Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2007

LILLY LEDBETTER FAIR PAY ACT OF 2007 -- (Extensions of Remarks - August 04, 2007)

[Page: E1746]

---

SPEECH OF
HON. NANCY E. BOYDA
OF KANSAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
TUESDAY, JULY 31, 2007

* Mrs. BOYDA of Kansas. Madam Speaker, on May 29th, 2007, the Supreme Court ruled on Ledbetter vs. Goodyear. Lilly Ledbetter was a 19-year employee of the Goodyear Tire Plant in Gadsden, AL. After discovering a substantive wage gap between herself and her seemingly equal, male co-workers, Ledbetter filed suit claiming gender wage discrimination. While Ledbetter won the case in a Federal court, Goodyear appealed and the case made it to the Supreme Court. In a thin margin, 5-4, the Supreme Court decided that Ledbetter had missed her legal window. Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employees have 180 days after an alleged act of discrimination takes place to file a complaint. While this 180-day deadline has commonly been interpreted to start over with each additional paycheck, the Supreme Court limited this right and claimed that only the first paycheck counts as the act of discrimination.

* Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was one of the four Supreme Court justices who disagreed with the ruling, and she called upon Congress to act. H.R. 2831, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act is Congress's response. This bill will reverse this Supreme Court decision by making the original Congressional intent clear--renewing the 180-day deadline every time a worker receives a discriminatory paycheck. This strengthens measures to ensure paycheck fairness and to address unfair wage gaps through legal measures, as well as strengthens the rights of employees.

* This ruling is in blatant disregard of how the average employment environment functions. It means that unless employees discover a potentially discriminatory action within the first 180 days of their first paycheck, or last pay change, they have no legal ground to challenge it. This ruling was made with the assumption that new employees enter their workplace with a clear knowledge of what their coworkers earn and that more established employees already know the wages of their coworkers. This is not the case. Many employees do not feel comfortable talking about their wages in the workplace, or disputing their wages too soon after beginning a new job. Moreover, many workplaces discourage their employees from discussing their wages at all. Yet, if employees do discover that they have been discriminated against, and it's past the 180-day deadline, employers have legal immunity.

* While I respect the Supreme Court, I believe that Justice Ginsburg was correct when she stated that the Court's decision ignored real-world employment practices. This is not a gender issue; all employees should have an equal chance of getting a just wage.

* I believe that Congress must find a way to fix the problem that the Ledbetter decision poses for employees who have experienced discrimination. However, I do not believe that this bill was the best way to accomplish that. By not establishing any deadlines after the initial hire date, Congress has now gone too far; similar to the Supreme Court decision, they have ignored the realities of the average employment environment. I agree that employees need more time than 180 days, but I also believe that employers need to be afforded some timeline as well. I hope to work with both women's organizations and businesses to find an equal balance--we owe both sides that degree of security about what our anti-discrimination laws mean.

Source