Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

May-30-07

Supreme Court Sides with Business in Wage Sex Discrimination Case

A Supreme Court ruling issued yesterday will limit the ability of many workers to sue for wage discrimination. The 5-4 decision prohibits an employee from legally challenging a case of wage discrimination more than 180 days after the original discriminatory act occurred. Yesterday's ruling in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. will virtually eliminate an employee's legal recourse against wage discrimination after the statute of limitations has ended, even if the discrimination is ongoing. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 established the statute of limitations.

In the dissenting opinion, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote that the decision could harm women, who on average make only 77 cents for every man's dollar. Women's wages could begin at an equal level with a man's and then decrease over time, as Ledbetter's did, or women might not become aware of the discrimination until years after it began. Ginsburg said in court, according to the Associated Press, "In our view, this court does not comprehend, or is indifferent to, the insidious way in which women can be victims of pay discrimination."

Marcia Greenberger, co-president of the National Women's Law Center, said of the decision, "Not only does the ruling ignore the reality of pay discrimination, it also cripples the law's intent to address it, and undermines the incentive for employers to prevent and correct it."

The case was originally brought by Lilly Ledbetter, who worked for Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company for 19 years before realizing that she was paid significantly less than her male counterparts with the same or less experience. A jury sided with Ledbetter after she pressed charges in 1998, but an Atlanta federal appeals court later reversed the decision.

Media Resources: National Women's Law Center release 5/29/07; Associated Press 5/30/07; Feminist Daily News Wire 11/28/06


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

10/30/2014 Medication Abortion Access Threatened by Oklahoma Court Ruling - An Oklahoma state district court judge has refused to block a state law restricting medication abortion, clearing the way for the law to go into affect on November 1. The Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, together with a local abortion clinic in Tulsa, challenged HB 2684 in September, arguing that the law was an unconstitutional restriction on non-surgical abortion in the earliest weeks of pregnancy. . . .
 
10/30/2014 UPS Switches Pregnant Worker Policy Ahead of Supreme Court Case - The United Parcel Service (UPS) is changing its policy on light duty assignments for pregnant workers, even though the company will stand by its refusal to extend accommodations to a former employee in an upcoming Supreme Court case. UPS announced on Monday in a memo to employees, and in a brief filed with the US Supreme Court, that the company will begin offering temporary, light-duty positions to pregnant workers on January 1, 2015. . . .
 
10/30/2014 North Dakota Medical Students Speak Out Against Measure 1 - Medical students at the University of North Dakota School of Medicine and Health Sciences are asking North Dakotans to vote no on Measure 1, a personhood measure on the state ballot this fall. The students issued published a letter in the Grand Forks Herald stating that they opposed Measure 1 in part because they are against "the government's taking control of the personal health care decisions of its citizens." Nearly 60 UND School of Medicine students signed the letter, citing concerns over the "very broad and ambiguous language" used in the proposed amendment, which has no regard for serious and life-threatening medical situations such as ectopic pregnancies. Measure 1 would change the North Dakota state constitution to create an "inalienable right to life" for humans "at any stage of development" - including the moment of fertilization and conception. . . .