01.09.09
The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (H.R. 11) would clarify that every paycheck or other compensation resulting from an earlier discriminatory pay decision constitutes a violation of the Civil Rights Act. As long as workers file their charges within 180 days of a discriminatory paycheck, their charges would be considered timely. This was the law prior to the Supreme Court’s May 2007 decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear.
“The Supreme Court’s misguided decision is already having very harmful consequences far beyond Ms. Ledbetter’s case and must not stand,” said U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. “This issue is about basic fairness for our nation’s workers. Americans shouldn’t be treated differently based on the color of their skin, gender, disability or faith.”
“The passage of the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in the House today is a rejection of the Supreme Court's ill-conceived Ledbetter decision and a restoration of an American worker's right to reasonably seek restitution against pay discrimination,” said Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ), chairman of the Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions Subcommittee.
The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would also apply to workers who file claims of discrimination on the basis of race, sex, color, national origin, religion, age, or disability.
According to a report from the New York Times, the Ledbetter decision has already been cited in more than 300 discrimination cases. Not only have pay discrimination cases been adversely impacted, but protections guaranteed by the Fair Housing Act, Title IX, and the Eight Amendment have also been affected.
Lilly Ledbetter worked for nearly 20 years at a Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company facility in Alabama. She sued the company after learning that she was paid less then her male counterparts at the facility, despite having more experience than several of them. A jury found that her employer had unlawfully discriminated against her on the basis of sex.
However, the Supreme Court said that Ledbetter had waited too long to sue for pay discrimination, despite the fact that she filed a charge with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission as soon as she received an anonymous note alerting her to pay discrimination.
While Ledbetter filed her charge within 180 days of receiving discriminatory pay, the court ruled that, since Ledbetter did not raise a claim within 180 days of the employer’s decision to pay her less, she could not receive any relief. Under this Supreme Court decision, employees in Ledbetter’s position would be forced to live with discriminatory paychecks for the rest of their careers. To view Ledbetter’s letter of support, click here.
Contrary to claims from critics, the Congressional Budget Office estimated in 2007 that since the bill would essentially return the law to where it stood before the Supreme Court ruling, the legislation will not lead to an onslaught of costly new litigation. Click here for the CBO estimate.
The House-passed bill is the same as the bill approved in 2007. President-Elect Obama has indicated his strong support for the measure. The legislation is supported by a broad coalition of civil rights, worker, religious and business groups. To view supporters of the legislation, click here.
House Approves Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
WASHINGTON, DC -- The House of Representatives today approved legislation to rectify a Supreme Court ruling that made it harder for Americans to pursue discrimination claims. The bill is among the first considered by the 111th Congress and passed by a 247 to 171 vote.The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (H.R. 11) would clarify that every paycheck or other compensation resulting from an earlier discriminatory pay decision constitutes a violation of the Civil Rights Act. As long as workers file their charges within 180 days of a discriminatory paycheck, their charges would be considered timely. This was the law prior to the Supreme Court’s May 2007 decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear.
“The Supreme Court’s misguided decision is already having very harmful consequences far beyond Ms. Ledbetter’s case and must not stand,” said U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. “This issue is about basic fairness for our nation’s workers. Americans shouldn’t be treated differently based on the color of their skin, gender, disability or faith.”
“The passage of the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in the House today is a rejection of the Supreme Court's ill-conceived Ledbetter decision and a restoration of an American worker's right to reasonably seek restitution against pay discrimination,” said Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ), chairman of the Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions Subcommittee.
The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would also apply to workers who file claims of discrimination on the basis of race, sex, color, national origin, religion, age, or disability.
According to a report from the New York Times, the Ledbetter decision has already been cited in more than 300 discrimination cases. Not only have pay discrimination cases been adversely impacted, but protections guaranteed by the Fair Housing Act, Title IX, and the Eight Amendment have also been affected.
Lilly Ledbetter worked for nearly 20 years at a Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company facility in Alabama. She sued the company after learning that she was paid less then her male counterparts at the facility, despite having more experience than several of them. A jury found that her employer had unlawfully discriminated against her on the basis of sex.
However, the Supreme Court said that Ledbetter had waited too long to sue for pay discrimination, despite the fact that she filed a charge with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission as soon as she received an anonymous note alerting her to pay discrimination.
While Ledbetter filed her charge within 180 days of receiving discriminatory pay, the court ruled that, since Ledbetter did not raise a claim within 180 days of the employer’s decision to pay her less, she could not receive any relief. Under this Supreme Court decision, employees in Ledbetter’s position would be forced to live with discriminatory paychecks for the rest of their careers. To view Ledbetter’s letter of support, click here.
Contrary to claims from critics, the Congressional Budget Office estimated in 2007 that since the bill would essentially return the law to where it stood before the Supreme Court ruling, the legislation will not lead to an onslaught of costly new litigation. Click here for the CBO estimate.
The House-passed bill is the same as the bill approved in 2007. President-Elect Obama has indicated his strong support for the measure. The legislation is supported by a broad coalition of civil rights, worker, religious and business groups. To view supporters of the legislation, click here.
Next Article