Women and Work
Jun. 21st, 2011 07:32 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
emma_in_dreamI see that the large class action against WalMart in America has failed. Or, that's not really the right word. The Supreme Court has decided that all those women can't band together to argue discrimination because there are thousands of WalMarts each of which is run slightly differently.
So, despite the fact that WalMart itself in its own defense apparently produced figures which acknowledged some discrimination, there can't be a group action. Suing individual stores will, of course, be way more difficult. So, in effect, what this judgment says (as I understand it) is that really big companies are too big to be sued.
See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13845970
On a more positive note, there was also a really significant decision by Fair Work Australia recently. In May there was a decision that employees of non-government employers in the social, community and disability services industry throughout Australia were paid less, as a group, than employees in Government service. It was conceded that this was, in part, because these workers are mostly women.
See: http://www.fwa.gov.au/index.cfm?pagename=remuneration&page=introduction
I don't say this to say go Australia, boo America. Clearly the underlying pattern is women being paid less in both countries.
I was planning to write about the Australian case anyway, because I don't understand the details and I haven't seen much coverage in the news here and I want to know more. Has anyone seen anything else?
So, despite the fact that WalMart itself in its own defense apparently produced figures which acknowledged some discrimination, there can't be a group action. Suing individual stores will, of course, be way more difficult. So, in effect, what this judgment says (as I understand it) is that really big companies are too big to be sued.
See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13845970
On a more positive note, there was also a really significant decision by Fair Work Australia recently. In May there was a decision that employees of non-government employers in the social, community and disability services industry throughout Australia were paid less, as a group, than employees in Government service. It was conceded that this was, in part, because these workers are mostly women.
See: http://www.fwa.gov.au/index.cfm?pagename=remuneration&page=introduction
I don't say this to say go Australia, boo America. Clearly the underlying pattern is women being paid less in both countries.
I was planning to write about the Australian case anyway, because I don't understand the details and I haven't seen much coverage in the news here and I want to know more. Has anyone seen anything else?
