Tell Your Senators To Oppose S. 181, The Lily Ledbetter Act

On January 15, 2009, the Senate voted 74 to 23 to proceed with the Lily Ledbetter Act. I documented this and one other destructive piece of legislation in a previous blog entry here:

Gender Equity Frivoulous Lawsuits Will Once Again Jam Our Legal System
84rules
January 8, 2009

The Democrats in Congress are hell-bent on inflicting this wasteful, destructive legislation on us once again. The Lily Ledbetter Act opens the door wide for all kinds of lawsuits since the language of the bill permits anyone to be a vicitm of discrimination.

Remember back in the late 80's when our court system was so jammed with frivolous lawsuits that hardened criminals were being set free simply because there was no space on the court dockets to try their cases and they were being held too long while waiting for a "speedy, public trial?" Well, the Lily Ledbetter Act and its companion, the Paycheck Fairness Act, are threatening to bring us back to those days.

According to Eagle Forum:

Please note that S. 181 is different than the House passed version of the Lilly Ledbetter bill, H.R. 11. S. 181 is worse. Not only will it overturn the Supreme Court's decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company (2007), which upheld the timely filing of claims of alleged pay discrimination, S. 181 would also expand the class of potential plaintiffs to anyone "affected by" discrimination. A plausible reading of this language means a spouse or heir who receives pension checks and was not a victim of discrimination would have standing to file a lawsuit. This is a dangerous addition to an already destructive bill. At a time when more than 11 million Americans are unemployed, the highest unemployment rate in sixteen years, these bills would expose large and small companies to vast new liabilities extending back decades. What our economy needs now is for businesses to hire more workers in America, but they are not going to do that if it means exposing themselves to expensive and frivolous litigation. The only things these two bills will stimulate are more litigation and a further exodus of jobs out of the United States.

The big concern here is that businesses will be more reluctant to hire workers, especially women or members of any other group that may try to take advantage of the poorly worded provisions of the Lily Ledbetter Act. I wouldn't blame any business that did so.

Further, these two pieces of legislation would only serve to make some lawyers rich at the expense of the American consumer who would ultimately foot the bill for these frivolous lawsuits.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas has proposed an alternative piece of legislation. It is S. 166, the Title VII Fairness Act.

Please contact your Senators and ask them to oppose S. 181 and support S. 166.

You can reach your Senators on-line here:

Congressional Email Directory

And the Eagle Forum entry on-line here:

Senate To Vote On S. 181
Eagle Forum
January 19, 2008

Gender Equity: Frivolous Lawsuits Will Once Again Jam Our Legal System

"Gender Equity." "Comparable worth." Remember those terms? Now that we have a socialist controlled Congress and an avowed socialist in going into the White House, these issues will come up more often and they will serve to do even more damage to our already crippled economy not to mention how they are going to jam up our court system thereby wasting even more money and resources.

Of course, I am referring to the leftist idea that people should be paid equal wages for equal work. It sounds like a novel idea, but underneath, it is a destructive economic force that Joe and Jane Average American will end up paying for while elitist lawyers and lawmakers will get rich off of it.

All things being equal, there should be equal pay for equal work, but all things are not equal. Differences will exist in terms of education level, level of experience, time in current position and continuous time in current position.

Some workers will have four-year degrees while others will have two-year degrees or no degree at all. Some workers will have more experience working on specific projects while others will have less. Some workers will have been at the same position for a longer period of time while others will have been at that position for a shorter period of time. And, some workers will have spent a longer continuous period of time while others may have breaks in their time.

All things being equal? Not in the real world.

In my field of Information Technology, there are major differences in worker qualifications that will affect what kind of compensation a worker will recieve. For example, I have a four-year degree while my two co-workers do not. In market terms, that makes me just a little more valuable. I have worked in IT for over ten years while my two co-workers have less experience. I have certifications as a Network Engineer while those I work with have no certifications at all.

But we all do essentially the same work. Should we all be paid the same? No. The market determines what fair compensation will be. It just so happens that since I have done a little more work in my own education and in getting technical training, my value is higher. Thus, my employer must either pay what I am worth, or I am free to go to another employer who is willing to give that fair compensation. (Believe me, when I put my resume on-line, I have no problem getting responses from prospective employers who would love to have someone with my education and skill set.)

So, what does all of this have to do with "gender equity?" Just that are two bills (Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act) that the new Congress is set to pass and the new President is set to sign, despite the fact that they will only create more economic turmoil.

Writing for Town Hall, Allison Kasic has this to say:

The Paycheck Fairness Act would take significant steps toward the idea of “comparable worth,” aka government intervention (rather than market mechanisms such as supply and demand) in determining salary levels for different jobs to ensure “fairness.” Under the bill, the Department of Labor would issue guidelines that compare the wages of different jobs to give employers an idea of what is considered a fair wage. It would also subject employers to unlimited compensatory and punitive damages, even for unintentional pay disparities. As if that doesn’t leave employers vulnerable enough, the bill would also prevent employers from defending differences in pay as based on factors other than sex (for example, productivity, years in the workforce, education level, etc.). In other words, the bill is a trial lawyer’s dream come true. The potential for costly litigation is endless, which is likely to raise the cost of employment and discourage workplace flexibility, both of which are bad news for women.

How would it be bad news for women? Employers will be less likely to hire a woman for fear of her invoking the Paycheck Fairness Act and filing a lawsuit. Further, it will decrease the number of fields that women may have obtained employment in under other circumstances.

More:

Another bill inviting lawsuit abuse is the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which passed the House in the last Congress, but was blocked by a Republican filibuster in the Senate. The bill’s namesake, Lilly Ledbetter, gained notoriety when she lost her equal pay case against Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. before the Supreme Court. Ledbetter lost her case due to statutory timing limits, and the bill seeks to extend those statutory limits for future pay equity cases (giving employees more time to file a suit for wage discrimination).

In other words, there doesn't need to be any proof of discrimination nor will there be any time limts on when a suit can be filed, only the allegation will be enough for dead skunk lawyers to jump on the bandwagon in an effort to make themselves rich at Joe and Jane Average American's expense.

Write your Congressional Representatives and ask them to oppose these disastrous bills.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

"Gender Equity" Gets Top Billing in Congress
Allison Kasic
TownHall.com
January 7, 2009