2. 职称英语
  3. The employment discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart, which the Supreme Co

The employment discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart, which the Supreme Co

游客2023-09-05  48
问题     The employment discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart, which the Supreme Court heard last week, is the largest in American history. If the court rejects this suit, it will send a chilling message that some companies are too big to be held accountable (负有责任的).
    It began in 1999 after Stephanie Odle was fired when she complained of sex discrimination. As Ms. Odle described in sworn testimony, as an assistant manager she discovered that a male employee with the same title and less experience was making $10,000 a year more than her.
    She complained to her boss, who defended the difference by saying the male had a family to support. When she replied that she was having a baby that she needed to support, the supervisor made her provide a personal budget and then gave her a raise closing just one-fifth the gap.
    The plaintiffs (原告) who have brought a class action on behalf of 1.5 million current and former female Wal-Mart employees allege that they, too, faced discrimination in pay and promotion. If Wal-Mart loses, it could owe more than $1 billion in back pay.
    Wal-Mart has tried to end the litigation (诉讼) by arguing that 1.5 million women do not have enough in common to sue for discrimination as a single class under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A federal trial judge said they do. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld that ruling, twice.
    But during oral argument last week, conservative justices and liberals to some degree expressed skepticism: Is there enough "cohesion (一致性)" among the women to justify treating them as a single class?
    A brief by 31 professors of civil procedure explains why the women are a suitable class. Their claims meet the core test: They have in common the question of whether Wal-Mart discriminated against them. Meanwhile, the high cost of litigation compared to the low likely individual recoveries would make it hard for the women to proceed any other way.
    The average wage gap each year for every member of the class is around $1,100, too little to give lawyers an incentive to represent them. The best way to judge their rights efficiently and fairly is by recognizing them as a group. That is the purpose of the class-action rule.
    The case record contains 120 sworn statements describing sex discrimination in pay and promotion but also in the work environment: required company fishing trips where women weren’t included on their male peers’ boat; a supposedly revenge-free system for complaints that led to women being fired. The lower courts ruled that this and other evidence provide compelling reasons for the case to move forward. [br] After Stephanie Odle complained to her boss about the wage gap,______.
选项 A、she still got less payment than the male assistant manager
B、she was moved to a lower position from her previous position
C、the boss came to realize the problem and promised to solve it
D、the supervisor was criticized for treating employees unfairly
答案 A
解析 根据题干中的complained to her boss将本题出处定位到第三段首句。该句提到Odle向老板反映这件事(即第二段末句提到的“和她头衔相同的一位男雇员，经验没她多，一年却比她多挣—万美金”)，接着提到老板给她涨了工资，不过只是—万块的五分之一而已。由此可知，向老板反映并得到涨工资之后，Odle的工资仍然低于那位男雇员，故答案为[A]。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/2986918.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)