House Passes Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2007
In a 225-199 vote, Congress passed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2007, in effect reversing the Supreme Court's decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., which tightened the statute of limitations employees have to sue employers for pay discrimination. H.R. 2831, passed July 31, begins the...
August 02, 2007 at 05:17 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
In a 225-199 vote, Congress passed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2007, in effect reversing the Supreme Court's decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., which tightened the statute of limitations employees have to sue employers for pay discrimination.
H.R. 2831, passed July 31, begins the statute of limitations anew “each time compensation is paid pursuant to the discriminatory compensation decision or other practice.” It amends Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. George Miller and cosponsored by 93 other House Democrats, passed mainly with Democratic support–223 of 225 votes in favor of passage were Democratic.
In a statement, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi urged President Bush to approve the act. “The Ledbetter Fair Pay Act restores the ability of women and all workers who are protected by anti-discrimination and civil rights laws access to our judicial system to vindicate their rights when they have been harmed by a discrimination,” she said. “Equal pay for equal work is a fundamental value. The president should join the House on the side of all American workers in standing for pay equity and against discrimination.”
The White House has expressed its intention to veto the bill. In a statement from the White House released before passage of the bill, the administration said it “strongly opposes” H.R. 2831.
“This legislation does not appear to be based on evidence that the current statute of limitations principles have caused any systemic prejudice to the interests of employees,” the statement read, “but it is reasonable to expect the bill's vastly expanded statute of limitations would exacerbate the existing heavy burden on the courts by encouraging the filing of stale claims.”
In a 225-199 vote, Congress passed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2007, in effect reversing the Supreme Court's decision in Ledbetter v.
H.R. 2831, passed July 31, begins the statute of limitations anew “each time compensation is paid pursuant to the discriminatory compensation decision or other practice.” It amends Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. George Miller and cosponsored by 93 other House Democrats, passed mainly with Democratic support–223 of 225 votes in favor of passage were Democratic.
In a statement, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi urged President Bush to approve the act. “The Ledbetter Fair Pay Act restores the ability of women and all workers who are protected by anti-discrimination and civil rights laws access to our judicial system to vindicate their rights when they have been harmed by a discrimination,” she said. “Equal pay for equal work is a fundamental value. The president should join the House on the side of all American workers in standing for pay equity and against discrimination.”
The White House has expressed its intention to veto the bill. In a statement from the White House released before passage of the bill, the administration said it “strongly opposes” H.R. 2831.
“This legislation does not appear to be based on evidence that the current statute of limitations principles have caused any systemic prejudice to the interests of employees,” the statement read, “but it is reasonable to expect the bill's vastly expanded statute of limitations would exacerbate the existing heavy burden on the courts by encouraging the filing of stale claims.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRepublican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
4 minute readSo You Want to Be a Tech Lawyer? Consider Product Counseling
FTC Lauds Withdrawal of Proposed Indiana Hospitals Merger After Leaning on State Regulators
4 minute readHow Qualcomm’s General Counsel Is Championing Diversity in Innovation
6 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250