According to John Dicker's The United States of Wal-Mart, everybody's favorite retailer is sued, on average, 13 times each day. This one, however, strikes me as more serious than most. My source is
today's Boston Globe:
Nine minority customers say they were racially profiled while shopping at a Wal-Mart store in Avon.
In a lawsuit filed in US District Court in Boston yesterday, the consumers alleged they were followed, searched, humiliated, and in some cases, detained by greeters at the store after entering the retail center in 2002 or 2003....
Wal-Mart spokesman Marty Heires said the company investigated the cases and found no evidence of discrimination.
''Despite that, we did reinforce our zero tolerance for discrimination with all of our associates in the store," he said. ''Part of the greeters' role is to watch out for shoplifters."
Why do I think this is trouble? First, look at who's filing it:
The lawsuit, brought by one white consumer and nine minorities, including three African-Americans, several West Indians, and a Mexican shopper, alleges that Wal-Mart employees illegally detained the minorities until police arrived and searched bags or stopped them as they were leaving.
[The white customer was shopping with African Americans.] I am sure this is not the kind of diversity Wal-Mart had in mind when it wrote its section on diversity at the Wal-Mart Facts web site. This makes their bragging look emptier than usual.
More important is this line from the AP account of the lawsuit:
In December, the shoppers offered to settle the case for $400,000, according to the lawsuit. Wal-Mart offered to enter into private mediation with the shoppers, but did not make a settlement offer.
Wal-Mart has a blanket no-settlement policy when it comes to lawsuits. As the Wal-Mart Litigation Project explains:
Wal-Mart is very reluctant to settle cases out-of-court. It is folly to think, "Oh, they're a big company, they'll settle." The founder of Wal-Mart, Sam Walton, established the company policy of fighting lawsuits and it remains the policy today. Wal-Mart settles cases only after prolonged court proceedings (called discovery) make it clear that the company was at fault and the plaintiff has sustained serious injuries and will appear to the jury as a likeable person. Settlements are usually small compared to similar injuries in other cases where a corporation is a defendant.
Private mediation would likely have cost the company something otherwise they would have fought it like they do all cases. The offer certainly makes the claim that the company investigated the cases and found no evidence of discrimination look like a lie.
At some point in the last few weeks I wrote in this space that I don't think Wal-Mart is a racist company. That theory is certainly going to be tested if this suit gets the press it deserves.
JR