After reading the article, it looks exactly like the suit against Walmart is complete gold-digging.
In order to establish discrimination, one would have to show that the hourly wage of a person with x qualifications and y years of experience is different between a female and a male working the same job. None of those claiming gender based discrimination have shown such a thing.
Ruiz paints a very different picture of the opportunities offered women at Wal-Mart. She joined the company straight from college in 1992. "In less than four years, I went from an assistant manager trainee to running my own store," she said. "I'm one of thousands of women who have had a positive experience at Wal-Mart."
Looks like a pretty fast-track career to me. What's the basis of her claim of discrimination?
Simply the fact that she is a woman, from what I can understand of the case.
They're trying to use averages in statistics to prove specifics. Juries sometimes fall for that, but my hope is the SCOTUS isn't that innumerate.