|
WASHINGTON, DC -- The House of Representatives today passed legislation to rectify a Supreme Court ruling in May that made it harder for workers to pursue pay discrimination claims.
"With this vote, the House reaffirmed its commitment to America’s promise of fair and equal treatment for all people, and repudiated the Supreme Court’s ruling that made it easier for employers to discriminate against their workers," said Rep. George Miller (D-CA), chairman of the committee. “This issue is as basic as it gets. You should not be paid less because you are a woman. You should not be paid less because of the color of your skin or your religious beliefs. The Supreme Court has tried to roll back the clock on this issue of basic fairness, but Congress will not stand for it."
The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would clarify that every paycheck or other compensation resulting, in whole or in part, 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.
The legislation would make it clear that employees who are victims of discrimination are entitled to up to two years of back pay, as already provided in the Civil Rights Act.
The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would apply to workers who file claims of discrimination on the basis of race, sex, color, national origin, religion, age, or disability.
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. Employees in Ledbetter’s position would be forced to live with discriminatory paychecks for the rest of their careers under this Supreme Court decision. The Supreme Court overturned decades of prior accepted law that every discriminatory paycheck is a new violation of the law.
Earlier this month, the Congressional Budget Office released its estimate of the legislation. The estimate contradicts claims from critics of the legislation that it will lead to an onslaught of costly new litigation. The estimate says:
“H.R. 2831 would not establish a new cause of action for claims of pay discrimination. Because many variables influence the filing of a claim for pay discrimination, CBO expects that the bill would not significantly affect the number of filings with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Based on information from that agency, CBO estimates the H.R. 2831 would not significantly increase costs to the EEOC or to the federal courts over the 2008-2012 period. Enacting the bill would not affect revenues or direct spending."
Click here for the CBO estimate. Click here for more information on the Ledbetter case.
###
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Tom Kiley / Rachel Racusen
2181 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
202-226-0853
|
|
