The Kansas City, Kansas and St. Louis, Missouri offices of the EEOC brought this case against Wal-Mart, Inc. in January 2004 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri. The complaint alleged that the Wal-Mart store located in Richmond, Missouri failed to hire the complainant ...
read more >
The Kansas City, Kansas and St. Louis, Missouri offices of the EEOC brought this case against Wal-Mart, Inc. in January 2004 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri. The complaint alleged that the Wal-Mart store located in Richmond, Missouri failed to hire the complainant because of his physical disability in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. After a number of discovery disputes, Wal-Mart, Inc. filed a motion for summary judgment. The District Court granted the motion, but the U.S. Court of Appeals reversed and remanded. EEOC v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 477 F.3d 561 (8th Cir. 2007). After additional discovery and two stays in the case, the parties settled the case in April 2008 by entry of a consent decree.
The decree included non-discrimination and non-retaliation clauses, required Wal-Mart to comply with advertising requirements in publications and required Wal-Mart to notify agencies in the Kansas City area of its desire for employment applications from persons with disabilities. The decree also required Wal-Mart to post notice of the rights of employees with disabilities and to provide live training to the store manager, assistant managers, and personnel manager responsible for the operations of the Richmond, Missouri store regarding policies and practices that relate to the employment and reasonable accommodation of persons with disabilities. The decree also required Wal-Mart to prepare and submit on a quarterly basis a list of all applicants to the Richmond, Missouri location who have complained of discrimination in hiring on the basis of disability during that quarter. The injunctive parts of the decree had a two year term. In addition, Wal-Mart agreed to pay the complainant $300,000.
Kevin Wilemon - 05/27/2008
compress summary