The Case of Joseph Casias versus Wal-Mart Corporation

Depending on the current situation, it may be difficult for some administrators to decide to retire an employee. Today, many states have adopted a casual employment law, with the exception of employees who have contracts, even if there is no reason to dismiss employees. According to Erickson (2008), "The grounds for arbitrary employment are the basis for employers to dismiss employees without being sued.The principle is a statement signed by employees and employers at the time of employment Withdrawing without notice, the employer can dismiss employees at any time for legal reasons. "

In November 2009, Joseph Cassis was fired from Walmart of Battle Creek, Michigan for medical marijuana. Casias is suffering from inoperable brain tumor and cancer In 2009, his oncologist suggested that he attempt to smoke marijuana after he passed the Michigan Medicine Marijuana Act in 2008. Wal-Mart spokesperson Greg Rossiter said Wal-Mart's policy is to stop employees taking specific prescription medications and believe that the policy is in compliance with the law It was. In 2010, Cassis, representative of the American Civil Liberties Union, sued Wal-Mart and dismissed the case. In 2012, the US Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals maintained this ruling.

At Caias v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 80 The US District Court for the Michigan states that employees tested for positive medical marijuana are dismissed for Wal-Mart and illegal dismissal The 82 Medical Cannabis Act judging that it did not bring up a lawsuit merely provides a positive defense against domestic criminal prosecution or other disadvantageous litigation, not regulating private employment . "This will completely deviate from the general rules of general employment in Michigan" 85 In the next year, the United States District Court for the Michigan District Court ruled the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

USA: Wal-Mart v. Dukes, 564 The United States (2011) is the case of the US Supreme Court. This case is Dukes vs. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc 9th Circuit Court. In one appeal, the Supreme Court has abolished the district court 's decision to prove plaintiff group litigation with a 5-4 ruling. This includes 1.6 million women currently working or working at the Wal-Mart store, including plaintiff Betty Dukes. Current Wal-Mart employees Dukes et al. Argued that there is a gender difference between salary and promotion policies and practices of Wal-Mart stores. If the action of the defendant raises a class action for relief under an injunction and can file a class action in search of compensation, the court heard the rules of Federal Civil Procedure Code 23 (b) (2) I agreed to do.