Making the Case for Women's Rights at Wal-Mart

Betty Dukes is no Erin Brockovich. A middle-aged, African-American woman who thought sex discrimination was something unseemly and describes herself as a "preacher of the Gospel," Dukes -- who is currently employed as a 'greeter' at the Wal-Mart in Pittsburg, California -- is nevertheless poised to head a group of 1.6 million women in the largest civil rights class-action suit in history -- Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

A newly published book by journalist Liza Featherstone is Selling Women Short: The Landmark Battle for Workers' Rights at Wal-Mart (Basic Books), a chronicle, from its inception to date, of the pending sex-discrimination lawsuit against the largest private employer in the U.S.

BTW recently had the opportunity to talk to Featherstone about her book, which presents both the political and personal aspects of this landmark case, as well as an in-depth discussion of workers' rights, and women's rights, in this country and abroad. Selling Women Short is an absorbing read about many ordinary women who work hard for low wages and no glory but simply want "what's fair." They are taking on a business model, Featherstone argues, that "has completely transformed the retail industry with a single-minded focus on giving the customer the lowest possible price." A business goal that, she writes, results in "profits and low prices [coming] at a terrible human cost."

The suit, originally filed in San Francisco's federal district court in June 2001 for California Wal-Mart employees only, was gradually expanded to permit the gathering of evidence and documents from any woman nationwide who began working for Wal-Mart after December 26, 1998. Each extension of the scope of the trial was considered a victory for the employees.

In June 2004, Wal-Mart suffered a major legal setback when a judge ruled that there was enough evidence of possible systematic discrimination, in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, for the case to be certified as a class action. Thus, 1.6 million current and former female employees of Wal-Mart stores nationwide were all included in the historic Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Wal-Mart is appealing the decision and a ruling on the appeal is likely in spring 2005.

Featherstone worked on Selling Women Short for two years, completing it in summer 2004, after the landmark ruling by the federal district court. "Wal-Mart has been on my radar for a long time, as I'm a writer interested in labor issues," Featherstone told BTW. "Their reputation as a low-wage, anti-union employer makes any case against them big news. I was intrigued by the opportunity, which the lawsuit provided, to get a closer look at the company. You can really learn a lot about companies from the documents that they're compelled to show in lawsuits. They would never volunteer that information to a journalist. I was also really curious about these women -- who would they be, who would stand up to the world's most powerful retailer?"

Featherstone was able to interview many of the women involved in the lawsuit. "Workers not involved with the suit," she said, "were sometimes very afraid and did not want their names used. They didn't have the protection against reprisals that the lawsuit guarantees."

It was more difficult to interview representatives of Wal-Mart. Featherstone said that they were definitely not interested in cooperating with the book and usually told her they couldn't say anything because of the lawsuit. Although, she noted, Wal-Mart employees at all levels, including corporate representatives, were always friendly and polite to her.

Wal-Mart does have a reputation as a friendly and polite business, and it is this face that the company emphasizes in its TV commercials. One features "Wal-Mart district manager Margaret" who notes, "It's not easy to have a family and a career. But my company makes it a lot easier. My company takes family very seriously." In another spot, a middle-aged African-American woman talks about the great opportunities Wal-Mart has afforded her and how she urged her own daughter to apply for a job there. Now they are both part of the "Wal-Mart family."

Dukes is quoted in the book as having said, "I want to work for the Wal-Mart on the TV, because it's the real world when you get to my store, and it's hell on wheels."

Featherstone said that she doesn't think that the similarities between the woman in the second commercial and lead plaintiff Dukes is purely coincidental. " [The lawsuit] has definitely had an impact on Wal-Mart and the way it is presenting itself to the public. Some changes have been made in personnel practices that seem to have resulted from the charges of sex discrimination. But the reality for most female employees hasn't changed. Women make up 72 percent of Wal-Mart's hourly workforce, but only 34 percent of its managers are women. The few male cashiers make an average of $14,525, while the average female cashier makes $13,831. The average wage for men [in 2001] was $8.33, for women $8.05. Over 40 percent of workers in management training programs are women, but only 14 percent of store managers are women."

In Selling Women Short, Featherstone describes how Wal-Mart has effectively created an image of a benevolent, charitable, patriotic, and moral company: Although 85 percent of products sold in Wal-Mart are made overseas, its effective message is Wal-Mart is America.

"The mythology of the store is tremendously appealing to people," Featherstone said, "tapping into a desire to believe that their work is meaningful and that their store stands for family values. In reality the company's practices are directly opposed to the needs of real families: It doesn't pay workers enough to support their families. Hard work is not rewarded, at least according to the testimony of all these women. The company is single-mindedly devoted to profits, regardless of the health or well being of any employees."

Wal-Mart, the embodiment of the American dream, is affording few of its employees the opportunity to be financially secure, said Featherstone. About half of all Wal-Mart employees cannot afford the company's health plan.

"Many people have sworn that employees are given Food Stamp and Medicare forms by the company. California spends about $86 million a year in public assistance to Wal-Mart employees, according to a university study. Poor people work at Wal-Mart and poor people shop there," said Featherstone. "According to Al Zack, who retired as vice president for Strategic Programs at the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, 'Sam Walton's real genius [was appealing to the poor.] He figured out how to make money off poverty. He located his first stores in poor rural areas and discovered a real market. The only problem with this business model is, it needs more poverty to grow.' The company is solving this problem by creating more bad jobs overseas."

When asked if, considering all of the negative aspects of Wal-Mart, winning Dukes v. Wal-Mart would accomplish anything for the workers, she emphatically answered, "Yes. It would be wonderful. It would show everyone that people can make a difference by standing up to Wal-Mart and would encourage people who are fighting Wal-Mart on other fronts -- trying to organize unions or trying to make Wal-Mart pay decently. I think that seeing these women be successful in forcing Wal-Mart to abide by the laws of our country would be very encouraging to other people who are trying to do the same."--Nomi Schwartz