I don’t want to write about the sequester; I was hoping I wouldn’t have to. But here we are as the two...
For people who don’t want any government interference, the family that owns Walmart certainly relies pretty...
As my husband and I watched anxiously for news of the outcome of the New York state senate vote on marriage equality, my thoughts drifted back to one last worrisome aspect of the Supreme Court’s Walmart ruling — what it means for minorities. It may not be obvious, but there’s a connection. Let me explain.
The Supreme Court’s Dukes vs. Walmart, raising the bar for plaintiffs in class action suits, means workers who already have it bad in this economy probably won’t have it any better, and won’t be able to do much about it.
Can’t Win. Don’t Try.
The lesson Betty Dukes and other workers will learn after Dukes v. Walmart was best summed up by Bart Simspon, in the Simpsons episode “Homer at the Bat.”
It’s Walmart’s world, and the rest of us are just living in it. That seems to be the take away from the Supreme Court’s ruling in Duke v. Walmart. The court ruled on a narrow aspect of the case, but the decision has broad and foreboding implications for workers, women, minorities, and the course of progressive change going forward.
In March, when I first wrote about this case I began with a warning: “If you think conservatism’s war on America’s working- and middle-classes is only happening in Wisconsin and a few other states, you’re wrong. If you think that it’s only a war against public employees, you’re more wrong than you know.” I wrote that the court could possibly strip from private sector employees their last effective tool for seeking justice in the workplace.