PRockGirlScout said:
The Supreme Court interpreted the law correctly. Now it's up to congress to rewrite it. Also, anyone who doesn't understand why the 180 day statute was drafted in the first place doesn't have their common sense thinking cap on.
I don't buy this. Why exactly do you think that the Court's interpretation is correct (other than that the fact that 5 of 9 justices voted for it made it so)? For the record, I think the 180-day limitations period is maybe a bit short but is in principle a good idea, but that really has little to do with this case.
This case, quite simply, was about whether the last two pay decisions the employer made were "unlawful employment practices" because they were part of a series of pay decisions made by an employer that, let's not forget, was found by a jury to have engaged in sex discrimination. I don't think the Court's decision was crazy, but to me it's a lot more natural to consider the whole series of unfair pay decisions stemming from the discrimination to be an unlawful employment practice.
Her pay was low due to actions a jury found to be sex discrimination. There's no debate about that. To me, it seems pretty common sense that each pay decision that perpetuates that discrimination is a separate act for which the employer should be liable (as long as the employee brings suit within 180 days of one of those unlawful pay decisions, which Ledbetter did).
Ascanius
USA
October 2006
JUN 05, 2007 07:11 AM