No Commonality Among Employment Decisions Means No Class Action.

In Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes (U.S. Sup. Ct.; June 20, 2011) 131 S.Ct. 2541, [180 L.Ed.2d 374], current and past employees of Wal-Mart sought injunctive relief, punitive damages and back pay for themselves as well as 1.5 million female employees, alleging discrimination against women under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  A federal district court certified a class action and was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.  The United States Supreme Court noted the crux of a Title VII inquiry is the reason for a particular employment decision, and that, in this class action they “wish to sue about literally millions of employment decisions at once.”  The court concluded the action should not have been certified as a class because it will be impossible to provide “a common answer to the crucial question ‘why was I disfavored.’ ”    The Court was not impressed with a sociologist’s analysis concluding Wal-Mart’s corporate culture made it vulnerable to gender bias as the “only evidence of a general discrimination.  Quoting from the dissenting opinion, the Court said the women “have little in common but their sex and this lawsuit.”  The Court reversed the decision to certify the action as a class because litigation was necessary to resolve numerous issues relating to individual claimants.