Published in Taos, New Mexico by Dead Cat Press All rights reserved.© Penultimate Issue # 1 - $1.00 or OBO

Dead Cat Press

Sponsors

Contribute

Site Map

HOME

Business Philosophy

Affected Businesses

Eight Ways to Beat Walmart

Facts vs. Myths

Human Rights

Lawsuits

Working For Change on Wal-Mart

Local Letters

Walmart SS Solution

Walmart and the Local Economy

What We Stand To Lose

What Others Have Done

People to Contact

Contact TAWSS or call 758-9585

Contact

Some Court Cases Against Wal-Mart in New Mexico

  • Equal Rights Lawsuit

  • Class Action Lawsuit

    Have you been denied career opportunities in management?
    Are you tired of seeing new hires or less qualified men promoted over you?
    Have you been denied equal pay for equal work?
    Have you been getting the run-around about promotions or raises?
    Are you stuck in a dead-end job?
    Have you hit the glass ceiling?
    Has Wal-Mart retaliated against you for complaining about discrimination?

    If you answered YES to any of these questions Learn More Here!

  • Women Speak Out!

    Women from around the world speak out about their treatment by Wal-Mart, including several store employees in New Mexico.

  • Dis-satisfied Customers (Ripped OFF)

    Wheelchair-Bound Job Applicant Sues Wal-Mart for ADA Violations -- $3,583,399 New Mexico Award Plaintiff, who had lost the use of his legs in a construction accident, sued Wal-Mart under the ADA after the store rejected his application for employment six times. Each time plaintiff sought employment, a personnel manager informed him that the store had "no openings for a person in a wheelchair."During plaintiff's last attempt, a manager allegedly told him that the store 34already had one of his kind in the garden center."

    The EEOC used Wal-Mart records to document that the store had more than 133 openings during the time period that the plaintiff sought employment and that plaintiff was qualified for at least 83 of those jobs. Plaintiff submitted a video tape which established that he led an active life and was able to lift 16 foot

    boards, plaster walls and load bricks onto a wheelbarrow. Wal-Mart contended that plaintiff was not "qualified" under the ADA because he was considered 100% disabled under the Social Security Act and was receiving Social Security Disability Income.

    The jury awarded plaintiff $75,000 for compensatory damages, $8,399 for back pay and $3.5 million for punitive damages. E.E.O.C. v. Wal-Mart, U.S. District Court, District of New Mexico, Case No. 94-CV-1076. Richard R. Trujillo, Mary Jo O^?Neill and Trisha Kirtley, Phoenix, AZ for plaintiff. Bonnie Stapleton, Albuquerque, NM for Wal-Mart.

    Female Receiving-Department Workers Harassed by Co-Worker - $1,977,000 New Mexico Award Plaintiffs, employees in the receiving department of a Sam^?s Club, informed a supervisor that a co-worker was making obscene comments to them and touching them inappropriately. The supervisor, who witnessed some of the conduct, reported it the assistant manager in charge of the receiving department. Although the supervisor wanted to write up the complaints, the manager told him to wait and see if the harassing employee changed his behavior.

    Instead, the harassing employee continued the harassment. Rather than take disciplinary action, management promoted him to supervisor. One plaintiffquit; the other one stayed on the job, but contacted the EEOC. Before meeting with the EEOC, management reassigned the harassing employee to another department, but he continued to harass plaintiff. Subsequently, the second plaintiff quit.

    Ten days after the second plaintiff quit, the harassing employee was arrested on criminal charges of sexual assault, false imprisonment and aggravated assault of his girlfriend. He was not terminated. After the harassing employee was convicted of two felonies, store officials gave him a leave of absence to serve his jail sentence. The store terminated him after he failed to return to work when his leave of absence expired. Plaintiffs presented evidence that no Wal-Mart manager was ever trained to deal with sexual harassment issues. Moreover, the store^?s sole policy on sexual harassment was a two paragraph statement contained in the employee handbook. A district manager admitted that he had never seen the sexual harassment policy until after being deposed by plaintiff^?s counsel. The jury awarded one plaintiff $1.364 million and the other plaintiff $613,000 on their claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent supervision.

    Cathy Jean Coates v. Wal-Mart, 1st Judicial District (NM) District Court, Case No. SF 95-2409. Stephen E. Tinkler and Merit Bennett, Sante Fe, NM for plaintiffs. Mark James and Steve Scholl, Albuquerque, NM for Wal-Mart.

    2001 New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, Massachusetts Wal-Mart paid $1 million in fines to settle charges that it violated environmental laws.

    1999-02-26 Santa Fe, NM. Wal-Mart paid $2.3 million to settle Sexual Harassment at Sam's Club. Wal-Mart has lost its court appeal in a case involving sexual harassment filed by two of its former "associates" in New Mexico. The New Mexico Supreme Court upheld a $2.3 million award to the 2 former employees.