Wal-Mart is being forced to pay a quarter of a million dollars to a pharmacy employee they fired because she had a disability from a gun shot wound. Wal-Mart violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by firing Glenda Allen for her disability. It follows the long history of Wal-Mart's discrimination against people with disabilities, including firing Tom Hampton for coming to work in his wheelchair.
Here's the press release from The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission:
BALTIMORE – Retail giant Wal-Mart will pay $250,000 and furnish significant injunctive relief to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today. The EEOC had charged that Wal-Mart failed to accommodate and then fired a long-time pharmacy technician who suffered a disability resulting from a gunshot wound.In its suit (1:06-cv-2514), filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, the EEOC said that Glenda D. Allen had been employed with the Arkansas-based company as a pharmacy technician since July 1993, most recently at its store in Abingdon, Md. As a result of a gunshot wound sustained during the course of a robbery at a different employer in 1994, Allen suffered permanent damage to her spinal cord and other medical issues, including an abnormal gait requiring the use of a cane as an assistive device.
The agency charged that despite Allen’s successful job performance throughout her employment, Wal-Mart declared her incapable of performing her position with or without a reasonable accommodation, denied her a reasonable accommodation, and then unlawfully fired her because of her disability. The lawsuit settled shortly after the court denied Wal-Mart’s motion for summary judgment on March 10, and partially granted the EEOC’s cross-motion for summary judgment finding that Wal-Mart had no undue hardship defense.
Disability discrimination violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The EEOC filed suit after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement.
Commenting on her case, Allen said, “After beating all the odds -- surviving my injury when not expected to survive, walking again when told that I would never walk again, and returning to work where I received excellent performance evaluations and consistent merit increases -- I was devastated to have the rug pulled out from underneath me simply because Wal-Mart could ‘no longer accommodate my handicap needs.’ I am hopeful that this settlement will make Wal-Mart take a closer look at its policies and practices with respect to the employment of individuals with disabilities so that what happened to me will not happen to someone else.”
Along with the monetary payment, the consent decree settling the suit requires Wal-Mart to:* Observe the ADA and post a notice to employees on the ADA;
* Have all salaried supervisors and managers of its Abingdon stores and in pharmacies in the district that includes Abingdon complete training on the ADA with annual refresher training for the next three years; and
* Submit a list of all employees at the Abingdon store and the pharmacies in the Abingdon district who have been denied reasonable accommodation and/or complained that they have been unlawfully denied reasonable accommodation or terminated because of their disabilities.The EEOC will monitor the company’s compliance with the decree for the next three years.
“When an employer is faced with an employee who has difficulty performing certain tasks because of his or her disability, it cannot sit back passively and then turn around and fire the employee because of its own failure to accommodate,” said EEOC Regional Attorney Jacqueline McNair. “Federal law mandates that employers engage in a good-faith interactive dialogue with the qualified disabled employee to identify potential reasonable accommodations.”
This is the EEOC’s second settlement this year with Wal-Mart concerning the ADA. In April 2008, the EEOC settled a lawsuit concerning Wal-Mart’s failure to hire an individual with cerebral palsy in Richmond, Mo., (EEOC v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. 04-cv-0076 (W.D. Mo. April 18, 2008) for $300,000 and injunctive relief. According to its web site (www.walmart.com), “Today, 7,357 Wal-Mart stores and Sam’s Club locations in 14 mar
kets employ more than 2 million associates, serving more than 179 million customers a year.”During Fiscal Year 2007, disability discrimination charges filed with the EEOC under the ADA increased 14% to 17,734 -- the highest level in a decade. Approximately one out of every five private sector charge filings with the EEOC contains an allegation of disability discrimination.
Posted by Taylor - June 10, 2008 10:49 AM - In The News
Well guess what apparently they haven't! I was just sent home yesterday because I couldn't pull a 100 lb skid because of my weight restriction!
Posted by Carissa - August 6, 2008 10:52 AM