Wal-Mart Discriminates Against Women: Facts & Evidence - Essay Sample

Introduction

This paper details how Wal-Mart discriminates against women. It provides facts and circumstances about how women are discriminated against. This is despite the fact that Wal-Mart's policies propose equal pay and promotion opportunities for men and women. However, in reality, women are denied promotion opportunities and are paid far lesser than their male counterparts in this store are. The plaintiffs further maintain that the retail chain has continued discrimination against women as a continuous and ongoing pattern by denying women opportunities for assignments, promotions, and training, pay, and dependency on practices and policies which otherwise help men to enjoy promotions and other benefits in the firm (Business Insider, 2018).

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Company Background

Wal-Mart Inc., headquartered in Bentonville, AR. is a Company that engaged engages in wholesale and retail businesses. The Company offers a range of products and services at lower prices (Chang & Hu, 2020). The Company operates on several segments: Wal-Mart International, Wal-Mart U'S., and Sam's Club. In the U.S., the market segment involved operates as a trader for consumer products operating under Walmart, Walmart Neighborhood, and Wal-Mart Market brands. Sam's Club encompasses membership-only warehouses and samsclub.com. Samuel Monroe and James Lawrence founded Walmart in 1945. Currently, the Company has 11,501 stores worldwide, and the average American Walmart shopper is 46 years old and white and has an annual household income of just over $76,000 (Chang & Hu, 2020).

The Diversity Challenge

The discrimination against women at Walmart became known when harassed women employees across 48 U.S. states filed sex discrimination complaints against Wal-Mart. The charges were filed with the 'Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.' This commission is entrusted with ensuring that employers levy the legal rights of workers to them. However, the Supreme Court quashed the charges maintaining that Wal-Mart represented a diverse and large group, and it could not be considered as a 'class.' However, the employees' attorneys maintained that they would file cases after breaking down the employees in small teams (Forbes, 2019). A woman called Betty Dukes filed one famous suit. In a lawsuit supported by other women working for Walmart, she filed a case claiming that there was discrimination against women working in the Corporation. She alleged that Walmart is discriminating against women in various forms. The first allegation was that women have fewer chances of receiving training and promotion. Secondly, women are assigned to low-paid departments compared to their male counterparts. Thirdly, women are paid less for similar job activities. Fourthly, they have to work in a hostile environment and experience pressure due to gender discrimination. Lastly, male employees at the Corporation retaliate against women who dare to oppose gender discrimination.

The case was filed in 2001 as a class-action lawsuit on behalf of 1.6 million women working in Walmart in the United States (Forbes, 2019). There were notable statistical data for male and female pay that was meant to support the claims. In 2004, the status of a class-action lawsuit was approved, but Walmart appealed the decision. Walmart defended its position by expressing that the organization allotted most responsibilities to local senior supervisors, and in this way, activities in various regions could fundamentally contrast from each other. Arguing from these lines and on statistical contrasts, the organization requested that women should file individual cases, and every one of these cases ought to be considered independently. In 2007, the Ninth Circuit ruled first in support of class action, then dismissed the decision at the end of 2007, and granted a rehearing of the lawsuit on the certification of class action (Reichard, 2020). Eventually, the Supreme Court ruled the case in favor of Walmart in 2011. It was decided that the commonality of cases was not sufficient to form a class action lawsuit. Instead, the lawsuit was taken down to the state level.

It is expected to be considered in the states in which the evidence of gender discrimination was the most notable - California and Texas (Reichard, 2020). Even though the case was ruled in favor of Walmart, this lawsuit had a positive impact on the issues related to workplace gender discrimination in the United States. Walmart improved its corporate policies for women and created special programs empowering women. For example, Walmart is currently investing in such programs as empowering women through training, sourcing from a business owned by women, promotion of diversity and inclusion among the suppliers of professional services and merchandising suppliers (Walmart, n.d.).

Betty Dukes, who is still determined to protect her rights and the rights of other women working in Walmart in the court, contributed a lot to reducing gender inequality and empowering women. She is viewed as the role model by many women who decide to protect their rights in the court. Increased public attention to the questions of gender discrimination and workplace discrimination at Walmart urged the Company to review its policies and attitudes. The fact that workplace issues about gender discrimination are considered and that the Company explicitly promotes equality stimulates managers and other Walmart employees to be more tolerant and more just in those cases where discrimination might have emerged. Also, even the decision to review the lawsuit at the state level might be beneficial for gender equality. According to PBS (2011), the decisions on these lawsuits might create a certain national standard for treating women and promoting gender equality, which would be later adopted by Walmart stores and other large employments in other states. Hence, this lawsuit has a mostly positive impact on gender discrimination issues in the workplace.

There has been a previous incident of discrimination based on sex, which was ruled in favor of the employee of Wal-Mart. The lawsuit filed by EEOC claimed that Wal-Mart denied jobs to women for positions based on the warehouse from 1998 to 2005. This is despite the fact that women employers were equally or better qualified than their male counterparts. On the other hand, the retail store regularly hired males during this period (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2010). The store has to pay $11.7 million to settle the suit for sex discrimination.

Recommendations for Wal-Mart

Wal-Mart has successfully organized operations across America. The store is in a position to challenge the misdemeanors of managers and accordingly levy the control function to speak against prejudices and stereotypes. This should be enforced in the store with immediate effect. New policies that adhere to and protect the ethical code of conduct mentioned on the website should be formulated and implemented (Walmart, n.d.)Wal-Mart can fix the discrepancies by observing the promotion process and ensuring that each store is offering positions to the most qualified applicant. One psychologist states that "studies show the strongest predictor of whether an opening is filled by a man or a woman is whether the previous incumbent was a man or a woman" (Boatright, 2009, p. 199). If hiring managers used a scoring system to rank applicants and offered the position to the best performer. This allows the store to avoid accusations by proving their choice was made using a system that selects the best applicant, as opposed to leaving for the manager's decision and risking discrimination. Wal-Mart needs to ensure that women are hired in top managerial and management positions across the country. This will help in solving consistent issues with sex discrimination. Studies reveal that the retail giant has a substantially low level of female workers in managerial positions as compared with its competitors (Fine, Sojo, & LawfordSmith, 2020). Another recommendation for the firm is to ensure that equal and fair wages are paid to both men and women in the firm. The firm has previously discriminated against by paying lesser wages to women as compared with men for the same tasks.

The control function has to be exercised to ensure that supervisors do not conduct discriminatory practices based on wages. This may be conducted by having a centralized human resource department that would be accountable to ensure that men and women are paid equal wages for similar work. The department should further work towards providing equal opportunities for training, career growth, and development of employees in Wal-Mart. Human resource experts should conduct surprise visits to Wal-Mart stores, interact with the employees, find out issues, and resolve them. Also, the organization staffing plan has to be modified to include both men and women to work together. The store should ensure that there are no men-centric and women-centric departments in the stores. The human resource department should ensure that the concerns of female employees are duly considered while transferring them from one store to another, and the relocation policy should not favor discriminatory practices against female employees.

The toll-free number levied to voice the concerns of employees should not be used to harass personnel. The human resource department has to ensure that such calls accusing the Company of discrimination against women should be strictly managed. Accordingly, the arrangement should be carried out to ensure that women are not discriminated in the workplace. On the other hand, the human resource team can take suggestions from workers and suggest areas of improvement for employees in the store. This will help in the class of workers to be satisfied, engaged, and motivated to perform (Ravazzani, 2016).

Conclusion

The United States federal law prohibits any kind of workplace discrimination for about four decades. Despite this, there has been a widespread instance of discrimination against women based on wages and salaries as compared with men. The evidence presented in the Dukes v. Wal-Mart case has provided alarming statistics that highlight specific discrimination issues that women employees in Wal-Mart have to confront. The Company should strive to maintain fair policies, pay, and career growth opportunities to men and women. It should adhere to the recommendations and set up an active human resource department that efficiently manages to resolve all such complaints. This requires levying stringent control mechanisms and empowering the human resource department to take action against discrimination cases. This case is unique as it has adequately addressed a vice and has successfully highlighted such discriminatory practices that are conducted in most firms in the United States of America. It has triggered public debate and discussion, and its effects may be echoed beyond the boundaries of the retail giant and may gradually end this vice.

References

Boatright, J. (2009). Ethics and the conduct of business. Upper Saddle River, NJ. : Prentice Hall. https://www.pearsonhighered.com/assets/preface/0/1/3/4/0134168283.pdf

Business Insider. (2018, December 9). YOU DECIDE: Did Walmart Discriminate Against These 6 Women? Retrieved from https://www.businessinsider.com.au/women-who-sued-walmart-2010-12

Chang, Y., & Hu, J. (2020). Analysis of the Mode of Multinational Retail Enterprises Entering Chinese Market