Why aren't more of us P.O'd??
Lilly Ledbetter worked 19 years at Goodyear before she learned the men at her level were earning far more for the same work and equal time in the job. She sued, taking her case all the way to the Supreme Court. There five male justices ruled her claim invalid because she filed it more than 180 days after the discrimination STARTED. So now the law of the land is you have 180 days from the day the discrepency in pay STARTS to file a claim. So, ladies start asking what everyone else is making, because if you discover it later, you are already out of luck.
So, there is currently legislation that says every instance (paycheck) where there is an illegal equality starts the 180 day clock, not the moment the first inequity occured.
Senator McCain is blocking a vote on legislation to correct this injustice (the bill that passed in the house) they are filibustering it's return. He FAILED to show up to vote on the first one, Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2007 and further said the gap between the pay of women and men in this country isn't due to discrimination. Women just need more "education and training" to earn as much as men. I think he mentally added "and a penis helps too." Ask Lilly Ledbetter, she'll tell you if she had one, she'd have been making more money all these years.
So, just remember this ladies, when the senator comes to romance you for your vote. He thinks we all can discover pay dicrimination in 180 days, or he thinks it doesn't exist (figures be damned) or he thinks it is our own faults since we are lacking "education and training" or he just doesn't give a rip.
Lovemy4 is a discussion leader for North Central Phoenix, tired mother of 4 great kids and wife to one great husband.
McCain who?? :) 180 days
McCain who?? :)
180 days what ??
Seeing red, yup!
This is discrimination....I don't even want to get started....
The last time I looked around more and more ladies our getting their " education and training " without flashing a little boob to get in the door !
Not only do most of us ladies make time to get educated....we also run our own buisness which is called " Home and Famliy "!
No respect....
All I can see is a huge cover up for 180 days.....what a joke!
But look we (women) get a
But look we (women) get a slap in the face and only you and I even comment on it... nothing is going to change if only two people will even say that this is unfair. Where is the outrage? Women are getting valued (we earn about 77 cents to every one of their dollars) less than men, and one of the candidates who wants to lead this nation is OK with that, and is actually trying to stop a fair process from being the law of the land (this is especially annoying because the Senate is fillibustering, remember when they had the majority they wanted to do the nuclear option, which would do away with the filibuster? Kyl was saying how only an up and down vote is fair. Now that they would lose and up or down vote, they LOVE the filibuster. They have changed their tunes, one short year later.) Makes me crazy!!!
Lovemy4 is a discussion leader for North Central Phoenix, tired mother of 4 great kids and wife to one great husband.
The Supreme Court Case dealt
The Supreme Court Case dealt with the TIMING of filing a lawsuit, with the realization that there had to be constraints so employees wouldn't come back months or YEARS later to try to sue, at which time it would be costly and difficult to litigate such a claim.
Those who wanted an open-ended --- or at least long-term -- timeframe to sue were for the most part LAWYERS who make huge amounts of money on such cases, even if the case had no actual merit. The idea was to bring the lawsuit, then offer to 'settle' to save the company the money it would cost to fight and the bad PR the case would bring. Then the lawywers would walk away with 1/3 to 1/2 (and sometimes even more!) of whatever money the plaintif received.
This case was never about pay inequity per se, and the law proposed would do nothing to close the 77% gap. All it would do is put more money in the pockets of trial lawyers and increase the costs for business who get sued, which they would then pass on to US, the consumer.
So if you're wondering why so few people are miffed about it, it's because most people AGREE with the decision!
What? Ask Lilly Ledlbetter
What? Ask Lilly Ledlbetter if it was about pay inequity. It absolutely was. She received a lower wage than any of the men in the same position and she had more experience in most cases. If that isn't pay inequity, what is it?
The Supreme Court made it about timing, since the pay inequity aspect was pretty obvious. Saying it doesn't matter if she was discriminated against, she didn't file suit in time. They say she should have discovered it and filed a claim 180 DAYS from the moment of first discrimination (back when she was first hired 19 years earlier). Who can find out what other employees make and file a claim in 180 days?
I am not sure your sources, (Someone on FOX news??) but no one suggested an open ended timeframe. The proposed law that I refer to that was voted down, certainly did not, it asked for 180 days from the last discrepancy, which seems reasonable and fair. And if companies don't want to be sued, they should pay equally.
Some Congressmen who voted against it may be saying they did it to stop trial lawyers from suing big companies, but in my opinion these trial lawyers, are the heros who would be representing the person who was discriminated against, in most cases a woman, and in this particular case, a woman.
So, maybe the reason people aren't miffed, is they feel sorry for the companies or more likely they are being thrown off issue, as I think you have been. It is too bad if bad information is out there.
Lovemy4 is a discussion leader for North Central Phoenix, tired mother of 4 great kids and wife to one great husband.
The point I was making with
The point I was making with my hubby...talking about this...is work ethics, employees aren't supposed to talk among each other about their wages.So unless some girl is lucky enough to find a pay stub on the ground and sees....then what?
I do agree certain laws should be in place, however 180 days isn't enough time to be sneaky....and we ladies shouldn't be forced to be sneaky...
And as you said lovemy4, if companies were honest from the get, they wouldn't find trouble ahead......
On a side note lovemy4....
My boss, who I just love... NOT...
walks into today wearing a John McCain shirt....OH SNAP! :)
Then starts passing out buttons, he goes to my co worker...she just gives him a look...and then me...I just look with a sniker ...." Oh great, Demo's".....
Now I know for sure why I wasn't liking him.. lol....Just kidding...
But please...this is one cruel joke!
Hey MWheeler, Already?? I
Hey MWheeler, Already?? I know there was a lot of boss pressure during the last election in some offices, hope it doesn't get ugly for you! I am sure living in McCain's home town isn't going to be easy...
Lovemy4 is a discussion leader for North Central Phoenix, tired mother of 4 great kids and wife to one great husband.