Wal-Mart Coughs Up $250K in Pharmacy Discrimination Case

In the summer of 1993, Glenda Allen landed a job as a pharmacist with a Wal-Mart in Abingdon, Maryland. All of her employment records indicate that she was doing an excellent job during her first year on the job. Her career arc was on the way up.

Then she went out and got herself shot.

While working for a different employer in 1994, Allen was injured by a gunshot during the course of a robbery.

Allen suffered permanent damage to her spinal cord and other medical issues, including an abnormal gait requiring the use of a cane as an assistive device.

Presumably following a period of therapy and recovery, Ms. Allen sought to resume her career as a pharmacist. Wal-Mart, on the other hand, apparently had other ideas.

Wal-Mart felt that Ms. Allen was no longer able to do her job - even with reasonable accommodations made to the work area. The retail giant offered her no accommodations and proceeded to fire her. It's worth noting that Ms. Allen was not a quadriplegic - she was ambulatory, albeit with assistance.

Commenting on her case, Allen said, "After beating all the odds -- surviving my injury when not expected to survive, walking again when told that I would never walk again, and returning to work where I received excellent performance evaluations and consistent merit increases -- I was devastated to have the rug pulled out from underneath me simply because Wal-Mart could 'no longer accommodate my handicap needs.'

Allen sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Yesterday, after a protracted legal battle, and after having lost a motion for summary judgment, Wal-Mart settled for $250,000.

In addition to agreeing to pay Ms. Allen $250,000, Wal-Mart also agreed to:

• post notices about the ADA in their stores
• have supervisors go through periodical ADA training
• submit a list of other employees who have requested and not received reasonable accommodations.
  

We've all been to Wal-Mart - a retail superstore selling everything from pillar to post where merchandise is stacked to the ceiling. There very well may be jobs at Wal-Mart that a person with a spinal cord injury can't do.

Pharmacist isn't one of them.

It would certainly be possible to modify a work area to better suit the needs of someone in a wheelchair. I'm assuming (since Allen is at least somewhat ambulatory) that she would have no difficulty handling the product; the two prescriptions I filled yesterday would be measured in ounces, not pounds.

One might be tempted to partially excuse Wal-Mart based on the age of the claim. Back in 1994, employers looked at the ADA as the monster in the closet, a tempest that, if let loose, might cost untold millions.

They shouldn't hold that view today. And they shouldn't be still fighting the case of a person who is partially paralyzed, is ambulatory with assistance, who received good reviews, and who wants to continue to pursue her professional dream.

Accommodated worksites benefit everyone. Wal-Mart should know better. And I'm sure that any accommodation for Ms. Allen would have been a bargain compared to the $250 thousand, not to mention the years of legal fees.

Allen hopes the case will help others down the road.

"I am hopeful that this settlement will make Wal-Mart take a closer look at its policies and practices with respect to the employment of individuals with disabilities so that what happened to me will not happen to someone else."