You're big - but not too big to sue
Jun. 22nd, 2004 08:01 amA US federal judge has given the go-ahead for a sex-discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart to be heard as a class action, the plaintiffs' lawyers say.
The judge's decision means the case now involves up to 1.6 million women who have worked for Wal-Mart since 1998.
..San Francisco-based judge Martin Jenkins has dismissed Wal-Mart's argument that a class action lawsuit would be too unwieldy, the Wall Street Journal reported.
The bolding is mine.
Unless you want us to go form our own country, you're going to have to hear us dirty hippies defend the public weal every time someone wants to ignore it to make a buck. Ya hear?
I'll make book on it now. The suit to limit offshore anything - tax shelters, manufacturing, jobs - will come out of San Francisco. Mark it on your callendar.
And for the record, I'm damn pleased that the "leave God in the pledge" issue was overturned at the Supreme Court. It was a badly disguised custody battle and if someone really wants to argue the issue that it was "harmful" - go knock yourself out. You might actually get somewhere.
But don't bring a case on your kid's behalf when the kid doesn't care one way or the other and you're pissed your ex doesn't agree with you. Sheesh.
The judge's decision means the case now involves up to 1.6 million women who have worked for Wal-Mart since 1998.
..San Francisco-based judge Martin Jenkins has dismissed Wal-Mart's argument that a class action lawsuit would be too unwieldy, the Wall Street Journal reported.
The bolding is mine.
Unless you want us to go form our own country, you're going to have to hear us dirty hippies defend the public weal every time someone wants to ignore it to make a buck. Ya hear?
I'll make book on it now. The suit to limit offshore anything - tax shelters, manufacturing, jobs - will come out of San Francisco. Mark it on your callendar.
And for the record, I'm damn pleased that the "leave God in the pledge" issue was overturned at the Supreme Court. It was a badly disguised custody battle and if someone really wants to argue the issue that it was "harmful" - go knock yourself out. You might actually get somewhere.
But don't bring a case on your kid's behalf when the kid doesn't care one way or the other and you're pissed your ex doesn't agree with you. Sheesh.
no subject
Date: 2004-06-22 09:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-06-22 10:06 am (UTC)Right on! If the case has merit it will be brought up again and decided on later, but this particular suit did not have good legal standing and was rightly struck down (in my opinion).
no subject
Date: 2004-06-22 01:00 pm (UTC)(But I am not a dirty hippie. Okay, it is true I need to wash my hair today, but I smell neither of patchouli or pot. I am a rock-throwing leftist, damnit.)
no subject
Date: 2004-06-22 07:00 pm (UTC)