Connect with us


Walmart Hit With Down Syndrome Lawsuit



Walmart Hit

Due of Walmart’s Down syndrome, a lawsuit has been filed. Walmart was sued by a young woman who alleged that she had been subjected to discrimination because of her Down syndrome. The business was ordered to pay her $125 million in damages, but it still refuses to accept responsibility. The EEOC also filed an appeal after being told that it had paid her back earnings in error.

EEOC demands punitive damages of $125 million

Walmart Hit

Recently, Walmart was ordered to pay the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) $125 million in punitive damages. This was said in a lawsuit filed on behalf of Marlo Spaeth, a former Walmart employee with Down syndrome. Prejudgment and tax penalties of $69,000, or $44,758 per, were awarded by a jury.

The problem, according to Gregory Gochanour from the EEOC Regional Attorney, involves Walmart not adjusting the schedule of a worker with a disability. In particular, the EEOC claimed that Spaeth experienced significant difficulty as a result of a new scheduling system that Walmart introduced in late 2014.

Officials from the EEOC claim that Spaeth struggled to get to work on time. She eventually lost her job as a result of her frequent absences. Spaeth’s attendance troubles were made worse by Walmart’s failure to provide modifications that would have improved her scheduling.

Despite earning favourable performance reviews, Spaeth was denied a schedule modification that would have allowed her to arrive on time. After she stepped in, Walmart denied to hire her mother.


The EEOC is appealing the back pay.

In January 2017, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a lawsuit against Walmart Inc. on the grounds that the company had wrongfully terminated a Down syndrome employee. Despite the employee working for Walmart for 16 years, the EEOC contends that Walmart did not provide accommodations for his needs.

A jury decided to impose punitive and compensatory damages of $125,000,000. The jury also awarded front pay interest.

The most prestigious honour ever granted to one person by a federal agency was this one. Massive jury verdicts are intended to punish offenders rather than to enrich plaintiffs.

$125,000,000 in damages were awarded by the jury, but not the punitive sum. Instead, the sum was decreased to $300,000. Consequential damages are not covered by this cap, though.

Jurors were told to look for the simplest answer as well as the most significant legal claim. In this instance, it wasn’t the EEOC.



Spaeth is rehired by the EEOC after losing a lawsuit.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has launched a federal complaint against Walmart Wisconsin. Walmart was accused of discriminating against disabled persons. The lawyers contend that Walmart did not make accommodations for Marlo Spaeth, a long-time sales worker with Down syndrome.

A jury decided to impose punitive penalties totaling more than $125 million. It is the biggest verdict in a case where a single victim was a federal agency. The award, according to Charlotte Burrows (Chair of the EEOC), conveyed a clear message to employers.

By refusing to change an employee’s work schedule to provide him or her greater flexibility, Walmart was judged to have broken the law. However, the ruling caused a backlash from the public, and Spaeth’s case was taken by the EEOC.

Spaeth experienced a sudden change in her schedule as a result of the corporation implementing a computerised scheduling system. It was difficult for her to get sick because of the new shift she had been given. She desired to resume her previous schedule and modify the start and end times. The business, however, declined, claiming that the accommodation was unreasonable.

Walmart’s unwillingness to take accountability

Walmart was sued in Wisconsin for treating disabled women differently. The judge gave her a $300,000 judgement. The business is still debating whether or not to appeal, though.


Down syndrome employee Marlo Spaeth has been employed by the Manitowoc Walmart since 1996. The store introduced a computerised scheduling system in 2014. Spaeth found it difficult to adapt to the timetable modification, which was intended to align client volume with employee levels. Spaeth was disappointed because he couldn’t eat dinner.

Walmart is accused of discriminating against Spaeth by refusing to make a reasonable accommodation for her impairment. She asked Walmart to adjust her hours, but they refused.

Spaeth’s social life changed as a result of her termination. Spaeth frequently took sick days from work. Her new working hours were midday to 4.30 and then 1.30 and 5.30.

Her managers felt that she required greater assistance. She occasionally left early to catch a bus to work.