Lilly Ledbetter and the Paycheck Fairness Act
February 3, 2009
by Beverly Cooper Neufeld
|Beverly Cooper Neufeld is the Vice President of New York Women’s Agenda and Coordinator of the Equal Pay Coalition NYC.
Surrounded by members of Congress, President Barack Obama signs the Lilly Ledbetter Bill with Lilly Ledbetter, at center, behind Obama. SOURCE: AP/Ron Edmonds
What a picture: a petite, blond grandma from Georgia, dressed in red, standing next to our first African-American president as he signs his first major piece of legislation into law, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. In that moment, we who have felt anxiety, anger, frustration, and sometimes despair for eight years, saw a vision of what a new, progressive administration and agenda could mean for American women. Passage of the bill took two years of fighting and drama, but it finally made it past the political hurdles and to the desk of a president who was ready not only to sign it, but to embrace and honor its significance:
What does this mean for working women in the U.S? Two weeks ago, if a woman realized she had been a victim of wage discrimination for the past ten years, or five years, or even one year, it was too late for her to take action and gain redress. The 2007 Ledbetter v. Goodyear decision determined that the 180-day clock to file a complaint started running on the first act of discrimination, typically the first illegal paycheck. Unless the employee filed her complaint within that first six months, she had no case — even if she’d worked for years and hadn’t learned of the discrimination until much later, like Lilly Ledbetter. The Ledbetter law reverses that, starting the 180-day period at the last act of discrimination, meaning the most recent illegal paycheck. Still, only two years of back wages can be recouped, but employers are on notice that they will be help accountable for inequitable pay practices.
This is a great victory, but all it really does is return us to the situation that was in place before Ledbetter v. Goodyear. To give the new administration the tools to end wage discrimination, a second, more comprehensive law — already passed by the House — is essential. The Paycheck Fairness Act (PFA) would update the Equal Pay Act of 1963. The PFA, which was originally shepherded by then-Senator Clinton, is designed to create incentives for employer compliance with equal pay laws, to re-arm federal enforcement and outreach efforts, and to encourage programs to help eliminate the persistent wage gap. Yes: 45 years after President Kennedy signed the Equal Pay Act, women are still only paid on average 78% of what their male counterparts make. That gap is real money and has a profound effect on women, their families, and our communities, making equal pay a family pocketbook issue. Being underpaid today means making untenable choices every day (healthcare or childcare? mortgage or groceries?). And it means smaller pensions for older women, making the current economic crisis especially punishing for this vulnerable, growing population.
There are a number of factors which contribute to the gap, but one is simple: discrimination. Signing into law both Ledbetter and Paycheck Fairness will address this. It will not solve the problem of persistent low wages for female-dominated jobs, or lack of access to male-dominated, non-traditional fields that can actually provide a living wage. It will not ensure that the economic stimulus package will benefit America’s working women. But it is one step toward the promise of change.
President Obama has made it clear. He is ready to sign strong equal pay laws. Now it is up to us to email, call, meet with, and cajole our Senators to ensure passage of Paycheck Fairness Act and other measures. The Ledbetter fight in the Senate made it abundantly clear that it will not be easy or pretty. The House bundled the two bills and passed them as one, but the Senate would only take up Ledbetter. And, even to the end, opponents tried to impose limiting amendments.
So, dig in ladies: We are in for a fight — one we can win only with a strong, united effort.
Beverly – Thank you for this summary of where we stand with these two pieces of legislation and the meaning of each.
TNA – Do you plan to draft a press release to send out on this matter? I hope so. It will be important for the media to hear from TNA as an org and a well written press release, along with Bevelry post can help many visitors and members find language for lobbying their elected officials as well as for writing letters to the editor.
QUESTION
How is the Paycheck Fairness Act different from the Equal Pay Act? Is it because of the elements that you note that Clinton built into it? Just want to better understand why this is needed, as opposed to better enforcement of the 1963 legislation.
Thanks Beverly for addressing this.
I wrote a blog post on the Confluence regarding the Ledbetter Bamboozle act by Obama.
Without the Paycheck Fairness Act, women are still vulnerable.
Here my post on it:
http://riverdaughter.wordpress.....ut-wheels/
Nice article. Thank you; the battle is on.
Anna,
Two big differences I’ve noted between the proposed PFA of 2009 and the EPA of 1963 (the EPA was further supplemented by the Civil Right Act of 1964′s prohibitions on sex discrimination):
1. In Section VI(d)(1)(iv), the EPA allows employers to discriminate between employees on the basis of sex by paying
wages to employees in such establishment at a rate less than the rate at which he pays wages to employees of the opposite sex in such establishment for equal work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions, SO LONG AS he can claim that it’s ” a differential based on any other factor other than sex.” The example I gave previously was an employer who pays a lower wage to women with children — sure, it’s a “factor other than sex,” but it’s not an inherently good reason to pay someone less money.
The PFA would change this to require that it be a bona fide, or good faith, factor. For example, if an employer hires two entry level workers who temporarily will be doing the same job, but wants to attract a worker with an MBA who can be groomed for management, the employer can pay that worker a higher starting wage. A bona fide factor has to be based on actual differences between the employees that rationally relate to the wage they’re paid, as opposed to differences that should have nothing to do with the wage they’re paid (such as a difference in whether they are parents).
2. The Paycheck Fairness Act also amends labor law to prohibit firing employees for asking for or disclosing information about their paychecks. Ledbetter didn’t find out about the discriminates for decades because Goodyear forbade employees from comparing paychecks. Finally a colleague sent an anonymous note (he had to be anonymous so he wouldn’t get fired for this) telling her. I really think this measure should have been put in the Ledbetter Act itself, since it’s not specific to sex discrimination and would address one of the problems that Ledbetter faced.
There also are various measures in the PFA to help women and girls learn to be better negotiators and to given an award for pay equity, but they’re frankly not as substantively important as the two changes I note above.
Kevin – You are so gracious…I was just going to comment that perhaps the end comment of the post should not specify “ladies” as there are men who are members of TNA.
We should say ladies and Kevin
Thia – LOL! But, seriously, I think that would rather stigmatize Kevin and make him stick out like a sore thumb. Plus, I thought TNA’s membership was 30% male (don’t quote me). Plus, who knows how many men are blogging here under female names!…I vote for: The fight is on for all who want to join us!
Anna asks,
“QUESTION
How is the Paycheck Fairness Act different from the Equal Pay Act? Is it because of the elements that you note that Clinton built into it?“
At the Dissenting Justice site, Am. Univ. law professor Darren Hutchinson answers your questions, and more, with his recent posting that explains the ways in which the Ledbetter legislation doesn’t quite measure up to either HR Clinton’s original version of the Paycheck Fairness Act in the Senate or Rosa DeLauro’s near-identical follow-up in the House:
“Cheerleading for Ledbetter Law Drowns Out Discussion of More Progressive Pay Equity Measure”
25th Jan 2009
http://dissentingjustice.blogs.....great.html
FWIW, the Natl Women’s Law Ctr provides a FAQ, a quick overview, plus many links, some compiled before the legislation passed:
(older but still very informative page)
http://www.nwlc.org/fairpay/pe.....ation.html
(Jan 2009 update)
http://www.nwlc.org/fairpay/
The need for further legislation with bigger teeth and range is so abundantly clear, even NOW knows it! {{sarc snark}} Sorry, I seem to have misplaced the link to their site’s latest ladylike letter of lame lamentation to their president and party….
HTH.
Yes, ladies and gentlemen (15% of our members are men :-0)
Thanks so much Beverly. We would love to have you back on Ophelia to help us strategize about the way forward!
P.S.: How did Pelosi get in the picture? And where is Hillary who sponsored this bill?
Thank you Beverly! Here’s the bottom line, quoting Beverly: “To give the new administration the tools to end wage discrimination, a second, more comprehensive law — already passed by the House — is essential. The Paycheck Fairness Act (PFA) would update the Equal Pay Act of 1963.”
For more information, here is a Fact Sheet on the PFA = Paycheck Fairness Act:
http://www.nwlc.org/pdf/Broad_.....r_2008.pdf
Additional information on the PFA can be found here: http://www.nwlc.org/fairpay/pe.....l#paycheck
ACTION PLAN:
1. As Beverly says: “Now it is up to us to email, call, meet with, and cajole our Senators to ensure passage of Paycheck Fairness Act . . .”
2. So, contact your Senators now and ask them to pass the PAYCHECK FAIRNESS ACT (which has already been passed by the House). The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (a different act) is good, but not nearly enough—(message: we are smart women and feminist men and we know the difference!). The Senate must also pass the Paycheck Fairness Act.
You can find your Senators’ contact information here: http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml
Anna,
You could be right about the blogging names. I know of one person who is a friend of mine who blogs here under a woman’s name.
In my life, in male dominated careers, I have almost always been lumped in with “gentlemen” or worse, singled out with a snotty “and lady.” Surely Kevin and other men will understand if, in our passion about this cause, we occasionally have a slip of phrasing and lump them in with the “ladies.” It is a compliment after all.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski [D-MD] was the main Senate sponsor of the bill, and is given her rightful place at the forefront for the signing. Sen. Clinton was one of 54 cosponsors in the Senate. Now-Secretary of State Clinton also probably had some fairly important work to do at Foggy Bottom.
Amy, a very good question. Hillary was present and in the picture. The photo posted here (SOURCE: AP/Ron Edmonds) cut Hillary out. Whether this was intentional, or an example of press SOB-ing, remains to be seen. Here are links to the WHOLE picture:
http://hillary.foreignpolicy.c.....n_made_law
The Whitehouse website: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog_post/AWonderfulDay/
http://www.noquarterusa.net/bl.....-into-law/
It would be interesting to see if the AP only used the ‘cut out’ version.
Amy, I have an answer to your question: “How did Pelosi get in the picture? And where is Hillary who sponsored this bill?”
Just posted it, but it’s awaiting moderation as are several other posts–Action Plans– I’ve posted today. Can we speed up the moderation process somehow?
Perhaps the TNA website needs more Moderators so that all appropriate posts can be cleared within a 1/2 hour or an hour at most?
ER – I think I saw a post a day or so ago that TNA is working on the link and moderation issue so comments with links aren’t held up. Looking forward to your most recent link…….
Thanks Anna.
Another recommendation about moderating posts:
When a post is let out of moderation, it should be posted as the last post (even if it was posted some time earlier). I recommend this because, if a post has been held up in moderation for a long time, many people will have posted subsequently, so the earlier moderated post may not be read as it it far up the line by then.
T.I. – Thanks.
ER – Thanks.
Beverly – Again, thanks for your piece. It helped me enormously in writing and framing my own argument for my letter to my elected officials.
Meanwhile, perhaps the description: “a petite, blond grandma from Georgia, dressed in red” is the sort of thing we dislike when the media goes to great pains to describe women via their body type and size, hair, clothes, etc.
Is it my imagination but nonwithstanding the picture, all the men seem to be “out front” on commerce and labor issue but where are the women in the Obama administration with respect to fixing the economy and promoting women’s rights. I have seen Tim (he shouldn’t have made it through confirmation), Larry (he should never have been selected) and Biden (I am okay with Biden, he is basically harmless) and now all the talk is Sen. Gregg.
Where is Rep. Hilda Solis (D-CA) and Christina Romer? I hope these two get plenty of support.
Kevin – Great point. Given how the media can no longer be trusted to present unbaised information (in my view), it’s so hard to know if these women are “out front” we well, but not being covered, or if they are, indeed, too silent right now. Perhaps good to contact them and ask what’s up (in better English than that!).
[begin quote of ER's suggestion]
“When a post is let out of moderation, it should be posted as the last post (even if it was posted some time earlier). I recommend this because, if a post has been held up in moderation for a long time, many people will have posted subsequently, so the earlier moderated post may not be read as it it far up the line by then.”
[end quote of ER's suggestion]
Assuming here that the moderated posting’s actual submission time is kept intact (my best guess based only on my own delayed postings), I have no problem with scrolling up the page, just to satisfy my Curiosity’s insistence that I not miss anything!
A better technical solution is to allow readers the display option of changing the default date/time Sort Order from Ascending (or First on the top, Latest on the bottom) to Descending [i.e., Most Recent Posts on the top). This option is available at nearly every BBS and many so-called blog sites. The bigger point here is to re-enable or add more of the good ol' BBS functions, such as sorting and searching, that either were taken out of the blog program or dumbed-down to 'Off' in the installed settings.
I have another, related request that might help when reading and submitting comments, which is for TNA to enable at least a few blog formatting commands and/or HTML tags, so that we all can properly cite a prior comment and emphasize some text with basic centering, bolding, lines and such. Examples include
Ah, my first example above was the HTML “BLOCKQUOTE” tag within angle brackets, which was rendered as a bold V. bar which I’ve seen on a few blogs.
Does anybody know if the bold bar was intentionally enabled in this blog’s settings, or….? IMO, simple centering or indentation would be easier on the eyes, w/o any special character unless a person wanted to use quote marks or a bullet, for instance.
Good web / blog ideas. I agree it would be great to be able to use a bit of html programming when posting.
How about creating a separate thread for these website questions and suggestions–and putting the related posts above there? (I admit I started the questions here about moderation.)
That way, we can get back to action on the Paycheck Fairness Act and why Hillary’s was cut out of the AP Photo of Obama signing the Ledbetter Act.
ER,
I could volunteer a little moderation time late night West coast. I usually get on around 10 or 11 pm PST through 1 am PST.
I agree that a post coming out of moderation should go at the end of the string rather than at the time it was submitted. It’s hard enough to keep up with posts without having to backtrack up to the middle of a string just in case there were things that weren’t posted when submitted. It would also be nice if posts coming out of moderation were flagged in some way as ‘delayed by moderation’.
[begin ER's note re "On Being OT"]
How about creating a separate thread for these website questions and suggestions–and putting the related posts above there? (I admit I started the questions here about moderation.)
[end quote of ER re "On Being OT"]
Guilty as charged, and in 100% agreement, on all counts.
WRT coverage of the 2 pay acts , an e-mail to AP might be able to hit both targets by pointing out that HRC is a key figure connecting both bills– instrumental, if not essential, to passage of both. A 3rd “bonus hit” is to highlight the areas that would be covered by the PFA [name your version].
I agree with fsteele’s idea about where comments coming out of moderation should go and love the idea of having some sort of a flag (esp if they remain inserted in their original time zone).
Meanwhile, fsteele, that is so so so sweet of you to volunteer to moderate. You and ER are always prepared to do heavy lifting!
Thank you all!
To the web moderator / web designer of this great website (I don’t know who that is):
1. Would it work to have a separate webpage/section on this website with the web and moderation suggestions? Perhaps under grassroots, though it’s not really that. Perhaps under ‘Blog’ – 2 sections – go to the blog, and website suggestions? Or a separate area altogether? Just some thoughts.
This website is great and is one of the ‘cleanest’ easiest to use blog areas I’ve come across. Kudos!
Back to the picture, from the post way upstream here:
Hillary was present and in the picture. The photo posted here (SOURCE: AP/Ron Edmonds) cut Hillary out. Whether this was intentional, or an example of press SOB-ing, remains to be seen. Hillary was the highest ranking official present, after Obama, I think. Here are links to the WHOLE picture:
http://hillary.foreignpolicy.c.....n_made_law
The Whitehouse website: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog_post/AWonderfulDay/
http://www.noquarterusa.net/bl.....-into-law/
It would be interesting to see if the AP (Associated Press) used the ‘cut out’ or whole version in other media.
It would be interesting to see the whole picture posted next to the version above.
I just read an article that said all the Republican Women Senators crossed party lines and voted in favor of this bill. Has anyone already checked which women voted for and against?
Thia – I don’t know, but here’s a link to the Congressional Women’s Caucus members. It might be a start for your research:
http://www.womenspolicy.org/si....._women_111
I just blogged about this wonderful historic event:
http://tinyurl.com/bzkoha
The really cool thing about the Senate roll call is that 80% of female Republican senators voted yea, compared to 2.7% of male Republican senators. That is strong support for our new wave of non-partisan feminism. Women will stand up for other women. It doesn’t matter if they are Republicans or Democrats- we need stop thinking inside the political party box!
ER said, ” Would it work to have a separate webpage/section on this website with the web and moderation suggestions?”
What I’ve seen elsewhere is a ‘backchannel’ in the form of an email list with registration. More privacy, less clutter on the open forum.
On the sidebar of ‘Latest Comments’, would it be possible to include the date/time of each comment. I’m always having to guess whether I’ve seen that one yet.
Jane – Thanks so much for that post!
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...