Why Lily Ledbetter is Controversial

lilly ledbetter

I don't think Marth Burk thought out that statement she made because a very strict rule for most companies is to NOT discuss pay with other workers. It was not Ledbetter's fault that she isn't preoccupied in other co-workers personal buisness. Although she agrees with the fatc that an employee must not discuss pay with other employees, how exactly was Lilly supposed to be aware of the situation?

Anonymous of PA @ Apr 07, 2009 21:28:26 PM

claims against law are bogus

The claim that the law would force companies to "settle claims that might pop up years after litigating employees had departed" seems totally bogus, since claims can only be filed within 180 days of the last paycheck. Also, there are limits on the penalties that can be assessed and the time period that can be covered. I'm certainly not in favor of any lawyers' bonanzas, but this law seems very reasonable to me.

Dan of AZ @ Feb 03, 2009 23:36:01 PM

Stimulus for Plaintiff's Lawyers, Not for America

The Ledbetter Act does not guarantee equal pay for equal work, that is what the Equal Pay Act of 1963 set as a legal standard more than 45 years ago. What thee Ledbetter Act will do is resurrect claims that will be extremely difficult for companies to defend against.

Ledbetter filed an EEO complaint back in 1982 and DID complain about her pay and she lost. She went back DECADES later and sued alleging a man, deceased at the time of her suit, harassed her. Imagine trying to find the punch cards or the reel-to-reel tapes AND their functioning systems with pay records to provide statistical or relevant employee data in legal discovery. [Can you even find a functioning 5 1/2 inch floppy drive these days with legacy software?] How many companies also keep appraisal information that dates back decades? I can't remember what an employee did a couple of years ago much less dating back to the prior century - so how good is the testimony going to be from either the employee or from management? No wait, the employee will recall that they were near perfection and the hardest worker in the shop -- yada yada yada.

Even with most crimes there is a statute of limitations, but not with a potentially subjective pay determination that dates back years??? The courts will naturally defer to statistical "evidence" that will not take into account all the aspects of an employee's pay: their performance, their work habits, their attendance, their effort or lack thereof. So, I guess we will also employ a number of statisticians as well.

All Congress need do is look at how pay is set for Federal employees. It is highly regimented system based upon years of service and has explicit limits on pay increases and promotions. You often have a new employee who is performing much better than a long term employee but getting paid much less. It may not be entirely fair but it is a system that causes the effect (which is equal on men, women and minorities).

This Act will do nothing to help our economy except make trial lawyers a bit richer. That is not the stimulus our country needs. The 180 day period to make a complaint in the private sector was more than fair.

Mike from Virginia of VA @ Feb 02, 2009 18:05:03 PM

Discrimination?

Most articles don't mention what Alfred just said.

Goodyear said that there was no discrimination, she just didn't deserve to be paid as much because she wasn't as good an employee. But, since it was so long ago, how can they prove that?

That's why they need the 180 day limit. Otherwise, a company could face a multi-million dollar law suit for discrimination that never existed. And the burden of proof is almost always put on the employer, rather than the employee.

What this will lead to is making sure everyone is paid exactly the same, so they can't sue. Nevermind that this guy is doing twice the work, if they give him a raise, his coworker will sue for discrimination in thirty years. and she'll win too.

UnCommon Sense of IN @ Jan 31, 2009 17:31:20 PM

True, not enough facts...

Idiots like Tom will march like lemmings without actually figuring out what she did or how well she performed her job to merit her pay.

A little research on some other sites tells me that she was among the lowest ranked employees in regards to her evaluations and was to be among the first to be laid off if that time came.

Of course, waiting long enough for her supervisor that was in charge of these evaluations doesn't hurt her pity party, either!

Alfred B of TX @ Jan 31, 2009 02:04:53 AM

are you serious?

The "reasoning" behind the statement "But the merits of the law are actually fairly controversial. After all, President Bush didn't support it." is totally non-existent. Whether the former President supported it or not is not an indicator of controversy.

More to the point, the arguments against the Ledbetter act promulgated by the WSJ, Ms. Dealey, and the above commenter "not good" are totally specious: Someone who has been receiving lower pay for years as the result of discrimination at the point of hiring deserves compensation from the company even if it has been reorganized and/or control has transferred to other owners; someone whose benefits are lower as the result of discriminatory hiring and/or pay practices deserve to be compensated for being cheated in the past by those who cheated them; yet Mr. Dealey and the Journal act as if those outcomes would be travesties. Why should the current ownership of, say GE get away with earning extra profit because of discriminatory actions taken decades ago?

Krystof of NY @ Jan 30, 2009 18:11:43 PM

Perfect justice

Let's get it over with and give everybody the same pay. Why should most men make less than Hillary Clinton? Shouldn't all pay be based on whining about discrimination so loudly and aggressively that a nuisance payoff is made?

Luther of IL @ Jan 30, 2009 14:39:35 PM

Not enough facts

Do we know if the men being paid more than Lily started the same time as her? Did they have more seniority? Does anyone one know why Goodyear decided to pay her less? I don't know what my coworkers make and I don't care. I know how much I make and I will decide if I feel it is fair or not.

Adrien B. of ME @ Jan 30, 2009 11:50:42 AM