Wal-Mart was founded by Sam Walton in 1962; it is an international retail outlet that runs several discount department stores. It’s an American public cooperation operating discount stores, supercentres, and neighborhood markets. It has been reported that Wal-Mart is not in line with Equal Employment Opportunity Committee regulations, due to diversity, there are cases where employees are discriminated, by age, sex, disability, religion, or even their race. Discrimination thus refers to a situation whereby individuals especially in the workplace are treated unfairly due to the mentioned demographic characteristics (Ackman, 2006).
Several cases have been brought forward to claim that Wal-Mart indeed discriminated against employees on such demographic factors mentioned as above and especially on gender grounds, most of which were determined in courts. For instance, in Bentonville, Ark discount store chain, women raised concerns that they were not getting promotions and were being paid less as compared to men in the same jobs, the plaintiff further claimed that 70% of the workforce is made up of women but hardly one-third hold managerial posts, the case is still pending. A similar suit was made in 2003 by US (San Francisco) women working at Wal-Mart. Male always have privileges and are not severely punished as compared to women. Cindy Stem, a worker of Wal-Mart at Covington in Washington realized that there was unequal treatment of women of all ages. In my view, these moral complain brought forth by women are justified because what the organization is doing is contrary to provisions in Equal Employment Opportunity Committee (EEOC) regulations and for this reason, women deserve to win such cases by providing solid evidence.
The financial implications associated with such lawsuits are enormous. The organization might lose the trust it has built with its customers and once the name is tarnished, then consumers will not associate with it which will jeopardize the sale volumes. More importantly, the business will e compelled to pay a fine in form of damages to the plaintiff if the cases are ruled in favor of the theme. On the same line, Walmart will incur extra expenses in hiring lawyers and advocates to defend it.
To address discriminations that may arise due to these demographic factors, organizations must strive to follow laid down regulations and guidelines concerning employees (Ackman, 2006). In addition, the organization opts to establish ethical statements that will guide it although as well as having a committee in place that will be addressing such issues once they are raised.
It is no doubt that the manner with which Robinson’s male workmates behaved was unacceptable and for this reason, the management opts to take necessary action to prevent it because it was an act of sexual harassment and discrimination which is not in line with regulations in EEOC. Although workers are allowed to post a picture in their place of work, there is a need to clearly define the kinds of pictures to be posted so that they do not disturb other co-workers. following the channels within any organization, such problems need to be solved by those involved but when things seem to hit a snug, then there is a need to involve those in higher authority within the organization.
Although section six does not mention sexual harassment while prohibiting sex discrimination, the former in itself amounts to the latter since it is unfair treatment of women. For this reason, even if the manager will admit that it was morally wrong for Robinson’s co-workers to do what they did, I will not agree with him if he asserts that what was done was not illegal.
According to Boatright, 2009 even though Robinson was not denied other privileges such as wages, she was offended. It is worth noting that all employees do have the right not to be offended and there is a need for all employees to be given equal chances to adequately complete tasks and duties bestowed to them. Offensive gestures especially the postings interfered with her ability to execute her duties. The moral rights of workers should not be deprived at all.
It is worth noting that it may seem the posting of the sign ‘men only’ had a good intention but it turn out to be self-defeating as it was prejudiced against Robinson together with her female counterparts. Considering here the posting was made, a ship-fitter trailer where individuals g to receive instruction, such a posting is both morally and legally wrong. Since both males and female workers in the company, the posting restricted the movement of women hence interfering with how work is carried out (Boatright, 2009).
From the review of sex discrimination, it is evident that at any given time, the organization will have a workforce that is diverse in several ways. It will only be rational for them to put in place measures that will help them, be in line with regulations in EEOC.
References
Ackman, D. (2006). “Wal-Mart and Sex Discrimination by the Numbers”. Web.
Boatright, J. (2009). Ethics and the Conduct of Business. New York: Prentice Hall.