del país violan
el Título VII del Acta
de Derechos Civiles?".
Definitivamente, este caso es una patata caliente por su enorme potencial para transformar el mercado laboral y poner coto de paso a los intereses de la iniciativa privada. Betty Dukes, una mujer negra de 61 años, lidera la demanda en un país muy sensible a cualquier tipo
de discriminación, prohibida, en efecto, por el Acta de Derechos Civiles. Por eso,
a la pregunta de Alito, el letrado de las demandantes respondió sin titubeos: "Podría ser muy bien
el caso".
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link
.
[T]he Republican president managed to make the meeting revolve around his interests — the debate about the 5% — and left out ... the White House’s attitude toward the Kremlin.
[T]he Republican president managed to make the meeting revolve around his interests — the debate about the 5% — and left out ... the White House’s attitude toward the Kremlin.