Fair Pay Act

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act -- drafted in response to the Supreme Court's ruling in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, which held that employees must sue for pay discrimination within 180 days of the start of such discrimination -- is in trouble again. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) introduced an alternative bill that would require employees to show they filed their pay discrimination claims within six months of the date when they had -- or "should" have had -- enough information to suspect they'd been subject to discrimination.

Misleadingly named the "Title VII Fairness Act," Sen. Hutchison's bill would perpetuate the problems created by the Supreme Court's ruling.

The rights of women in the workplace must be fully restored. Please let Congress know that the Hutchison bill is not a reasonable alternative to the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act to combat pay discrimination. Email your Senators today.

Sample Letter for Campaign

Subject: Stop sneak attack on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

Dear [ Decision Maker ] ,

As your constituent, I urge you to support the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and reject the approach of the alternative introduced by Senator Hutchison (S. 3209).

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (H.R. 2831) is the only bill that will reverse the effects of last year's Supreme Court decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

Unlike the Hutchison bill, the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would give employees the time to evaluate their suspicions of discrimination and work toward solutions with their employers, and ensure that employers are held accountable for continued discrimination.

Again, I urge you to support the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and reject the approach of the Hutchison bill (S. 3209). Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Campaign Launched:
August 13, 2008

Background Information

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (H.R. 2831) will reverse the Supreme Court decision Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., which severely limits workers' ability to vindicate their rights and distorts Congress' intent to eliminate sex and other forms of discrimination in the workplace.

In Ledbetter, the Supreme Court held that employees cannot challenge ongoing compensation discrimination if the employer's original discriminatory decision occurred more than 180 days before, even when the employee continues to receive paychecks that have been discriminatorily reduced.

Prior to this decision, the law, as interpreted by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and nine of ten courts of appeals that have considered the issue, treated each discriminatory paycheck as a separate discriminatory act that started a new 180-day clock.

Because pay information is often confidential, it may take a long time for an employee to realize that she is experiencing compensation discrimination. And if employers are insulated from liability after 180 days, they have little incentive to correct pay discrimination that occurs. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would restore long-standing law and promote voluntary compliance with anti-discrimination laws by employers.

The Hutchison bill (S. 3209) creates damaging new legal hurdles before those subject to pay discrimination can vindicate their rights. The Hutchison bill stands to set back basic anti-discrimination protections in the workplace even beyond equal pay.