Legal Blog:  Race Discrimination Still Black and White in Michigan

Wal-Mart has, unsurprisingly, been the target of more lawsuits than one can count over the years. The company’s treatment of it workers and “save money at all costs” mentality has resulted in a flood of legal challenges ranging from single plaintiff suits to multi-million dollar class actions. Dukes v. Wal-Mart is of course one large example (the largest class action in American history, actually), as are the myriad wage/hour/overtime class actions the company faces.

Just as important as those large class actions, however, are the countless suits filed by individual plaintiffs – the tiny David trying to win justice over Wal-Mart’s Goliath. We at Wal-Mart Watch will be focusing on one of these stories each week, highlighting those cases that warrant further attention because of the light each sheds in its own way on how Wal-Mart does business.

In February of 2007, Daniel Bajor was employed at a Wal-Mart in Warren, MI – about an hour away from Lake Erie.  According to Bajor, who is white, he was hired as a member of the custodial staff, working the midnight shift on a team that was 55% Black.  During his eight month tenure, Bajor witnessed fellow employees steal from the store on several occasions and even work while intoxicated, only to receive verbal reprimand for their actions.  These slaps on the wrist were a far cry from the company’s policy of mandatory termination in both instances.

But on October 5, 2007 when Bajor took three unauthorized breaks (to cope with a lingering illness) that totaled one hour off the clock, he was unable to benefit from such lax enforcement of company policy.  Instead, he found himself severely sanctioned – first suspended and later fired, both of which occurred over the course of four days.  Having seen several Black co-workers get away with far more egregious violations of company policy in a store where Blacks comprised nearly two-thirds of the management team, Bajor decided to file a Title VII complaint for a wrongful discharge.

Given that the population of Black citizens in Warren is only 2.67% (and a mere 1.3% in the neighboring town), the high percentage of Black management at the Wal-Mart is stands out at first glance.  It is underscored when compared to the company’s national average of Black employees comprising only 12.2% of its management teams.  But these disproportions do not seem particularly alarming until a case such as Bajor’s (that amounts to merciless punishments against white workers) manifests itself.  Regardless of whether one defines racism as prejudice and violent acts or a system of advantages based on race, the scenario at the Warren Wal-Mart leaves little room for interpretation. 

Bajor has looked to the arbitrary enforcement of policies and the fact that he was replaced by Black custodians and labeled this an instance of “reverse racism.” (A discussion regarding the definition of racism and the appropriateness of the phrase “reverse racism,” however, is not the purpose of this forum.) It is under this notion that Bajor is seeking damages.  Nevertheless, this is further evidence of Wal-Mart’s refusal to take responsibility for the actions of its managers.  As a corporation, Wal-Mart has a duty to ensure that its agents adhere to the law or find itself subject to legal retaliation.  And considering the slew of Title VII cases pending against the corporation (over 50 filed this year), Wal-Mart has demonstrated that apathy (rather than proactive measures) is its preferred means of dealing with the issue.

Check out the complaint here.

Posted by Joel Nezianya on Wednesday, August 13, 2008