U.S. Accuses Walgreen Drugstore Chain of Racial Bias

[Breeze54]

U.S. Accuses Walgreen of Racial Bias

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/08/business/08walgreen.html?_r=1&ref=washington&oref=slogin


From left, Mark Mills, Bruce Johnson and Martin Ezemma
at a January hearing in Reno, Nev., on accusations of
discrimination at Walgreen.

By BARRY MEIER
Published: March 8, 2007

The Walgreen Company, the nation’s largest drugstore chain, discriminated against thousands of black employees across the country, including managers and pharmacists, according to a class-action lawsuit filed yesterday by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

The agency’s action comes after a lawsuit filed in 2005 against Walgreen by several current and former black employees who said the company made store assignments based on race and gave the plaintiffs jobs in either predominantly black neighborhoods or less-desirable ones.

Walgreen, which is based in Deerfield, Ill., has disputed the accusations in that lawsuit and it said yesterday in a statement that it was disappointed by the agency’s decision to bring its suit. Both actions were filed in United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois in East St. Louis.

“Fairness and equality always have been the cornerstones of our business,” the company said. “We’re the nation’s best-represented retailer in urban areas, and managers of all backgrounds are promoted to senior levels from those locations.”

Walgreen has 5,638 stores in 48 states and Puerto Rico, according to its Web site. It had sales of $47.4 billion in 2006.

Agency officials described the Walgreen case as the biggest discrimination action brought by it in recent years. After more than 20 current and former employees nationwide complained to the agency, the E.E.O.C.’s district offices in St. Louis and Miami conducted an investigation, the agency said in a statement. It said it decided to bring the case after attempts to reach a voluntary settlement were unsuccessful.

Robert G. Johnson, a lawyer in the agency’s St. Louis office, said that it had reviewed an analysis commissioned by plaintiffs’ lawyers that looked at how Walgreen assigned its stores and paid managers.

After doing so, the agency determined that black managers were frequently assigned to poorer-performing stores, which made them less likely to be promoted, he said. It also concluded that discrimination at Walgreen was widespread, institutional and directed at blacks working as managers, pharmacists and trainees.

“Blacks were being paid less,” Mr. Johnson said.

Johnny Tucker, a store manager who is a plaintiff in the private lawsuit, said in a telephone interview that he had spent his entire 21-year career at Walgreen working primarily at stores in black or inner-city neighborhoods.

As a result, he said he realized that he and other black managers were not keeping up with their white counterparts.

“The reason is that we were placed in low-income, low-profit, low-sales locations,” said Mr. Tucker, who was among the employees who complained to the E.E.O.C.

He applauded Walgreen for having stores in inner-city neighborhoods. But he said the company needed to spread the challenges of managing such stores among all its employees, not just black ones. Over the years, he added, he had been held up at gunpoint and threatened with a knife.

“I didn’t live in these neighborhoods, so why was I working there,” Mr. Tucker said.

Walgreen, in its statement issued yesterday, said that it was committed to providing opportunity to all employees “not only because it is the right thing to do but because our business was built on this principle.”

Amy Coopman, one of the plaintiffs’ lawyers suing Walgreen on behalf of Mr. Tucker and several other current and former Walgreen employees, said she was seeking to have it certified as a class action on behalf of all the company’s employees.

The E.E.O.C. action is seeking both money damages for Walgreen employees who have been the subject of discrimination as well as changes in the company practices.

--------------------

[ThomCat]

1. This will be interesting to watch.

It would not have reached this stage if there wasn't substantial evidence. But I'll bet that the white executives honestly think they're not prejudiced. I'm sure they had wonderful rationalizations for why black employees would be happier or better off in the poorer and more dangerous locations.

[Breeze54]

6. Walgreens and Walmart... Class Action Discrimination lawsuits

What companies are next? I'm sure a lot more than that!

[Breeze54]

2. I went to Walgreens the other night

and the woman behind the counter tried(?) to short-change me.
She's not a very pleasant person. Never smiles.
Can't say I blame her. I wouldn't be smiling in that job either.
But she was a real a-hole during the holidays too. Never was friendly.

I guess I'm off topic.

If Walgreens has been discriminating, then they deserve what they get! :grr:
Hopefully it's a real punishment/fine and these men get results and fairness!

And retro-active compensation! And promotions! ;)

[Horse with no Name]

7. I went to one during the holidays when I was in Phoenix

the cashier was too friendly. I forget what I did, but she was grateful that I was polite and didn't get angry at something.
I think someone cut in line or something...it was very trivial. She heard me talk and asked where I was from. In the 3 minutes she checked me out, I learned she was from Oklahoma and married for 25 years to a golf pro and her husband left her...personally I would rather they leave me alone than gush all over the place.:shrug:

[Selatius]

3. The EEOC is not a group to be trifled with.

They know what they're doing.

[MzNov]

4. Walgreens is one of the puke stores whose pharmacists

were refusing to fill birth control prescriptions. That came out a couple of years ago. I've never set foot in that store since.

:grr:

[Breeze54]

8. I have avoided them too and Walmart; for those reasons

but I forgot the other night and my remote broke and they were the only store open.

Please forgive me!! ;)

[Horse with no Name]

5. Good for them for coming forward

Those smaller, lower paying stores are generally the first stores that pharmacists get. By staying with a company, these pharmacists should have been advanced into higher revenue stores.
I bet if you look at the records, that has happened with the white pharmacists.
I hope they get a ton of cash. There is no reason for this other than downright racism.

[Colobo]

9. I've noticed it here in Tampa

The stores in the nice areas (where I live, for example) are predominantly run by white and Asian employees (with usually one or two blacks). The ones in bad areas (the one at E. Fowler Ave., for example) is almost exclusively run by blacks and a few dark skinned Hispanics. In fact, since I've been living over here, I don't remember seeing a white person working at that Walgreens.

[Breeze54]

10. Where I am , it seems like the same woman is always there!

The store is very new (under a yr. old); new building.
I hardly see any workers there, if and when I've gone in there.
Except that same woman cashier!! :rofl:
But I don't recall any people of color working there.
But that doesn't mean they aren't there. It's a very blue town.
I just don't frequent it very often, if at all.
My area has a lot of diversity and I live in the suburbs.
I interact with people of all backgrounds here.

[NMMNG]

11. If Walgreens is found guilty

may they pay thoroughly for their misdeeds.