The Ledbetter Fair Pay Act has completely overshadowed the Paycheck Fairness Act --- even though the latter represents a much deeper and more progressive reform! The Ledbetter Act -- though vitally important -- simply restores the imperfect status quo that existed before the horrific Supreme Court ruling which invalidated a more favorable statute of limitations doctrine.
Cheerleading for Ledbetter Law Drowns Out Discussion of More Progressive Pay Equity Measure
[UPDATED: SEE BELOW]
Many of you already know the story, but in a nutshell -- the ruling discarded the "paycheck rule" that existed for decades in this setting. Under the old doctrine, known more generally as a "continuing violations" rule (which actually is not unique to discrimination cases), each new paycheck reset the statute of limitations clock. Plaintiffs, nevertheless, could only recover a maximum of 2-years backpay. So, even if plaintiff discovers the discrimination many years after the fact, she can still sue, but only recover for two years of discriminatory underpayment. Still this is vitally important legislation.
Another bill, the Paycheck Fairness Act, is currently pending in Congress as well. This one -- unlike the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act -- is actually a fair pay statute. The Paycheck Fairness Act contains many provisions designed to stregthen the SUBSTANTIVE law for victims of discrimination -- rather than just the PROCEDURAL obstacles they face (and will continue to face, even with the Ledbetter reform).
Two versions of the law were first proposed in 2007 by Rep. Rosa DeLauro and Senator Hillary Clinton. Recently, on the same day that the House passed the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, it also passed DeLauro's Paycheck Fairness Act -- but by an even larger margin. The House then merged the two bills and sent them to the Senate. The Senate, however, has tabled the Paycheck Fairness Act provisions, and voted only for the Ledbetter rule. The House will probably compromise and let go of the more progressive terms. It is unclear when or if the Senate will resume deliberation on the more progressive bill. We should make sure that it does not get lost.
My question: Why is this more progressive bill being drowned out by the discussion of Ledbetter? Ledbetter is a great start, but many liberals don't even know about the progressive alternative that the House passed. We must educate each other -- and, most of all -- demand more. Only by doing so can we ensure that "reversing Bush" does not become the sole measure of "change."
Cheerleading for Ledbetter Law Drowns Out Discussion of More Progressive Pay Equity Measure
[This Diary is a modified (and shortened) version of a longer essay I authored.]
In response to questions, the proposed law contains everything that's in the Ledbetter legislation, PLUS:
The proposed measure would modify existing law in the following ways:
It would require employers to justify sex-based pay differentials in the same job category by proving the existence of a "bona fide" business necessity related to the work the position;
Plaintiffs could demonstrate that employers could achieve the business necessity with less discriminatory means;
The measure would prohibit employers from retaliating against employees who inquire about or discuss the wages of other employees or who file claims alleging discrimination;
The measure would allow for punitive damages, upon a finding that the employer acted "with malice";
The measure would establish various programs to help industry reduce and eliminate gender-based pay discrepancies, including the provision of "technical assistance" to companies and the training of "women" and "girls";
The proposal would require the Secretary of Labor to collect sex-specific salary data as a part of the routine compilation of employment statistics by the government.