Supreme court narrows rules for claims of unfair pay RAW STORY

Published: Tuesday May 29, 2007 Print This Email This Earlier today, the Supreme Court narrowed the rules for claims of unfair pay, according to a report in the LA Times, referring to it as "a victory for employers, shielding them from discrimination claims from the past." "In a setback for employees claiming job bias, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that they could not rely on old evidence showing that they have long been paid less than co-workers to argue that they are discriminated against now," David G. Savage reports for the paper. The article continues, "In a 5-4 decision, the justices said federal civil rights law requires proof of a 'discrete act of discrimination' in the 180 days before a suit is filed. A discrimination claim cannot rely on earlier pay decisions that shortchanged a black, female or disabled worker, the court said." In a press release obtained by RAW STORY , Senator Hillary Clinton (NY-D) said, "Today's decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. interprets Title VII in a way that limits a worker's right to receive equal pay for equal work." "In her dissent, Justice Ginsburg invites Congress to remedy this problem," Clinton's press release continued. "I intend to do just that by introducing legislation to clarify Congressional intent on this issue. All Americans deserve equal pay for equal work, and it is my hope that Congress can remove the technical hurdles that will prevent individuals from receiving what is rightfully theirs." Excerpts from article: # The ruling threw out a pay discrimination claim brought by a woman who for nearly 20 years was the lone female supervisor at a Goodyear Tire plant in Gadsden, Ala. She sued the company in 1998 and showed that she was being paid 15% to 40% less than the men who held the same job. A jury sided with her and awarded her back pay, but the Supreme Court agreed with the company that her suit should have been thrown out at the start because it relied on evidence of discrimination in the 1980s, not a current unfair-pay action by the company in 1998. # FULL LA TIMES ARTICLE CAN BE READ AT THIS LINK



