Friday, June 24, 2011

Wal-Mart Has Fucked More Women Than You Will Ever Dream About

Wal-Mart Has Fucked More Women Than You Will Ever Dream About

As every day goes on my hatred for the supreme court grows with it. Just look at this latest Supreme Court Ruling

The Supreme Court put the brakes on a massive job discrimination lawsuit against mega-retailer Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., saying sweeping class-action status that could potentially involve hundreds of thousands of current and former female workers was simply too large.

The ruling Monday was a big victory for the nation's largest private employer, and the business community at large.

The high-profile case– perhaps the most closely watched of the high court's term– is among the most important dealing with corporate versus worker rights that the justices have ever heard, and could eventually impact nearly every private employer, large and small.

The thing that most people don't realize about the supreme court is that the "justice" in their title is actually ironic. Sort of like a hipster type of thing.

Fuck every single supreme court judge especially the ones who voted against this for not raising a stink about how awful and corrupt this supreme court is. Because really, how many 5-4 decisions have they've made lately that completely fucked the average American? Oh, this was a 9-0 decision? Well then Fuck everybody even harder then.

Though I can't say I was at all surprised by this latest news piece of fucking the common man. Because it doesn't come as a surprise that capital won yet again against all odds. After citizens united, the court won't even pretend to hear cases with corporate parties involved. They'll just summarily move in favor of the corporation

I'm still not sure how the justification for this is actually that the case was just too large. What the fuck does that even mean? Is it literally "Yeah, widespread sexism and illegal discriminaiton might be an issue... but that it's just way bigger than we can handle so fuck it, let it ride!

Maybe their too large class action lawsuit might not have gotten negged so hard if it lost a few pounds, am I right? Besides, the whole notion that the corporate policy says that they don't discriminate, and so they clearly must not in any shape or form discriminate must be right..

I can't wait for the day that an immovable object meets an impenetrable force. It'll be a day to remember when the supreme court spontaneously collapsed into a black hole as the unconquerable paradox presented itself; a case in which both sides were major multi-trillion dollar multinational corporations.

Faced with the prospect of actually having to decide a case on the merits and dangerously risking the precedent that no matter which side was ruled for, a case would be decided against a corporation, the supreme court was unable to cope and imploded from the strain only to collapse endlessly inward for eternity.

Don't believe me that corporations get a major favoritism?
Though the current Supreme Court has a well-earned reputation for divisiveness, it has been surprisingly united in cases affecting business interests. Of the 30 business cases last term, 22 were decided unanimously, or with only one or two dissenting votes. Conrad said she was especially pleased that several of the most important decisions were written by liberal justices, speaking for liberal and conservative colleagues alike. In opinions last term, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and David Souter each went out of his or her way to question the use of lawsuits to challenge corporate wrongdoing — a strategy championed by progressive groups like Public Citizen but routinely denounced by conservatives as “regulation by litigation.” Conrad reeled off some of her favorite moments: “Justice Ginsburg talked about how ‘private-securities fraud actions, if not adequately contained, can be employed abusively.’ Justice Breyer had a wonderful quote about how Congress was trying to ‘weed out unmeritorious securities lawsuits.’ Justice Souter talked about how the threat of litigation ‘will push cost-conscious defendants to settle.’ ”
Clearly we can't think about making things difficult on companies in this economic climate, can we? Anyone in the country who works for a private entity must now submit to a arbiter paid by said private entity for every kind of civil grievance whatsoever. Sounds pretty awesome, right?

Apparently the best legal protection you can get in the US is to incorporate yourself. This court ruling basically implies that a company can discriminate as they please so long as their official policy claims they do not. As if they would ever write something down that would qualify as discriminatory practices.

Yup, America sure is an awesome place to be... if you're a corporation. Cant I just point this out:
A lower US court ruled that the case could go to trial, but Walmart appealed to the supreme court. If the class action had been accepted it could have set a precedent for gender discrimination at many corporations, with companies such as Microsoft and General Electric writing to the court expressing their concern.
How the fuck is this even legal? The law is totally fucked because those very same assholes who benefit from this are the ones who are writing it.

More to the point, why would you even try to take Wal_Mart to court? I mean, really?
"Hmmm, let me just sue the Pharaoh, supreme ruler of all that exists, for working me overtime, finally justice will be served!"
-a slave
Also annoying is comments like this from the article:
Red Pison
I was against this from the start because while I am for equal rights if a woman cannot do the same workload as a man, then she should not earn as much or more than a man who would have to work twice as hard to pick up her slack. Ladies, you cannot get your cake and eat it too. You want even more special privileges, not equal rights.
June 20, 2011 at 10:44 am | Report abuse | Reply

Yeah, dicks. How about this finding about female Wal-Mart employees:

d) Women have more years employed at Wal-Mart than men overall, in salary
jobs, and in hourly jobs. Women have been working at Wal-Mart longer
than men in the same job, for 97% of jobs with at least 1000 employees in

e) Women have higher performance ratings in hourly jobs than men, on the
average in 2001. The average performance rating is higher for women than
men in the same job, for 75% of hourly jobs with at least 1000 employees
with ratings in 2001.
Male manager said women only made store manager to meet a quota. Fuuuuuuck. That women should be home barefoot and pregnant and women weren't qualified to be managers because men had an extra rib.

In short - Fuck Wal*Mart. Fuck the Supreme Court. Fuck This Gay Earth. Death To America.

That is all.

No comments: