Walmart Paid $65 Million Because It Wouldn't Let Cashiers Sit Down

In 2018, retail giant Walmart agreed to pay $65 million to settle a class-action lawsuit brought by nearly 100,000 California cashiers who argued they should be allowed to sit down while working. The case, which had dragged on for almost a decade, centered on a question that might seem absurd to anyone outside the United States: should workers who stand in one spot all day be given a chair?

The Lawsuit That Started It All

The case, Brown et al. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (Case No. 5:09-cv-03339), was filed in June 2009 by former Walmart employees Kathy Williamson and Nisha Brown in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. They alleged that Walmart violated a California wage order, originally adopted in 1911, which states that employees "shall be provided with suitable seats when the nature of the work reasonably permits the use of seats."

Walmart fought the lawsuit aggressively for nearly a decade. The company argued that the nature of cashier work did not reasonably permit sitting, claiming that employees needed to stand in order to greet customers, look inside shopping carts, and stock nearby shelves. Walmart even argued that seated cashiers would be less efficient, that customers preferred standing cashiers, and that providing seating would cause a "significant loss of revenue."

The $65 Million Settlement

In October 2018, Walmart finally agreed to a preliminary settlement of $65 million, making it the largest settlement ever recorded under California's Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), a state law first passed in 2004 that allows employees to sue employers on behalf of the state for labor code violations.

Under PAGA's structure, the state of California collected 75 percent of the settlement funds, while the remaining 25 percent was split among the roughly 99,000 eligible cashiers. Class members received approximately $4 per pay period they had worked as a Walmart cashier since 2008, with those who had worked the entire class period receiving around $1,000.

U.S. District Judge Edward Davila initially rejected the first version of the settlement because it gave Walmart "total authority" to remove the seats after two years. A revised agreement was approved in December 2018, stipulating that Walmart could only remove seats if they led to "increased injuries or accidents" or harmed "the quality and effectiveness of the cashier's overall job performance." The settlement received final approval on March 28, 2019.

The Pilot Seating Program

Beyond the financial payout, Walmart agreed to implement a pilot seating program for front-end cashiers at California stores. Under the revised terms, the company was required to provide seats to cashiers without workers having to request them, consistent with an employer's affirmative duty under the wage order.

However, the story didn't end there. Cashiers later alleged that Walmart ignored the terms of the settlement, with investigators visiting 45 randomly selected stores and finding "virtually no seats and virtually no seated cashiers." Workers claimed the company continued to require a doctor's note to obtain a seat, even for pregnant cashiers. Ultimately, a federal judge ruled that the cashiers failed to establish a clear violation of the settlement terms.

California's Suitable Seating Law

California's suitable seating requirement traces its roots back to 1911, when it was originally adopted to protect women working in retail. The law was expanded and amended multiple times over the following century, eventually becoming gender-neutral.

The landmark case that shaped modern interpretation was Kilby v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc. in 2016, when the California Supreme Court ruled that workers whose jobs can be done while sitting cannot be denied suitable seating. The court established that employers must evaluate tasks performed at specific workstations, not the overall job description, when determining whether seating is appropriate.

This ruling opened the floodgates for similar lawsuits. Bank of America paid $15 million to settle a case brought by tellers at California branches. Safeway paid $12 million in 2019 after a Santa Clara County cashier was denied a seat. CVS, Walgreens, Rite Aid, JPMorgan Chase, Kmart, AT&T, and Home Depot have all faced comparable lawsuits.

Why America Is the Outlier

What makes these lawsuits especially striking is how normal cashier seating is in the rest of the world. Over 52 countries have ratified the International Labour Organization's Hygiene Convention of 1964, which includes right-to-sit provisions. Countries with formal seating laws include Germany, France, Austria, the United Kingdom, Japan, Spain, Argentina, South Africa, Ireland, Mexico, and Brazil, among many others.

At the German discount chain Aldi, cashiers have always sat down at their registers. The company's own research found that seated cashiers are actually more productive, scanning over 1,000 items per hour. Aldi designed its entire checkout system around seated operation, with conveyor belts, bagging areas, and scanners optimized for reachability. Lidl and other European chains follow the same model.

In the United Kingdom, the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations of 1992 mandate that employers provide suitable seating for workers not engaged in tasks requiring standing. In Austria, the General Employee Protection Ordinance of 1995 requires that seats be made available at or near workstations for any work that can be performed while sitting.

The Health Cost of Standing All Day

The resistance to cashier seating in America is more than a cultural quirk. Research has shown that prolonged standing carries serious health risks. A study by Canadian researchers found that workers required to stand for extended periods are twice as likely to develop heart disease compared to those who primarily sit. When a person stands for hours, blood pools in the legs, forcing the body to work harder against gravity and increasing pressure in the veins.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has linked prolonged standing to low back pain, muscle fatigue, leg swelling, cardiovascular issues, and pregnancy complications. Workers commonly report plantar fasciitis, chronic joint strain, and degenerative spinal damage. A Quebec study found that among 30 young workers who usually worked standing, all but one reported discomfort, with two-thirds saying the pain and fatigue carried over into their personal lives.

According to John Logan, director of Labor and Employment Studies at San Francisco State University, corporate resistance to right-to-sit laws is less about efficiency and more "about maintaining unilateral control of the workplace." Industry culture has long equated standing with diligence and sitting with laziness, a perception that persists even when no customers are present.

A Slow Shift in America

While California leads the way, seven U.S. states now have gender-neutral right-to-sit legislation: California, Florida, Massachusetts, Montana, New Jersey, Oregon, and Wisconsin. There is still no federal standard, though the Americans with Disabilities Act requires seating as a reasonable accommodation for qualifying workers.

Unionized workers are increasingly making seating a bargaining priority. Employees at Barnes & Noble's Union Square location in Manhattan have included chair access in their contract negotiations. As bookseller Bear Spiegel noted, "The longer I've been at the job, I've started noticing knee issues, especially because we do a lot of bending down and standing back up."

The Walmart settlement remains a watershed moment in America's slow awakening to a right that much of the world takes for granted. For 100,000 California cashiers, a $65 million lawsuit was what it took to get a stool.