Is The Fair Pay Act For Women A Constantly Moving Target?
January 13, 2009
by Gretchen Glasscock
|Editor’s note: Beginning this month, The New Agenda Blog will be featuring regular columns from a diverse group of contributors. Gretchen Glasscock is Founder and President of Advancing Women, an organization and web portal that supports equity for women and minorities in the workplace through career and financial parity. She’s also the editor of the Advancing Women Career & Biz Blog and a co-founder of The New Agenda.
Remember those Looney Tunes animated cartoons where the characters Wile E. Coyote (also known simply as “The Coyote”) and the Road Runner did battle with each other, with the Road Runner using devilish tricks to humiliate and defeat the Coyote? I remember one cartoon, or seem to, where the Road Runner kept zooming ahead, constantly moving the sign that said “5 miles to Somewhere,” so it became a 100 mile trek, with the goal always out of reach. The Coyote usually wound up running as fast as he could and going SPLAT head on into a wall or cliff, having completely lost his bearings in the skullduggery and never even getting close to his destination.
I remember a personal trip like that when I, my niece, and a few supportive friends made the trek to visit a nephew of mine who had misguidedly joined the remote Rashneesh compound in Oregon. Indian guru Bhagwan Shree Rashneesh had purchased the 64,000 acre Big Muddy Ranch near Antelope for $5.7 million and enticed many of his followers to join him, their wallets in hand. Our goal was to get my nephew to sign some papers to preempt him from emptying out any of his other relatives’ bank accounts into the guru’s pockets, to support the guru’s lavish livestyle or his fleet of Rolls Royces, in which he drove by and waved to followers like my nephew whose job was digging fence posts and pledging more money. As we drove on and on into the Oregon wilderness one of my friends asked dolefully: “Is someone running ahead of us, moving these signs back 5 miles, every time we drive 4 miles?”
Good question.
And one which Lilly Ledbetter and a lot of other women must be asking themselves about now. My nephew was not the only one ever to be suckered. My niece and my friends and I were not the only ones who ever made a long trek only to have the sign posts moved down the road ahead of us to forever prolong the journey. Lily Ledbetter is an unfortunate symbol for women. She embodies the wrong that has been done to us all. And one more time, there are promises on the table to correct it. But will it happen?
According to the AFL-CIO in House Passes Two Major Working Family Bills: Fair Pay Act, Paycheck Fairness Act, Lilly Ledbetter says she knows she’ll never recover the hundreds of thousands of dollars she lost from her paychecks because of nearly 20 years of pay discrimination. But a few days ago, by a vote of 247-171, the House passed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Act (H.R. 11), overturning the 2007 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that denied Ledbetter—and any worker who suffers pay discrimination—justice. Then shortly after, lawmakers added some new teeth to equal pay laws and passed the Paycheck Fairness Act (H.R. 12) by a 256-163 vote. Both bills now go to the U.S. Senate.
During a conference call with reporters Ledbetter said:
“I’m a living example of the fact that pay discrimination is a pervasive problem in workplace today….My case is just the tip of the iceberg. My case is over and I will never receive any pay. But Congress has the power to ensure what happened to me won’t happen to anyone else.”
After years of working at an Alabama Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. plant, Ledbetter discovered she was being paid less than the lowest-paid man doing the same work. She gathered enough evidence to file suit, and a jury awarded her $3.8 million. But Goodyear appealed to the Supreme Court.
In May 2007, the Supreme Court squelched the award and ruled that Ledbetter—and other workers—had no right to sue for a remedy in cases of pay discrimination if she—or any worker—waited more than 180 days after her first paycheck, even if she didn’t discover the pay discrimination until years later.
Following the court’s ruling, hundreds of pay discrimination cases have been thrown out based on the 5-4 decision that basically overturned decades of precedent treating each paycheck as a discriminatory act, thus allowing workers who don’t discover the discrimination for years to seek legal remedies.
Marcia Greenberger of the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC) says the Ledbetter bill is a matter of economic justice and a matter of economic urgency for women and the families they support. More than 300 cases were lost because of the court’s ruling. No doubt many more were told by their lawyers, “It’s too bad. You’re too late.” We can’t wait another day to pass this law.
The Paycheck Fairness Act, introduced by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), would provide more effective remedies for women who are not paid equal wages for doing equal work, by adding some teeth to the 1963 Equal Pay Act. The Paycheck Fairness Act makes the 45-year-old Equal Pay Act a more effective tool. It stiffens penalties, protects workers from retaliation, and offers concrete solutions to what is a real problem.
Anti-labor groups and Republican leaders in the Senate are sharpening their knives for the upcoming vote on this and the Employee Free Choice Act. It is sure to be a knock-down drag-out battle.
And one more time, can women look forward perpetually to have the destination of equal pay enticingly in our sights then have it moved down the road again? Will we keep getting suckered in? Will we once more go SPLAT against the wall of our expectations? Stay tuned….
Fair play with a fundamental premise that women are not sex objects – of course there should be fair play, equity, etc. but then along comes an idiot like this woman, taken from FOX news, who only reinforces the mentality of mysogyny. This is off-track but has bearing on the matter at hand:
“A San Diego woman who is auctioning off her virginity said she has now received a bid of $3.7 million, according to a published report.
Natalie Dylan, a 22-year-old San Diego woman, said she got the idea for the auction after her sister was able to pay for her college education after prostituting herself for three weeks, according to the London Telegraph.
Dylan has a degree in women’s studies. She told the paper she hopes to pay for an advanced degree in family and marriage therapy with the proceeds from the auction.
She told the Telegraph that she doesn’t think she’s the only one who will be benefit from the auction.
“I think me and the person I do it with will both profit greatly from the deal,” Dylan told the paper ” (FOX News: 1/13/09)
If it were only men with pig-like minds regarding women causing all the problems, fair play might come about much faster. How do we overcome something like this?
How many people want Caroline Kennedy to be the Senator from NY when this vote comes up?
Gretchen,
Oh my, Rajneesh again. (Spent a lot of my life in Oregon.)
Anyway, women who’ve been working for 180 days (6 months) still are learning their way around, and highly likely won’t have asked for comparative pay info, which most likely they would not get, or they could lose their jobs for being too pushy as to ask for the information.
It’s the equity that’s so important, in my mind. I remember I caused upset when I asked this unaskable question about professorial salaries in a public university, as a professor years ago. I did have the audacity to add that it was public information (wrong thing to ask for the young and untenured at that time.) But, equity and fairness don’t seem to happen. “You got the highest raise in the dept.” I was told one year.
Hmmm, let’s see, 25% of $100 = $25. 5% of $500 = $25. So in the end, the pay base equity is very important. And where it does count big time is the compounding for retirement.
That is quite off the track, but I don’t blame the woman. I blame the fact that it is very difficult for women to get jobs, and jobs that pay a living. I don’t think this is the place to side-track a discussion to an “idiot woman” who is ruining it for women. It’s just not the case. It’s like claiming that prostitutes are ruining it for women. It’s just not the case. It’s discrimination against women.
That’s what’s ruining it for women.
This is a great example of the difficult juncture of voting for parity vs voting for values (not that they are necessarily mutually exclusive, but sometimes they will be). There are Repubican leaders who are women who are being quite vocal in their opposition to this bill. So, what do we want more?
More women in Congress no matter how they vote, or more elected officials who will stand for women’s rights?
Anna,
Your point sparked me to research the proportion of women who are journalists, as this could highlight the problem in a way we’ve experienced first hand this election cycle. It is 1/3. Were that number to rise to 50/50 it would be hard to say the media would be less misogynist. However, I think it would be because the women would be secure in their employment, and 50/50 would be evidence that there is little discrimination and thus little impetus for the women to be misogynists. This is only, of course, if my theory on misogyny in the media from women has to do with the women adopting the values of discriminatory men in power majority in the media.
I would vote for parity over values. But I think that, either way, values should or will eventually lead to parity. So it is definitely a difficult juncture, and a difficult choice to make.
Excerpts from my Congressional Rep re: the LLL. Can you guess if it’s a male or a female?
————————————————————————————-
Thank you for writing to me in support of H.R. 11, the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, and H.R. 12, the Paycheck Fairness Act. I strongly support both of these bills to restore basic rights and fundamental fairness to working women. I was pleased to vote in favor of their passage in the House.
(snip)
Equal pay for equal work is as American as a principle can be. This is not about men versus women, but basic fairness. And its ramifications affect everyone. Paying women less hurts men who aren’t hired because hiring a woman is cheaper. It hurts families by devaluing the work of women and mothers who are already paying out of pocket for child care so they can pursue a career. In short, it hurts all of America, and it must end right here, right now.
(snip: Rep does education re: background of the legislation and Lily Ledbetter’s lawsuit)
I can’t think of anything more un-American or anti-family than paying two employees doing the same job different wages based on their gender. In the 21st century, this is unacceptable, and I plan to make pay equity and issues of fairness an integral part of my platform as your representative.
————————————————————————————–
If by some coincidence any other blogger received a response with similar verbage, please do not hypothesize as to where I live and certainly do not announce any thoughts on this matter on this blog. Thank you.
Kiuku
I’m not understanding your post. (It’s probably me…been sick for several days). Are you suggesting that if we had gender parity in the media then we couldn’t cry sexism? If so, I disagree since women can be just as sexist as men (See: Maureen Dowd as Exhibit A for a fine example). If I’m missing your point and you have the time and inclination, can you make it more clear. Sorry if I’m being thick.
Regarding you last point:
“I think that, either way, values should or will eventually lead to parity. ”
Sadly, I don’t think it has proven true thus far. Sigh.
Anna—-come on!! Have you actually found out how the women in Congress will vote or are you just snickering? I’m guessing that Caroline Kennedy would vote for this bill as well.
I’m sorry, but for me your ideal of how to vote is just keeping women down. Your brand of thinking has been around for a long time and it hasn’t gotten us anything.
The paradigm must shift.
And the “bad” women you refer to aren’t (i.e. always Republicans I might add) bad women. They’re politicians just like the Democratic women.
Why is it in your book that African’Americans can support each other in overwhelming numbers and it’s ok (as long as they are Democrats) but it’s somehow unseemly for women to do so. Can you explain that line of reasoning?
I for one am done with glorifying Democrats and demonizing Republicans.
Cynthia
Per your first paragraph: I’m not “snickering” and I read a piece on line a couple of days ago (sorry I don’t have the link) noting at least one Republican rep who made a rather strong statement against the bill.
Your second paragraph is alienating and smacks of a group that claims to be a big tent, while having an agenda. I thought there was room for all of us to have our perspective, exchange views, etc. I think broad brush comments like “hasn’t gotten us anything” usually diminish any argument.
Your third paragraph is too insistent. Says who? All you can say is that you want, hope, wish for the paradigm to shift. How, when and if it does will not be up to you, or me.
As for your fourth paragraph, I made no claim at all about “bad women” and don’t appreciate having my words distorted in this way. I was making a point that I thought was pretty clear: parity can undermine values we are striving to achieve, such as the LLL. It’s complex and I’m not trying to make it simple.
Regarding the next to the last paragraph, again, I strongly reject you putting words into my mouth. Please tell me where I ever said that African Americans can support each other in overwhelming numbers, but it’s unseemly for women to do so. I’ve never made any such claims. What in the world are you referring to, Cynthia?
The last statement puzzles me as much as the rest. When and where have I glorified Dems whle demonizing Reps?
Your language is very emotional and over the top. I don’t believe me language has been. I can now only wonder if you are responding to me and/or another Anna variation on this blog because you have so misrepresented my words that I cannot come up with any other explanation.
PS The Rep rep I was referring to in my post above was female.
If we vote by values and policy, we’ll eventually get a government with parity — or at least a government that shares our values and policy.
Another way to phrase my own intention on gender-voting might be, “When in doubt, vote for the woman.”
I really am trying to find a way to support some gender-voting, because it has such a good sound (till you think twice) and may get some wide coverage. I just don’t want that coverage to be ridicule (Maureen Dowd and Campbell Brown would immediately announce they were running against some good men and dare us to vote for them) or justly turn some good men against us. After Hillary was backstabbed by her female colleagues, I don’t want to backstab any men who have stuck their neck out to take our side. It is just not a right or fair thing to do!
I can’t justify SURE current damage and unfairness just for a POSSIBLE benefit starting 2017.
We don’t know how CK would vote on the LLL. We don’t know how T. Kennedy and Obama would tell her to vote.
We do know how Maloney would vote on it – YES.
Here are some statements by Cuomo about his background (with the Clinton Administration in the 90s] and positions, in a August 2008 interview:
Andrew Cuomo
Featured Speaker at Landmark
….
[Cuomo was first Assistant Secretary, then Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).] …. He said, “It was a great experience-we had 14,000 people, a $30 billion budget, and worked in every state.” Cuomo added that he was with the Clinton administration “literally from day one,” and opined that the administration was “an extraordinary accomplishment for this country-jobs, economy, good image, and bottom line net performance.”
….
Among his current priorities are health care, the mortgage fraud crisis, consumer fraud, and student loan issues.
….
Fair Pay Act mandating equal pay for equal work. Cuomo said that he supports the legislation, but pointed out that there are already anti-discrimination laws on the books and said that they need to be better enforced.
Support Fair Pay – Vote Yes!
http://www.floodthelines.com/supportfairpay/
Ted Kennedy is a co-sponsor of the current Fair Pay bill, which is Bill # S. 181.
He was the original sponsor of Bill # S. 1843 in the 110th Congress.
ACTION NEEDED NOW!
The U.S. Senate will begin voting on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act soon — as early as tomorrow.
Quoting from the National Women’s Law Center:
“The House passed both the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act last week. Now the Ledbetter bill is heading to the Senate, and we’re hopeful that the Paycheck Fairness Act will not be far behind.
The fight is far from over. Last year, when the Senate voted on this bill, it came up just three votes short. This year, we have a real chance of reaching the 60 votes needed to move the bill forward.
Women in this country still make only 78 cents for every dollar earned by men. And for women of color, the numbers are even worse. This is our chance to make a difference — now, when the economic downturn means women are depending on every penny of their income.”
ACTION PLAN:
1. Write to your Senators today! Here’s a quick way to do it; the letters are already written – just add your comments: https://secure2.convio.net/nwlc/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=271
2. Send emails to your friends and colleagues with the above link.
3. Post this information on your women-friendly websites.
4. TNA, can we post this as a separate thread to get the word out and action going quickly?
Together we are strong!
ER
1. check
2. check
3. check
4. not my job
Thanks Anna!
Thanks to you, ER! You really help to make this an activist org by posting very relevant issues along with concrete steps that enable us to take action. There’s no excuse for anyone not to do it in my eyes cause your posts are so clearly spelled out. They’re a great compliment to the articles cause we can talk and blog all we want, but at the end of the day, we need to get our voices out of here and onto a bigger forum, i.e. msm, our elected officials, etc.
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm
January 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm
January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm
January 23, 2012 at 1:04 pm
January 15, 2012 at 11:37 am
January 9, 2012 at 6:36 pm
January 7, 2012 at 10:10 pm
January 5, 2012 at 9:31 am
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...