Case: EEOC v. Walmart

On August 3, 2020, the EEOC brought a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky against Walmart alleging sex discrimination. Specifically, the complaint alleges that Walmart subjected two named plaintiffs and a class of female grocery workers to a physical ability test that disproportionately impacted female applications by denying them employment opportunities on the basis of their sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The lawsuit, though brought against Walmart, Inc., specifically references the conduct of the Walmart store located in London, Kentucky.

Prior to the filing of this lawsuit, the plaintiffs filed their charges of discrimination with the EEOC. The EEOC found reasonable cause to determine that Walmart’s actions subjected a class of women to sex-based discrimination based on Walmart’s use of a physical ability test. The EEOC then issued Letters of Determination to Walmart with this finding and invited Walmart to join the EEOC in informal methods of resolution to remedy the discriminatory practices and provide appropriate relief to the plaintiffs. However, Walmart did not provide a resolution that the EEOC found acceptable, and the EEOC issued a Notice of Failure of Conciliation advising Walmart of the failed resolution. The EEOC then filed suit against Walmart.

The complaint alleges that since 2010, Walmart used a selection procedure in grocery distribution centers nationwide that required grocery orderfiller applicants to achieve a competitive score on a physical abilities test. The physical abilities test was not necessary to the performance of the grocery orderfiller job function. Because women tended to receive less than competitive scores on the physical abilities test, Walmart’s use of this physical abilities test disparately and negatively affected women in the hiring process for grocery orderfillers.

The EEOC asked the court for: (a) a permanent injunction preventing Walmart from using physical abilities tests to hire for grocery orderfiller positions; (b) a permanent injunction against any hiring practices, such as employment tests, that have a disparate and discriminatory impact on women; (c) an order requiring Walmart to institute new training, policies and programs that provide equal employment opportunities based on sex and that ensure that its operations are free from employment practices that discriminate on women based on sex; (d) an order requiring Walmart to compensate the plaintiffs to eradicate the effects of the discriminatory employment practices; (e) an order granting further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper; and (f) an order awarding EEOC costs for the lawsuit.

By the time that the lawsuit was filed, the parties had already agreed on terms of a settlement. On August 3, 2020 the parties filed a joint motion for entry of a consent decree and on September 9, 2020, Judge Karen Caldwell granted the motion and approved the consent decree.

The consent decree applies to all Walmart grocery distribution centers. The decree provides injunctive relief, including requiring Walmart to cease use and refrain from using for five years a physical abilities test for hiring orderfillers at grocery distribution centers. Walmart is also forbidden from engaging in employment practices that discriminate on the basis of sex and from engaging in employment practices that discriminate on the basis of involvement in the EEOC proceedings, the proceedings on the claim against Walmart, or any other proceeding under Title VII.

The consent decree also provides significant monetary relief. The decree ordered Walmart to pay $20,000,000.00 into a Qualified Settlement Fund as part of the resolution, to be distributed to eligible claimants at the sole discretion of the EEOC. Eligible claimants include women who applied for the position of orderfiller at a Walmart grocery distribution center between February 1, 2020 and the time Walmart ceased use of the physical abilities test and who did not score competitively on the physical abilities test, and therefore did not move forward in the hiring process for the position of orderfiller. The decree also shifts the costs of a claims administrator up to $250,000.00 to Walmart, allowing a mutually agreed upon claims administrator to oversee the claims process and payments to eligible claimants. The consent decree does award the EEOC costs for the action.

Further, the consent decree mandates certain training and notification requirements. The decree required Walmart to provide training to employees who have hiring or supervisory responsibilities for grocery orderfillers regarding the terms of the consent decree including the cessation of the physical abilities test, clear and accurate information about the grocery orderfiller job requirements and qualifications, and information on what constitutes unlawful employment practice under Title VII. Walmart was also required to certify compliance with certain aspects of the consent decree in writing to the EEOC.

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky retains jurisdiction over the matter for two years, through September 9, 2022. The case remains ongoing.