A federal appeals court in San Francisco has “delivered” a verdict against Wal-Mart in the case of a pregnant woman who claimed that the company refused to hire her because she was pregnant. The 9th. Circuit court of Appeals ruled on September 24th. that Jamey Stern of Arizona should be allowed to go after punitive damages from Wal-Mart. This means the company could be exposed to as much as $300,000 in damages if Stern wins her case, which is being handled by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunities Commission. Stern said in the court appearance that a Wal-Mart personnel manager had told her that she was qualified for several job openings at a Wal-Mart in Green Valley, Arizona, and that her pregnancy was not an issue. But several days later, an assistant manager told Stern that she couldn’t be hired because she was pregnant. The court ruled that because Wal-Mart “almost certainly knew” that its conduct was illegal, then Stern can seek punitive damages against the company. Stern has already been awarded a small compensatory damage award for lost pay and interest, but the punitive damages are meant to deter Wal-Mart from discriminating against pregnant applicants in the future.
Want more? Read the next case of Wal-Mart discrimination that took place in Texas….