Fair Pay: In the Courts

In the Courts

Courts play a critical role in establishing standards that govern our rights. The Supreme Court ruling in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. had an immense and damaging impact on the lives of Americans in the workplace. After the ruling, Ledbetter was cited in 347 decisions in cases of workplace discrimination.

The recent passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act reversed the damaging Supreme Court decision in this case and strengthened a woman's ability to fight pay discrimination in court. But careful monitoring of the courts is still critical, both to ensure that the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act is properly applied and to ensure that courts are using both Title VII and the Equal Pay Act proactively to combat the still pervasive problem of unfairly reduced wages.

Impact of Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co.

In Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., the Supreme Court ruled that employees could not challenge ongoing compensation discrimination if the employer's original discriminatory decision occurred more than 180 days before, even when the employee continued to receive paychecks that had been discriminatorily reduced. This ruling ignored the realities of the workplace and gave employers an incentive to hide discrimination. As a result, Congress passed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which overturned the Supreme Court's decision and restored the law that allows women to challenge every discriminatory paycheck they receive.

Before Congress acted, courts across the country applied the Supreme Court's Ledbetter ruling in numerous court cases, having a drastic effect on the lives of working Americans. Not only did courts apply Ledbetter to dismiss claims of pay discrimination based on race, national origin, disability and age, as well as sex; they also applied the decision even beyond the context of employment, to dismiss claims brought to challenge housing defects and athletics inequities. An example of the ruling's effect on claims involving housing defects can be seen in the case of Garcia V. Brockway. To learn more about how this Supreme Court case affected appeals involving athletics inequities such as in the case of Mansourian v. University of California, Davis read NWLC's amicus brief in support of Arezou Mansourian. Additionally, a more detailed discussion and compilation of cases that were affected by the Supreme Court case in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. is available in Alliance for Justice's publication, Damage Done: The Startling Impact of Ledbetter V. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

Application of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act reversed the damaging Supreme Court decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. and helps to ensure that individuals subjected to unlawful pay discrimination are able to effectively assert their rights under the federal anti-discrimination laws. However, the new law can only effectively support women's rights to equal pay if it is properly applied.

Following the passage of the Ledbetter Act, the National Women's Law Center requested that the Supreme Court take the new law into consideration in the case AT&T Corp. v. Hulteen. However, the Supreme Court ignored the realities of the workplace and the intent of Congress and again ruled against female workers. Read NWLC's amicus brief in the case and the press statement after the ruling in May 2009.

There is one case that is currently being considered in which the recent passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Act may help change the course in the right direction. In Mikula v. Allegheny County of Pennsylvania, the National Women's Law Center asked the third Circuit Court of Appeals to rehear a case in which the court declined to apply the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the third Circuit panel agreed to a rehearing.