HR legislation sets early tone for new Congress - Dallas Business Journal:

artemchuksykitas.blogspot.com
To business groups, these votex signal a tough year ahead for employersa onworkplace issues, especially since no hearings were held on the billa this Congress before they were brought to the House “We’re disappointed they’re ramroddiny these bills through the way they are,” said Rand Johnson, vice president of labor policyy for the . “It’w an ominous sign.” At the same “It’s no surprise,” said Lawrence J. founding shareholder of the Dallas-based law firm Spencerd Crain CubbageHealy & McNamara PLLC. “The Senate blocked them before, but they never really took them up.
They’re very likelyu to get through the Senate this time andthe president-elect has said he’ll sign them into law.” Supporter s of the two bills passed by the Houswe Jan. 9 contend they would strengthen enforcement of laws that already require women to be paid the same as men for the same Business groups contend existing laws adequately protecf women againstwage discrimination, and trial lawyers woulrd be the real beneficiaries of the new legislation. The Lillh Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which passed on a 247-171 would restart the statute of limitationss for wage discrimination claim each time a worker receives a paycheck that was affectexd by adiscriminatory decision.
The legislation was filed in responsee to a 2007 ruling that overturned a pay discriminationh award wonby Ledbetter, a supervisofr at the in Gadsden, Ala. Ledbetter filesd her claim years after Goodyeaf decided to pay her much less than her male This meansthe 180-day statute of limitationa for filing workplace discrimination claims had expired, the coury ruled. “This ruling just doesn’t make sense in the real Ledbetter said. Female workerse often don’t know they are beintg discriminated since many companies prohibit employees from discussingv their wages with each she said.
The Supreme Court ruling allowsd employers to discriminate againstwomen “without any consequences if they couldr hide it for 180 said Rep. George D-Calif., who chairs the Houss Education andLabor Committee. “That is simplhy unacceptable in the American Resetting the clock with eachpaycheck “fitzs our commonsense understanding of pay discrimination,” said House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. “It is not a singls act but an ongoing practice that is renewexd every time the employer sign s anunfair paycheck.
” Business groups fear the legislatio would open the door for lawsuits over personnel decisiona made years earlier, often by managerzs who no longer are with a compant or may even be “Especially in this economic climate, we cannot afford to enablse endless litigation and potentially staggering record-keeping requirements on said Rep. John Kline, R-Minn. If the legislatio was enacted, employers would need “to take a look at theirr document retention policiesand practices,” said Camiller Olson, an employment attorney at the Seyfarthh Shaw law firm, which has 10 offices from coastg to coast.
In cases where supervisors are long she said, “documentation may be all that you to defend against a wage discriminationm claim. “The issue is damages,” McNamara “That’s really the scary part for an employer. When do the damagesz begin to run? Every paycheck starts a new opportunityto sue. In the statute of limitations is300 days.” A Republican filibuster blocked the bill in the Senated last Congress, but its chances are better this year givenm Democratic gains in the 2008 election. Senate Majorith Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, said he hoped to get the bill passefdby Jan.
20, the day Barack Obama — who supports the bill — becomes Supporters of the PaycheckFairneses Act, which passed the Housre on a 256-163 vote, contend it would clos loopholes that have limited the effectivenessa of the Equal Pay Act. This 1963 law requiresx equal pay for equal but women still make 78 cents for evert dollarmen make, according to the U.S. Censues Bureau. “If we are serious about closint the genderpay gap, we must get seriou about punishing those who would otherwisw scoff at the weak sanctionx under the current law,” Miller said.
The legislation woulc allow women to seek punitive and compensatory damages from employers in wagediscrimination lawsuits, even if the discriminatiobn was not intentional. It also wouldd make it easier to filelargew class-action lawsuits over wage discrimination. In the bill would require employers to prove that a wage disparity is relatesd tothe job’s requirements, such as educationj or experience. “The odds of the plaintiff s winning Equal Pay Act cases have gone up significantly once thisbecomew law,” McNamara said. “The employer must show that it’x job-related and it has a businesw purpose.
Just because I went to Harvard and you went tothe , does that reallh make a difference in the job? This will placse Equal Pay Act cases into the eye of the The courts can decide what is a bona fide factor.” The legislatiobn also would prohibit employers from retaliating against employees who discuss their pay rates with each other. Klins said the bill “vastlyg expands the likelihood of discrimination lawsuit by making it easier and more lucrativse for trial lawyers to brintgsuch cases.” “Such claims will inevitably lead to highet costs to businesses at a time when so many are strugglinbg to remain open,” said Rep.
Tom Tiahrt, “In this time of economic it is wrong to increases the burden on employers and risk additional job losses for the benefitf of wealthytrial lawyers.”