Ledbetter Act Proceeds in Senate, Could Reverse Supreme Court Decision

President-elect Barack Obama with Lilly Ledbetter, who has become a symbol for equal pay for equal work. Ledbetter will be among about 40 guests on Obama’s pre-inaugural train journey to Washington.—Photo by Haraz N. Ghanbari/AP Photo

Democrats are using their newfound political influence early in this legislative session to reverse a U.S. Supreme Court ruling and do battle against wage discrimination among women in the workplace.

The House last week passed twin measures that support equal pay for equal work in the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act. Today the Senate took up the Ledbetter bill, voting 72-23 to move forward. The measure, which would make it easier for workers to sue over pay discrimination claims, is strongly supported by President-elect Barack Obama. But with Republicans demanding changes, some lawmakers say the bill is unlikely to be ready for his signature when he takes office next week.

The Ledbetter Act would allow employees to bring wage discrimination claims within 180 days of receiving a discriminatory paycheck, rather than within 180 days of the original decision by the employer to pay them less. The law would reverse a high court ruling last year that held that Lilly Ledbetter, a supervisor at an Alabama tire plant, could not sue her employer for pay discrimination because the decision to pay her lower wages occurred years ago—not within the 180 days necessary to file charges.

The bill has languished since April, when it was filibustered by Senate Republicans who argued that it would lead to more lawsuits. At the time, Obama and Hillary Clinton, rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination, returned to Washington from the campaign trail to vote for the bill.

Jessica Arons, director of the women’s health and rights program at the Center for American Progress, says the Ledbetter bill should help all employees affected by pay discrimination to file a lawsuit seeking redress.

“The Ledbetter law gives people the opportunity to bring a suit after they’ve found out about the discrimination, even if it’s past the six-month period from when the discrimination occurred,” she says. “That will improve everyone’s ability to bring a suit, because it gives everyone time to learn about the discrimination.”

A study of pay inequity found that working women earn on average 78 cents for every dollar that men make. Over a 40-year period, that amounted to lost median wages of $434,000 for women, not including interest on that income, lost benefits and lost opportunities to save, according to the study, released in December by the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

“Because of the unequal pay that builds up over time,” Arons says, “women have less ability to save for retirement. So they go into retirement with less economic security than men do, in large part because of unfair pay.”

The other measure that takes on wage discrimination, the Paycheck Fairness Act, would compel employers to explain pay disparities between men and women and prove that such decisions were based on experience and education, not gender. The bill also would protect workers from retaliation if they question workplace salary structures. It has not yet been taken up by the Senate.

Workers’ rights advocates, including the National Women’s Law Center and AARP, praised the Senate for taking up the Ledbetter bill. They urged Congress and the incoming administration to act swiftly to safeguard the rights of all workers.

Meanwhile, Ledbetter, now 70 and retired, became a national symbol for pay equity after she lost her battle with Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., where she worked for 20 years before discovering that she earned less than male colleagues doing the same job.

She learned through an anonymous tip in 1998, as she was retiring, that her male colleagues were paid more for performing the same supervisory work.

“My pension and my Social Security are based on the amount I earned while working there, so this has been a drastic loss for me,” Ledbetter told AARP Bulletin Today in April. “It’s hard enough in retirement, making your income last the rest of your life.”

Carole Fleck is a senior editor at AARP Bulletin Today.