This piece originally appeared at The Huffington Post:

More bad headlines for Wal-Mart, the sexist employer. The company was nailed again by its own employees--this time in Kentucky.

In Wal-Mart’s Annual Report to shareholders there is a two page note simply called “Legal Proceedings.” In it, the company summarizes “a number of legal proceedings” which, “if adversely decided...may result in liability material to the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.” In addition to the well-known collection of wage and hour ‘off the clock’ class action lawsuits, are the gender discrimination lawsuits, including the massive Dukes v. Wal-Mart case which began 9 years ago. Damages sought by the women in the Dukes case could be so large that Wal-Mart admits, “the Company cannot reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss that may arise from the litigation.”

Less well known is another lawsuit that was originally filed in the summer of 2001, just two months after the Dukes case. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. The lawsuit, EEOC (Janice Smith) v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. was brought by the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on behalf of Janice Smith and all other women who made application or transfer requests since 1995 at the Wal-Mart distribution center in London, Kentucky, and were not hired or transferred into the warehouse positions for which they applied.

The EEOC sought backpay for these women not selected for hire or transfer, and injunctive relief. According to Wal-Mart, the Kentucky complaint charges that the retailer based its hiring decisions on gender---which is a violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights act. Wal-Mart told his investors that it could not “reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss that may arise from this litigation.”

But this week the EEOC helped quantify that loss. The federal agency announced that Wal-Mart had agreed to pay $11.7 million in back wages and compensatory damages, plus its share of employer taxes, and up as much as $250,000 in administration fees.

According to the EEOC, Walmart’s London Distribution Center denied jobs to female applicants from 1998 through February 2005. Wal-Mart hired male entry-level applicants for warehouse positions---but excluded female applicants who were equally or better qualified. Wal-Mart routinely would tell female applicants that order filling positions were not “suitable” for women, and that they hired mostly 18- to 25-year-old men for these positions.

Read the rest of this story ...

From our allies over at Wake Up Walmart:

WakeUpWalmart.com and a coalition of supporters today launched a national week of action against Walmart’s irresponsible sick leave policy.  WakeUpWalmart.com will hold events at 50 Walmart stores across the country to deliver ‘demerits’ and a letter to local store managers calling on Walmart to change its unfair and harmful sick day policy.

Last fall the New York Times article Lack of Sick Days May Worsen Flu Pandemic, exposed Walmart’s track record of giving employees “demerits” that can lead to termination when they call in sick.  A number of workers across the country reported retaliation and termination from Walmart due to illness.

Beatrice Parker, a former greeter at Walmart # 3371 in Charlotte, N.C., felt forced to resign due to Walmart’s sick leave policy after suffering from a bladder infection caused by not being given bathroom breaks on the job.

In a new video released today, Parker describes abuse and age discrimination and asks Walmart CEO Mike Duke, “If you don’t have any or can’t have any concern for the way I was treated in this Walmart, please have some for the people who work there, especially the older people.” You can watch the video on the right of this post.

Walmart’s policies and actions create a working environment where employees feel they are faced with a choice between spreading the flu and keeping their job.  Walmart deserves public demerits for sick leave policies that put the public at risk and make its employees sicker.

The Demerit Walmart program is supported by leading advocacy groups such as the MomsRising.org and the Labor Partnership for Working Families.

“MomsRising is extremely concerned by news reports that Walmart associates risk receiving demerits (which can lead to termination) for taking earned paid sick days,” said MomsRising Executive Director Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner.  “Such a practice is a public health hazard and a threat to the economic security of Walmart associates and their families. We call on Walmart to publicly respond to these charges and immediately end any ongoing practice of issuing demerits .”

Walmart is America’s largest private employer and sets the standard for workplaces in the retail industry.  Walmart associates should not be afraid of losing their jobs simply because they are too sick to help customers.  Walmart can and should live up to the highest possible workplace standards. 

Last month, Walmart Senior VP Ken Senser issued a company-wide memo on flu season ‘preparedness.’ His memo claims “the wellbeing of our associates… is a top priority,” and offers guidance on how to “plan ahead” in case the flu virus strikes.

Be prepared for illness: know the company’s sick day policy, the memo advises.

Of course, there is a catch-22 here.  Walmart’s sick leave policy boils down to a simple formula: if you get sick, you find trouble.  Each sick day taken by a Walmart employee results in a “point” (demerit), enough of which will get you fired. 

Walmart’s sick policy results, as this week’s NLC report shows, in a culture that pressures employees to work while ill.  This isn’t just grossly unfair, it’s unbelievably stupid.  Given the rapidly expanding H1N1 pandemic, steering sick workers out of bed and into the aisles is a catalyst for spreading sickness among employees and customers alike.

Which genius in Walmart management could possibly think this is a good idea?  Ken Senser.

Here’s a little background on Walmart’s spymaster turned health “advocate.” Before Mr. Senser was concerned with influenza, he was spying on employees and activists alike as Walmart’s security chief. His crowning acheivement came when company operatives planted a long-haired employee in an “Up Against the Wal” activist meeting.  The bugged employee transmitted audio from the meeting to a surveillance van circling eerily outside.

Senser’s department also spies on employees who are suspected of violating company policy.  His investigators have tailed executives across Central America, for example, to out them publicly for extramarital affairs.  This is the guy entrusted with safeguarding the wellbeing of Walmart’s 1.4 million U.S. employees.  Bizarre.

His de facto role, it would seem, is safeguarding Walmart’s $13 billion in yearly profits. By any means necessary.

Senser is known for bare-knuckle enforcement of policy.  Unfortunately, Walmart’s rigid attendance rules are not productive for anyone.  Not even Walmart’s top shareholders.  It’s simply a recipe for spreading disease among employees and members of their communities. 

At least some government officials are looking out for Walmart’s employees.  HR 3991 could cause Walmart to reconsider its policy by requiring large employers to give 5 days paid leave to sick employees. 

It might well be called the “Walmart Swine Flu Bill"--with policy enforcers like Ken Senser, Walmart is unlikely to make productive changes to its sick policies until regulations force it to.