The following is information provided by the Society for Human Resource Management, the largest national association of Human Resource Professionals. The Society works to protect and promote high standards of fairness and integrity in the workplace, while also making sure that common sense and the needs of business owners and management are not forgotten in the process. Take a moment to learn about legislation that is pending before the new Congress and how it might affect your business. If you share the Society’s concerns, contact your elected officials in Washington and let them know.
The new Congress begins today, and SHRM has learned that the U.S. House of Representatives plans to quickly consider important legislation to address pay discrimination in the workplace. These bills are:
***The Ledbetter Fair Pay Act – would eliminate the statutory time limit for filing pay discrimination claims.
***The Paycheck Fairness Act – would prohibit an employer’s ability to justify paying different salaries to workers based in different geographic locations.
The House is scheduled to vote on both the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act by the end of this week. Please let your Representative know TODAY that these bills go far beyond reasonable, balanced approaches to address wage discrimination.
Background
Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (H.R. 11) – The Ledbetter legislation is a congressional response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s May 2007 decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. In that case, the Court held that the 300-day time limit for filing a charge Title VII of the Civil Rights Act starts after the alleged unlawful employment action, and does not re-start a new upon receipt of each successive paycheck
The Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would effectively eliminate the uniform statue of limitations on pay discrimination claims and restart the time clock for filing such a charge with the EEOC upon the receipt of each successive paycheck. The bill would also re-start the time clock when a retiree receives an annuity check from an employer, and would thus keep employers liable to a discrimination claim potentially decades after an alleged act of misconduct. The legislation would amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Rehabilitation Act.
Paycheck Fairness Act (H.R. 12) – The Paycheck Fairness Act would amend the Equal Pay Act of 1963, which requires that jobs requiring comparable functions, skills, effort and responsibility in similar working conditions must compensate equally. Some stakeholders contend that the Equal Pay Act is not sufficient to remedy wage discrimination. While wage differentials remains an important workplace issue, debate continues over whether the differential is attributable to discrimination or the result of legitimate pay practices such as education, skill, experience, or tenure.
The Paycheck Fairness Act would limit an employer’s ability to justify paying different salaries to workers based in different locations with different costs of living. Second, the bill would lift the caps on compensatory or punitive damages for which employers would be liable, in addition to current liability for back pay. These damage penalties would apply to even unintentional pay disparities.
Many employers and human resources professionals fear that the proposed legislation goes too far to address perceived problems in the workplace. At a minimum, Congress should slow down its deliberations and make sure all arguments have received a fair hearing before rushing through this legislation.
Dirk A. Beamer
WRIGHT PENNING & BEAMER
27555 Executive Drive Suite 165
Farmington Hills, MI 48331
(248) 477-6300
(248) 477-7749 (fax)
(248) 893-1401 (direct)
www.wrightpenning.com
