Thursday's changes to equal pay act

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

emp123

New Member
On Thursday 1-29-09 president Obama signed a change to the "1964 Civil Rights Act" (equal pay act?).

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090129/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_15

Does this change apply only from 1-29-09 onwards?

That is, if I discover next week that I have been receiving unequal pay due to illegal race discrimination race for the last 10 years can I now make a claim?

Or, does the change only apply to new discrimination from 1-29-09 forward.

Thank you.
 
Q: That is, if I discover next week that I have been receiving unequal pay due to illegal race discrimination race for the last 10 years can I now make a claim?

A: I believe this has been illegal since 1964.
 
Agreed, this has been illegal for some time.

However, the supreme court ruled in 2007 that the discrimination claim must be filed within 180 days of the discrimination event.

The change to the law extends the time to 180 days from each discriminating paycheck.

I think I have that correct, look at the link in the earlier message for more details.

In my example, I would have had to file the discrimination claim 9.5 years ago. Not likely as the company would hide the discriminatory pay information from me.

So, using my example again, can I now file a discrimination claim and expect to recover 10 years of non-discriminatory pay?

Thank you for your time.
 
I haven't had time to review the amendment closely enough to answer your question yet.
 
Here is the way I understand it after reviewing the highlights.

There is a 180 day statute of limitations under which you can file a claim. Under the new law, this 180 days resets itself every time you receive a paycheck with - let's call it, discriminatory pay.

Say you get paid weekly. Say you got paid today, February 2. Today you have 180 days to file the claim. Tomorrow, you have 179 days. Wednesday you have 178 days. And so on.

Then on Monday, February 9, you get a new paycheck with discriminatory pay. The clock resets and you have 180 days again.

Does that answer the question? I"m not sure if that is what you are looking for.
 
Thanks. That answers the theoretical part of my question.

From a practical perspective, laws are usually written so they are in effect from the date of the law forward (ex post facto).

If I had been receiving discriminatory pay for the 10 years before the law was changed, would I be able to file a claim and expect to have the pay corrected for the 10 year period?

Or, because the 10 years took place before the law was changed, would I only be able to have the pay corrected from the date of the law forward?

Thanks again.
 
It would be quite unusual if you are able to get ten years corrected. You are expected to mitigate your damages; failing for ten years to take any action is not doing your part. You would be expected to file a claim or find new employment rather than waiting ten years and then expecting to get a decade's worth of correction all at once. So regardless of the answer, you're not going to get ten years worth.
 
Actually, you have hit on the reason for the change to the law.

Companies don't tell employees when they discriminate against them.

The unfortunate woman involved in the case discovered at the end of her career she had been the victim of discriminatory pay for 19 years. She sued and won, but the supreme court overturned the decision and stated she should have filed her claim when the discrimination started. She should have filed her claim before she knew she was being discriminated against.

My 10 year example was just an example.

In my case, I have been working with management and HR for longer than the 180 day time limit. They claimed to be interested, but have stonewalled every attempt to gather/present information. Perhaps to drag the process out longer than 180 days?

If the time limit change only applies forward only then it will be of no help to me. If the change applies retroactively then I may decide to pursue a case.

Thanks again.
 
Given that the law was signed less than a week ago, it's hard to say without reading the statute and I still haven't had time for that. What did the EEOC say when you asked them?
 
I haven't asked the EEOC yet. My last EEOC question took about a month before I got an answer.

I was about to start the complaint process when I read about the potential for the law change. I figured I'd best wait till after the change.

I asked the question so I would be better prepared when I spoke with the EEOC. The more I know the better able I am to answer questions.
 
emp123 said:
On Thursday 1-29-09 president Obama signed a change to the "1964 Civil Rights Act" (equal pay act?).
1. Does this change apply only from 1-29-09 onwards?

2.That is, if I discover next week that I have been receiving unequal pay due to illegal race discrimination race for the last 10 years can I now make a claim?

3. Or, does the change only apply to new discrimination from 1-29-09 forward.

Thank you.
Click to expand...

Answers:
1. It actually rolls back past the date 1/29/2009 to May 28, 2007.

2. Yes for all 10 years, not just the 180/300 limit.

3. No all claims filed after May 28, 2007.

As a side note the Equal Pay Act is different law signed in 1963 if Ledbetter had filed under the E.P.A the 180/300 tolling would not have been an issue, why she did not file under the E.P.A is a bit of a mystery. My guess is the equal pay for equal work under the EPA is a tougher hurdle.

SEC. 6. EFFECTIVE DATE.


This Act, and the amendments made by this Act, take effect as if enacted on May 28, 2007 and apply to all claims of discrimination in compensation under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (29 U.S.C. 621 et seq.), title I and section 503 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and sections 501 and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, that are pending on or after that date.
Click to expand...
 
Thank you for answering my questions.

I did ask the EEOC the same questions sometime after the last post. They were not much help.

I was laid off around the same time. I believe in retaliation for my complaints on discrimination and harassment from management And, more importantly, my refusal to accept the the companies transparently false rejection of my complaints (Ex., improper behavior isn't harassment unless they meant to harass you.).

To get my severance I had to agree that I would pay all attorney fees if I sued and lost.

So I'm now considering my options.

Again, thanks you for answering my questions.
 
Contact an attorney before you sign anything that has to do with severance.
 
rerply

Say you get paid weekly. Say you got paid today, February 2. Today you have 180 days to file the claim. Tomorrow, you have 179 days. Wednesday you have 178 days. And so on.
 
jackey said:
Say you get paid weekly. Say you got paid today, February 2. Today you have 180 days to file the claim. Tomorrow, you have 179 days. Wednesday you have 178 days. And so on.
Click to expand...
jackey,

Actually, the EEOC told me 300 days. Otherwise your stament is in agreement with my understanding.

Thanks.
 
Green Hornet said:
Contact an attorney before you sign anything that has to do with severance.
Click to expand...
Too late.

The time allowed to sign was too short.

The trauma of the harassment, management/HR lies and being laid off made it impossible to deal with the issue in the amount of time alloted.

I imagine that is the intention.

I forget the exact wording of the line in question. But I believe it said if I sued and lost I would be liable for the companies legal fees.

A few questions.

Would a EEOC investigation result in legal fees? I understand their 1st action is to try an mediate a solution.

If the EEOC were to take my case, do they not sue on my behalf? In that case would a loss result in me being liable for legal fees?

If a lawyer took my case on contingency, would they assume the responsibility for legal fees if the case were lost?

Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top