Wal-Mart Women Plaintiffs File Expanded Texas Class Action

DALLAS, Jan. 19, 2012 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Charging that Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., discriminated against female employees in stores throughout Texas, attorneys today filed an amended complaint in U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas, Dallas District, against the retailer on behalf of current and former female Wal-Mart employees.  The complaint expands the case by charging widespread denial of equal pay to female employees, and cites specific examples of biased statements by Wal-Mart's senior managers, according to plaintiffs' co-lead counsel Hal K. Gillespie of Gillespie, Rozen & Watsky, P.C.

The complaint – Odle, et al v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. – seeks an end to Wal-Mart's discriminatory practices in its Texas stores and punitive damages for the plaintiffs in the class.  It is the second regional discrimination case filed against Wal-Mart since the U.S. Supreme Court in June 2011 reversed a lower court's ruling on the national class action against the retailer and issued new guidelines for class actions and Civil Rights Act employment discrimination cases.  The first regional case, Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., was filed in a Northern California federal court in October 2011.

"This suit alleges that Wal-Mart Texas Regions have a general policy of discrimination.  We found during our discovery a consistent and willful practice of discrimination in pay and promotion against women employees," said Gillespie.  "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."

The complaint first was filed in Texas in October 2011 to protect the rights of named plaintiff Stephanie Odle to sue Wal-Mart before the statute of limitations in her case expired. Odle, of Norman, Okla., filed the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) claim that ultimately resulted in the Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., national class action.

Odle is joined as named plaintiff in the Texas case by former Wal-Mart employees Alesia Thurston of Houston; Celia Dian Trevino, of Floresville, Texas; Elise Dominguez of El Paso; Luana Roach of Sachse, Texas; and Desiree Melchor of Richmond, Texas; and current Wal-Mart employee Pamela Collins of Ennis, Texas.  The seven represent more than 50,000 current or former women employees—with the exception of store managers and pharmacists— of Texas Wal-Mart, and subsidiary Sam's Club, stores.

Evidence in the case shows that women who hold salaried and hourly positions in the Texas stores have been paid less than men in comparable positions, although on average the women have more seniority and higher performance ratings than men. Women in Wal-Mart's Texas stores also had a much lower chance of being promoted than men, and those who did get promoted waited significantly longer for job promotions. This continued to occur even after senior Wal-Mart management officials and outside consultants warned Wal-Mart that women are not sufficiently represented in management positions, that women are paid less than male employees in the same jobs, and that Wal-Mart lags behind its competitors in the promotion of women to management positions.  Evidence also confirms that Wal-Mart's male managers had biased views of women – from the top down.

In addition to Gillespie, Rozen & Watsky, PC, of Dallas, the plaintiffs are represented by The Tinkler Law Firm and The Bennett Firm, both of Santa Fe, N.M.; Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, PLLC, Washington, D.C.; and the Impact Fund, Berkeley, Calif.

For more information, or for a copy of the amended complaint, visit www.walmartclass.com.

SOURCE Gillespie, Rozen & Watsky, P.C.