Wal-Mart Ruling Doesn't Kill Class Actions

Despite claims that the Supreme Court’s decision in the Wal-Mart vs. Dukes case kills the class action lawsuit, the class action lawsuit is still very much alive, albeit with new limits, as shown by Forbes and Reuters. When Wal-Mart emerged victorious last month against a sex discrimination claim by 1.5 million female employees, many thought that this ruling and the Supreme Court’s wording would shield other major corporations in the United States from similar large lawsuits. This is not the case though, as several high-profile class action lawsuits have managed to continue since the ruling.

The Wal-Mart lawsuit was based on the question of whether 1.5 million current and former female workers at the retailer could certify as a class. The women claimed that Wal-Mart didn’t have an overarching employment policy and thus gave too much power to local managers, leaving female workers open to discrimination. They argued that these managers “exercise their discretion over pay and promotions disproportionately in favor of men, which has an unlawful disparate impact on female employees; and that Wal-Mart’s refusal to cabin its managers’ authority amounts to disparate treatment.” The Supreme Court ruled the women could not sue jointly, finding that their situations were too diverse to warrant class action status.

Despite this decision that being ruled class action warranted a certain “glue” to hold together the claimants, other large lawsuits against U.S. corporations have continued. According to Reuters, late last month, a Florida federal judge denied Starbucks Corp's attempt to decertify a class of more than seven hundred workers who sued over overtime pay, saying there were enough similarities to justify a class action suit. In the same week, a federal judge in California denied trucking company C.R. England Inc's attempt to decertify a class of up to 1,000 drivers in a wage-and-hour class action, and a federal judge in Ohio upheld class certification in a similar case against nursing home company HCR ManorCare. To be sure, these cases are miniscule compared to the extent of the Wal-Mart suit, but they represent that class action lawsuits can still be a powerful tool for workers, despite the new “glue” they must exhibit.

Furthermore, it has been overlooked that there was a stipulation inserted into the Supreme Court ruling ruling, saying that the case could have continued had a random set of claims been used to represent the claims of the entire class action. The justices ruled that the class action could be tried if a “random set of claims for valuation and then extrapolated the validity and value of the untested claims from the sample set.” Therefore, similar lawsuits could most likely continue if their random sample set showed discrimination, which still leaves the door open to future lawsuits and significant awards.

If you believe that you are being discriminated against by your employer for being part of a protected category (race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, pregnancy, etc.), you may have legal recourse. While employers may fire employees for job-related reasons, they may not discriminate against individuals for their participation or existence in a certain group. If you believe that you have been discriminated against, contact a dedicated job discrimination lawyer to see if you are entitled to pursue legal recourse for your grievance.