Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Federal Judiciary Blogs -> SCOTUSBLOG
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Federal Judiciary
: SCOTUSBLOGCongress overturns Court on job bias
By Akin Gump Supreme Court Practice Group
Rewriting a law to overcome a narrowing by the Supreme Court, Congress on Wednesday finished passage of a bill that will make it illegal each time an employer writes a paycheck that gives some workers less than others, because of race, sex, disability, religion or national origin. The so-called “Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009″ has been assured of approval by President Obama, and, when signed into law, will apply to bias claims that were in court as of May 28, 2007, or after that date. The text of the new law, Senate bill 181, in final form, can be found here.
The bill is a direct response to the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision on May 29, 2007, in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (docket 05-1074). The Court’s ruling can be found here.
In that decision, the Court interpreted Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to mean that a violation of that law through biased pay scales occurs only when the pay policy is instituted, and thus there is no new violation each time a paycheck is issued to implement that policy. That significantly shortemed the time when a worker could bring a Title VII bias claim, and could mean that, if a worker did not learn of the discrimination until some time later, beyond the filing deadlines under the law, the claim would have to fail.
That is, theCourt said, if a biased pay scale goes unchallenged within 180 days, “current effects alone cannot breathe life” into a claim filed beyond that period, even if the worker’s discovery of the differential is belated.
The new law, because it would apply to cases still pending that were filed the day before the Court’s ruling, or thereafter, it has the specific effect of overturning the Ledbetter decision. It cannot alter any case that has been finally decided, however. Congress had the authority to overturn the Ledbetter ruling because that was based only on the Court’s reading of a statute, and not a constitutional provision.
Congress, in the preamble to the new bill, said the Supreme Court decision “significantly impairs statutory protections against discrimination in compensation that Congress established and that have been bedrock principles of American law for decades.”
The decision, it added, “ignores the reality of wage discrimination and is at odds with the robust application of the civil rights laws that Congress intended.”
The measure applies not only to discriminatory pay claims under Title VII, covering bias based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin, but also to such claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
The key provision says that “an unlawful employment practice occurs” not only when a compensation policy or practice is adopted, but also when a worker becomes subject to the policy, or when the policy is applied to any worker “each time wages, benefits, or other ocmpensation is paid,” resulting from the discriminatory policy.
In referring to benefits, as well as wages, the new Act might be interpreted to mean that a workers’ entitlement to something other than wages or salary may be covered, so long as it is tied to the discriminatory pay scale. Thus, pension benefits linked to wage or salary levels perhaps also are covered.
Full post as published by SCOTUSBLOG on January 28, 2009 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
Unwed Fathers' Rights in Adoption
Landmark Cases in Adoption Law Shape Law with respect to Unwed Fathers
Lawry's Restaurants Settles Sex Bias Lawsuit for $1 Million
Lawry's Restaurants Settles Sex Bias Lawsuit for $1Million
Wal-Mart
To Pay $17.5 Million To Settle Race Bias Suit
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation
Employee Discrimination
Vanguard Group Inc. agrees to $500,000 racial bias settlement.
Age Discrimination
City of Independence awards two former employees a $65,000 age bias settlement.

"Congress overturns Court on job bias"
Congress May Pass A Law Outlawing Genetic Test Bias Discrimination
Transgender Bias Suit Against Library of Congress Could Change Federal Policy
S.C. Supreme Court Overturns Mother's Homicide Conviction for Drug Use During Pregnancy
"Court Details Opposition to Bias in Jury Selection"








