Wal-Mart Discrimination Suit Dismissed
BENTONVILLE, Ark. -- The Supreme Court yesterday dismissed a case brought by a Wal-Mart Stores employee who claimed the company, based here, had discriminated against her after she was disabled in an on-the-job accident.
The case was reportedly dismissed under Rule 46.1, which provides for dismissals when both parties agree to settle a dispute.
A major point of debate in the case was how far employers under the Americans with Disabilities Act must go to accommodate disabled employees.
The employee, Pam Huber, who still works at Wal-Mart, was injured in April 2001 while employed as an order filler in a Wal-Mart distribution center in Clarksville, Ark. She applied for a different position at equivalent pay, but didn't get the job.
Wal-Mart said in court papers that it hired a more qualified employee. Huber was later given a job at about half the hourly wage she earned as an order filler.
Huber sued in June 2004, arguing that under ADA rules, she only had to be qualified for the equivalent position, not the most qualified, and should have been reassigned to the job with equivalent pay.
The case was reportedly dismissed under Rule 46.1, which provides for dismissals when both parties agree to settle a dispute.
A major point of debate in the case was how far employers under the Americans with Disabilities Act must go to accommodate disabled employees.
The employee, Pam Huber, who still works at Wal-Mart, was injured in April 2001 while employed as an order filler in a Wal-Mart distribution center in Clarksville, Ark. She applied for a different position at equivalent pay, but didn't get the job.
Wal-Mart said in court papers that it hired a more qualified employee. Huber was later given a job at about half the hourly wage she earned as an order filler.
Huber sued in June 2004, arguing that under ADA rules, she only had to be qualified for the equivalent position, not the most qualified, and should have been reassigned to the job with equivalent pay.