pay more than $11.7 million

In addition, a federal appeals court has certified the largestclass-action employment lawsuit in U.S. history over allegedgender bias in pay and promotions.

The EEOC lawsuit accused Wal-Mart of regularly hiring maleworkers for warehouse jobs at its London, Ky., distribution centerfrom Jan. 1, 1998, through Feb. 15, 2005, and denying jobs toequally or better qualified female applicants. The lawsuit wasfiled in August 2001.

In this case, Wal-Mart and the EEOC signed a 5-year contractthat stipulates the retailer must hire women for the next 50order-filler positions, offer women half of the following 50positions and a third of the positions thereafter.

The settlement includes $8.41 million of back pay and $3.29million of compensatory damages, various fees and employertaxes.

Related: Read"Goldman Sachs litigation update"

In its other legal matter, a 6-5 ruling by the SanFrancisco-based 9^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals allowsthe multiparty litigation to move ahead to trial. Wal-Mart has theoption of appealing May 10's ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.

At the center is whether more than 1 million current and formerWal-Mart employees can band together in their claims ofdiscrimination.

The suit alleges that women were paid less than and were givenfewer opportunities for promotion than their male counterparts.They seek back pay and punitive damages. The plaintiffs state thatwomen comprise more than 70 percent of the retailer's hourly workforce but make up less than one-third of its store management.

The appeals court concluded that there is enough merit in theclaims to proceed to a trail on a class-action track. Wal-Martprotested the size of the class action, saying it would be tooonerous to litigate.