S.1843 - Fair Pay Restoration Act Sponsor: Edward Kennedy / 110th Congress

Title
110th Congress - A bill to amend title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 to clarify that an unlawful practice occurs each time compensation is paid pursuant to a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice, and for other purposes. hidemore...
Summary
A bill to amend title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 to clarify that an unlawful practice occurs each time compensation is paid pursuant to a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice, and for other purposes. (by CRS)
Status
The bill has been introduced.

Customize

Customize the interests supporting and opposing this bill

To remove an interest, click the Remove button next to its name below this box.

To add an interest, choose one from this list:

To add an interest, click Support or Oppose.

You can share your customized pages with other people by sending them the URL for pages about this bill. Other MAPLight.org users will not see your customizations unless they use the URL you send them. To save your customizations for your next visit, create a free New Account, then Sign In.

Done

Interests who did want this bill to become law included these interests and specific groups:

Interests who did not want this bill to become law included these interests and specific groups:

Contribution data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics (OpenSecrets.org)

Comments RSS feed

Clash between business and labor by Tiffany Hsieh, Mar 5, 2008 (4:37pm)

S.1843, The Fair Pay Restoration Act, is the companion bill to H.R. 2831, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which passed the House last July. Proponents of the legislation describe it as a way to counter the precedent set in a controversial supreme court decision, Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. Many believe the case severely limits the ability of victims of pay discrimination to seek a remedy under the Civil Rights Act.
Lily Ledbetter worked for Goodyear at their plant in Gaedsen, Alabama and proved that she was consistently paid less than her male coworkers in her suit against the company. She won her case and a large settlement, but the ruling was overturned by a landmark supreme court decision, which stated that in her case, she did not file her case in the 180 day statute required by the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The passage of S.1483 would eliminate that 180 day statute. It does not seem that anyone has argued that Lily Ledbetter’s case is not an injustice, but opponents of this legislation, largely any organization
representing the interests of employers of any kind, say that it will lead to frivolous lawsuits, and put undue strain on businesses.
This is a straightforward clash between business interests and civil rights proponents,and has sparked a significant, heated debate.

Reply to this comment
Reply to this comment close
[ Tags ]
[ Tags ] close
[ Spam ]
[ Spam ] close