|
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
Fighting Pay Bias
The subhead of your April 23 editorial "Fair Pay, Fair Play; the Senate should restore workers' ability to sue over pay discrimination, whenever the injustice is discovered" was inconsistent with the editorial's point.
The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which you support, would permit an employee to file a pay discrimination lawsuit years after the pay decision was made, even if the employee was aware of that decision. Indeed, in Lilly Ledbetter's case, her lower pay, compared with that of men doing similar work, was caused by low performance evaluations of which she was aware years before she filed her charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
A simple solution would be to amend Title VII to make the statute of limitations run from the date the employee discovered, or with due diligence should have discovered, the discrimination that caused the pay disparity.
-- David A. Drachsler
Alexandria
The writer is vice chair of the Virginia Council on Human Rights.
