Supreme Court Ruling Limits Unfair Pay Suits
Yesterday, the Supreme Court ruled against a woman who was filing a pay disparity suit against her employers at the Goodyear tire plant in Gadsden, Atlanta. This seemed it would be the easiest ruling ever, as the woman gave documented, undisputed, evidence that she had been paid less than any of her colleagues, even those with less seniority, but the republican justices found an amazing way to get around women’s rights and equal pay.
The case was overturned in the usual fashion (5-4, Republicans vs. Democrats) with the Republicans saying that the woman hadn’t filed a complaint for twenty years, so somehow her complaint was invalid.
So, what was this woman supposed to do for the last twenty years if she didn’t have any education about equal pay, and hadn’t thought to swap pay checks with her co-workers? To post all the salaries on the wall of the office would be an invasion of privacy, and perish the thought that big American business would actually pay everyone on performance!
So, in conclusion to the case, the justices established that all similar cases will be dismissed if the plaintiff didn’t file a complaint to a federal agency within 180 days after their pay was set. Good job reasoning!
Filed under: Aryeh, Featured Stories, Labor Issues, Politics, Sexism/Racism, Supreme Court, Women's Rights
Ah. That’s a tough decision for people though.
I’m a born and raised Republican (not anymore, but it helps strengthen my lefty views), and that was the hardest part. You want to feel bad for her, but it’s true. She didn’t file a complaint…and technically, unless she was being forced not to, she’s just doing this as a last resort, and therefore wasn’t suffering as much as she stated.
Cases like these are the hard ones. And kinda confusing.
And just to point out…
It’s kinda…I don’t know…naive? to say that “She was getting deducted pay. Obviously because she’s a woman.” I mean yeah, some people discriminate women. But for all we know, she just sucked at her job, so they payed her less. Who knows.
I’d feel more comfortable making a decision knowing more about it.
Thank God that I don’t have to.
Nice observation, but if she sucked at her job, then why wasn’t she fired or demoted, instead of having her pay be lower from teh beginning. Also, there was less education about sexist salary policies twenty years ago when the woman in question was reviewing her salary.
I dont know, Bryce. It seems more naive, to me, to assume it was anything OTHER than outright systematic sex discrimination because the pay gap is so pervasive and persistent. A little more about it here, if you’re interested, from something I posted here a while ago:
http://youthinkleft.com/2007/04/24/equal-pay-day/
It’s pretty clear in this case that those receiving higher pay are not more qualified than the woman in question, so it shouldn’t be very hard or confusing.
Also, this: “…and technically, unless she was being forced not to, she’s just doing this as a last resort, and therefore wasn’t suffering as much as she stated.”
…seems like a pretty unfair assumption.
Companies that hide who is getting paid what are not worried about meritocracy if the workers know that if someone is getting more money and they don’t agree then the workers
could leave. I think the Supreme Court is more worried about workers comparing notes and getting organized thats why they are putting a time limit on complaints they want to limit the size of any future lawsuits. I think Scalia should be banned from getting money or gifts from any outside source as long as he is a member of the court. Lets see how he likes being screwed by a labor law.
This is another unfair case. I cannot believe that there are certain individuals commenting against the woman. Most of us are capitalists and corporate citizens. The Supreme Court is using insignificant excuses, simply to dismiss the fact that this woman was right. I am extremely certain that - on top of women receiving low pay already - anyone of us who notices that we were not getting paid equal “35 years ago”, we would still complain. This is loss, not gain. Can anyone imagine the absolute gain of 20 years of profit loss? Incredible people! Americans at their worst, with your petty tax returns…