Dem broads have their panties in a twist... again.
This time, the righteous anger is directed at the Wal-Mart retail chain.
It's always something!
To wit (quoting from CBS News, "Angry Workers Up The Ante At Wal-Mart", 4/29/03):
"Wal-Mart is on the receiving end of what could become the largest class action employment lawsuit in U.S. history...
...The documents, detailing more than 100 complaints by women against the company, are part of a nearly 2-year-old lawsuit against the Bentonville, Ark., retail chain, the nation's largest private employer.
A hearing is set for July 25 in which attorneys for the women will ask a federal judge to elevate the seven-plaintiff suit into a nationwide, class action sex discrimination case."
There are basically two complaints.
The more sensational, and less serious, of the two - which, of course, tops the news article(s) due to its "shock" value - is that male managers at Wal-Mart Stores Inc. have "required" their female counterparts to attend meetings at strip clubs and - ahem! - Hooter's restaurants.
Now that the offended wimmen have said "no more", by having their lawyers file documents in federal court, I have to ask — whatever happened to just plain "no"? Maybe that could've avoided this so-called "more".
Too often in this world, people will simply go along with something - even if they know it's wrong - so as not to rock the boat. Then, at some point, when they've finally had enough, they sue. Welcome to the New Litigious World Order.
This is the same reason why Hitler would've eventually been sued by the Jews. If he hadn't, you know, killed them all before a class action lawsuit could be filed.
I'd be much more sympathetic if a woman (or group of women) at Wal-Mart had refused to attend such a meeting, due to its offensive locale, and had been fired. Then filed a wrongful termination/sex discrimination suit. Sometimes it's better to stand up for yourself, consequences be damned, than to just "go along" with the stupidity. Maybe that attitude is a "guy thing", or maybe I'm just funny in the head.
Article comments
1 - Michael Croft
Actually, I believe that Hooters in Houston claimed it was a sexually oriented business to defend itself from charges of discrimination due to the physical requirements to work as a "Hooters Girl". They may be hoist on their own petard.