Sex Discrimination Lawsuit Filed Against TX Wal-Mart
Late last week, attorneys filed a complaint in US District Court, Northern District of Dallas, on behalf of approximately 50,000 current and former women employees of Wal-Mart, alleging that the corporation discriminated on the basis of sex. The plaintiffs in the case, Odle et al v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., seeks punitive damages, claiming that Wal-Mart denied equal pay and promotions to women employees in its Texas stores.
Hal K. Gillespie, lead co-counsel, stated, "This suit alleges Wal-Mart Texas Regions have a general policy of discrimination. What we have found during our discovery is a consistent and willful practice of discrimination in pay. What we have found during our discovery is a consistent and willful practice of discrimination in pay and promotion against women employees in Wal-Mart stores throughout Texas. This case is in complete compliance with the new class action and employment discrimination guidelines. We can now seek justice for these women, many of whom had been discriminated against for more than a decade."
This is the second class action suit designed to serve as a scaled down version of the initial lawsuit sex discrimination lawsuit filed against Wal-Mart in 2001 and rejected by the U.S Supreme Court in June. The court ruled that the suit was too varied in its allegations, showing no concrete pattern of gender bias, effectively making Wal-Mart "too big to sue."
Media Resources: Turner Strategies 1/19/12; Feminist Daily Newswire 6/20/11
8/28/2015 Alaska Court Protects Abortion Access for Low-Income Women - The Alaska Superior Court struck down a state law yesterday that would have severely limited abortion access for low-income women in Alaska.
The state's Superior Court also struck down a Department of Health and Social Services regulation that placed narrow specifications on Medicaid coverage for abortions, requiring that Medicaid-funded abortions be determined by a physician to be "medically necessary." Last year, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Planned Parenthood sued on behalf of the Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest, claiming that the narrow definition of "medically necessary" arbitrarily established conditions designed to restrict the ability of low-income women to access abortion services.
The law was temporarily blocked last July by an Alaskan state court judge.
Superior Court Judge John Suddock ordered yesterday that the state be blocked from implementing this regulation, ruling that it placed an undue burden on low-income women seeking abortion services in Alaska.
"By providing health care to all poor Alaskans except women who need abortions, the challenged regulation violates the state constitutional guarantee of 'equal rights, opportunities, and protection under the law'," the ruling read.
"We applaud the superior court for striing down these cruel restrictions on women's health and rights that violate the Alaska Constitution," said Chris Charbonneau, CEO of Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and the Hawaiian Islands. . . .
8/26/2015 Saudi Women Prepare to Vote for the First Time - The fight for gender equality is making slow but notable progress in Saudi Arabia, where women will be allowed to vote for the first time in upcoming December elections.
This shift in Saudi law came in 2011, when a royal decree announced that women would be allowed to vote and run in local elections beginning in December of 2015. . . .