Making money, of course......

Walmart gives it's customers what they want. They hire people at a set wage that the new hires agree to accept. They promote people on merit. Any woman who wanted a promotion had to earn it. Unfortunately for too many people, they couldn't measure up so they sue. By suing and winning they get a few bucks and the lawyers get millions. You and I pay for it in higher prices, lower stock values, and smaller bonuses for the rest of employees.

Now we know the real crime!

P.s a woman I know who used worked for Walmart joined a class action suit and won. She received a check for 25$.

 No, really. 25$ !

What Is Walmart's Crime? - William L. Anderson - Mises Daily

The Supreme Court's recent Walmart decision has stirred a hornet's nest at the New York Times. Indeed, what else can one expect from that paper but the belief that it would be a very good thing for lawyers and the government to loot one of the country's most successful businesses?

Yet, as I read an attack op-ed written by Nelson Lichtenstein, a professor of history at the University of California, Santa Barbara, I have to ask myself just what crime the NYT believes Walmart committed in the first place?

The charge was discrimination against women, and when feminists, racialists, and environmentalists make any charge against an American business, the NYT never fails to take their side in knee-jerk fashion. In fact, as the newspaper's editorial laments, the alleged actual damages to individuals were pretty small (maybe about $1,000), but claiming that all women who worked (or had worked) at Walmart after a certain year were victims of discrimination turned this whole thing into a multi-billion-dollar payout.

(Not surprisingly, the NYT's favorite class of lawyers, the plaintiffs' bar, would have had a small group of individuals receive hundreds of millions of dollars apiece while the women they represented wouldn't have got much at all. This is the NYT's version of "justice.")