The New Law – Is it Really a “Trial Lawyers Dream?”
Many Republicans were very outspoken against changing fair pay law. John McCain said that changing the law would create a “trial lawyers dream.” Several bills were introduced to address the legal shortcomings that gave employers carte blanche to break the law. These bills sought to clarify, not substantially change unfair pay laws but were largely stalled or rejected by Republicans.Perhaps the most important comparison between the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2007 interpretation of civil rights law and clarification under the Lilly Ledbetter Act of 2009 is:
Old Interpretation of Civil Rights Law: An employee must take legal action within 180 days of the first time they received a discriminatory paycheck. If they failed to do so, they forfeited rights to file a complaint.
Specifically, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled:
”Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it an “unlawful employment practice” to discriminate “against any individual with respect to his compensation ... because of such individual’s ... sex.” 42 U. S. C. §2000e– 2(a)(1). An individual wishing to challenge an employment practice under this provision must first file a charge with the EEOC. §2000e–5(e)(1). Such a charge must be filed within a specified period (either 180 or 300 days, depending on the State) “after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred,” ibid., and if the employee does not submit a timely EEOC charge, the employee may not challenge that practice in court, §2000e–5(f)(1).”
New Law: The Lilly Ledbetter Act of 2009 clarifies the Civil Rights Act so that workers can sue up to 180 days after receiving any discriminatory paycheck; not just from the first offense. In other words, if an employer underpays a woman for ten years on the basis of her sex, she may now have legal recourse 180 days anywhere from the first to the last time she received a discriminatory paycheck.
I do not see this clarification as a “trial lawyer’s dream.” I see this has a way that workers can now hold employers accountable to existing fair pay laws – laws that have been in effect since 1964 but are now more clearly defined, and therefore, enforceable.
Until President Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Act of 2009 into law, employers had no incentive to abide by the law. As long as employers did not tell women (and other workers) that they were being discriminated against, the chances were pretty good they could continue to get away with it.
While there may be an initial flurry of lawsuits, why blame the trial lawyers? Employers who abide by fair pay laws have nothing to worry about. As for employers like Goodyear, unless they have changed their unfair wage practices, well, they should be worried.
The Lilly Ledbetter Act of 2009 is not a “trial lawyer’s dream,” but it may be a “law-breaking, discriminating employer’s nightmare.”
