Labor & Employment Law

Will the Lilly Ledbetter Act of 2009 really matter? Ask George Jackson.

George Jackson sued claiming that the City of Chicago discriminated against him by denying him two promotions. Jackson v. City of Chicago (7th Cir 01/13/2009)

He failed in his attempt to prove that he was as qualified as the two persons who were selected for the promotions, so he lost his case.

George asserted, however, that the reason he was less qualified was because of some prior discrimination that denied him important training that had been provided to the others.

The problem with that claim was that this alleged prior discrimination took place so long ago that the statute of limitations had run.

The court relied on Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 129 S.Ct. 2162 (2007). Under that case, George cannot argue that the real impact of the alleged prior discrimination was being felt at a later time.

To put it another way, there were really two limitations periods: One for the old alleged denial of training, and another for the later alleged discrimination in promotion. Because George never filed a claim regarding the older event, he cannot now claim that it had an impact on his current difficulties.

Will the Lilly Ledbetter Act of 2009 change that? Oh, yes, it will.

Full post as published by Ross' Employment Law Blog on January 15, 2009 (boomark / email).