[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 66 (Thursday, April 24, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3395-S3396]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LILLY LEDBETTER FAIR PAY ACT
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I wish today to strongly support the
Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which would clarify the laws against pay
discrimination. I would like to thank Senator Kennedy, chairman of the
Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions Committee, for his leadership on
the bill. He has been a tireless champion for civil rights and I
applaud his work.
Mr. President, we as Americans are bound by a powerful idea--a
revolutionary idea--that our nation is a work in progress. It is an
idea etched in the words of the Constitution: ``to form a more perfect
union.'' It is an idea that has inspired some of our Nation's greatest
achievements--abolishing slavery, banning segregation, and expanding
voting rights. It is an idea that brings the best out of our public
service.
This week in the Senate we have an opportunity to take another
important step along our path of progress--to make our union more
perfect.
It is no secret that pay gaps exist in our country. Gender, race,
national origin, age, disability, or religion should not have any
effect on a worker's pay. But, sadly, they do. Nationally, women earn
77 cents for every dollar that men earn. In Colorado, women earn 79
cents for every dollar that men earn. The inequities are even clearer
when you break the numbers in Colorado down by ethnicity. On average,
African-American women earn 61.2 percent of what White men earn. Asian-
American women earn 68.4 percent; Hispanic women earn 52.4 percent; and
Native American/Alaskan Native women only earn 54.7 percent of what
White men earn.
These pay disparities persist partly because women still occupy fewer
high-paying jobs than men. But they also persist because of continued
pay discrimination in the workplace. We have laws on the books to make
pay discrimination illegal, but those laws can be improved.
Lilly Ledbetter's case is a classic, and tragic, example. Ms.
Ledbetter worked for the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company in Gadsden,
AL, for 19 years. She was a manager, a position predominately occupied
by men at the company. After early retirement, Ms. Ledbetter learned,
from an anonymous note, that male managers at the company were making
20 to 40 percent more than she was making in the same job.
So Ms. Ledbetter took Goodyear to court. The jury found that the
company violated her rights under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964. They awarded her back pay and damages.
The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, however, reversed the
district court decision. They said that Ms. Ledbetter filed her case
too late. They said she needed to file her complaint within 180 days
after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred.
Rightly, Ms. Ledbetter appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. In its 5-
to-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that the 180-day statute of
limitations begins when the original discriminatory act occurs. Whether
the worker even knew that the discriminatory decision was made is of no
consequence. Whether they were discriminated against for 1 or 20 years
is also insignificant under the Court's majority decision.
It is critical to understand the profound impact of the Court's
decision. If an employee cannot challenge a discriminatory paycheck
beyond the 180 days that the employer made the discriminatory decision,
companies that discriminate cannot be held accountable for their
actions. Six months after a discriminatory action, the bad actor is in
the clear. This was certainly not the intent of Congress when it
enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
In her dissenting opinion, Justice Ginsburg raised a good question
and a matter of common sense. How was Ms. Ledbetter supposed to know,
and therefore complain, when she was first given a lower raise than her
male counterparts? Goodyear, like many employers, kept salaries and
raises confidential.
The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would correct this injustice. The
bill would amend title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other
civil rights laws to make clear that the 180-day statute of limitations
on a pay discrimination claim, based on gender, race, national origin,
religion, age or disability, would restart every time an employee
receives any wages or benefits affected by the discriminatory act. This
was the law of the land for decades, with the exception of three
States, until the U.S. Supreme Court decision, Ledbetter v. Goodyear.
The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act should receive the unanimous support
of this body. We should all agree on the principle of `equal pay for
equal work.' We should all agree that pay discrimination has no place
in a 21st century America. And we should all agree that when there is a
clear problem with the existing law, we should correct it.
We have come a long way over the last 2\1/2\ centuries toward opening
the doors of opportunity to every American. But ours is a nation still
in progress, and our Union can still be perfected.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in strong support of
the Fair Pay Restoration Act, S. 1843,--and I am proud to be an
original cosponsor of this bipartisan measure, introduced by Senator
Kennedy and supported by 40 of my colleagues in the Senate. This bill
would rightly provide victims of workplace gender discrimination with
the reasonable timeframe they deserve to file discrimination suits
under Federal law--while restoring longstanding precedent that was
regrettably reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court last year.
I firmly believe that America should be a global leader on issues
related to gender discrimination and equal pay, but with its decision
in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., the Supreme Court
telegraphed entirely the wrong message to the rest of the world about
the value of equal pay for equal work--and ignored the realities of pay
discrimination. Furthermore, with the economy in crisis, gas prices
sky-high, and housing values falling, it is all the more critical we
not lose vital ground on fair pay.
It is no secret that women play a substantial leadership role in our
Nation--we are business leaders, entrepreneurs, politicians, mothers,
and much more. But regrettably, wage discrimination still exists and
has remained constant for many years. In 1963, the year of the Equal
Pay Act's passage, full-time working women were paid 59 cents on
average to the dollar received by men. In 2004, more than 40 years
later, women were only paid 77 cents for every dollar earned by men.
What is even more troubling is that, according to a National Academy
of Sciences report, between one-third and one-half of the wage
disparities between men and women cannot adequately be explained by
differences in experience, education, or other legitimate
qualifications. And notably, this wage discrimination exists despite
the passage of the Equal Pay Act that made it illegal to pay women less
than men for performing equal work.
Wage discrimination also continues to exist despite the 1964 Civil
Rights Act, which outlawed discrimination in employment and wages on
the basis of sex, race, color, religion, and national origin. This
pernicious injustice continues despite Congress passing the 1991 Civil
Rights Act, which I strongly supported, along with most of my
colleagues on both sides of the political aisle.
As a former cochair of the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues, I
have been a longtime advocate in the pay equity debate. As some of my
colleagues may remember, in 1984, Representative Claudine Schneider, R-
RI, Representative Nancy Johnson R-CT, and I wrote to the Reagan
administration asking that it prevent the Justice Department from
weighing in against AFSCME v. Washington, which supported the concept
of pay equity. And as a Member of the House of Representatives, I
repeatedly introduced bipartisan resolutions that would have
established a commission to study compensation practices in Congress
from 1984 to 1993. It is therefore simply unconscionable to imagine
that in this day and age, wage-setting practices are still being
affected by historical gender biases resulting in the undervaluation of
work and low pay for women.
[[Page S3396]]
Sadly, the Supreme Court's decision in Ledbetter will make it
virtually impossible for women workers to close the wage gap and to
receive the remedies they deserve when they are discriminated against.
This decision represents an enormous step backward for women and for
any person alleging pay discrimination.
Lilly Ledbetter's story poignantly coupled with this unfortunate
ruling reminds us that wage discrimination persists across our Nation.
It is therefore long past time we reversed the Supreme Court's decision
in Ledbetter and clarified that laws against pay discrimination apply
to every paycheck or other compensation a worker receives. And Senator
Kennedy's Fair Pay Restoration Act would reestablish a fair rule for
filing claims of pay discrimination based on race, national origin,
gender, religion, age or disability.
This bipartisan measure would also impose a reasonable time limit for
filing pay discrimination claims and would start the clock for filing
pay discrimination claims when compensation is received, rather than
when the employer decides to discriminate. Each discriminatory paycheck
would restart the clock for filing a pay discrimination claim and as
long as workers file their claims within 180 days of a discriminatory
paycheck, their charges will be considered timely. This measure would
restore the precedent applied by nine courts of appeals and the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission in pay discrimination cases until the
Supreme Court's May 29, 2007. It would also maintain the current limits
on the amount employers owe.
The bill would also restore congressional intent, by mirroring
language prohibiting discriminatory seniority systems, which was
included in the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1991. The bill was signed
by President George H. W. Bush in 1991, and I was pleased to support
this measure which passed with overwhelmingly bipartisan support.
Some contend this bill would ``exacerbate the existing heavy burden
on the courts by encouraging the filing of stale claims'' . . . that it
would allow employees to bring a claim of pay or other employment-
related discrimination years or even decades after the alleged
discrimination occurred. That is simply an exaggeration. The fact is--
employers would not have to adjust for salary differences that occurred
decades ago. Current law limits back pay awards to 2 years before the
worker filed a job discrimination claim under title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, and this bill would not change this 2-year limit on
back pay.
I cannot overstate my support for the Fair Pay Restoration Act, and I
encourage my colleagues in the Senate to vote for this legislation
tomorrow to ensure equal pay for women and minorities in the workforce.
Discrimination of any kind in the workplace should not be tolerated. It
is time the law reflected that.
Thank you. Mr. President, I request unanimous consent that a copy of
my remarks be included in the Congressional Record.
____________________