Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act?

Okay, I get the basic concept of Obama's signing of this to extend the time to file a claim. What I don't get is how can one prove they are being underpaid? I couldn't find specifics on the actual act. Does it cover women who are doing more than their fair share of work over a male who is making 5 times her salary? Here's an example-GM of a company (male) who doles out responsibility to a woman who was only supposed to be for admin. support, being molded to take on the job with no title given or pay so the former GM can buy the company, thus making this woman do all of those responsibilities without the pay or title? If you can provide a link or more information, that would be great!

I'm posting anon for protection for obvious reasons, here, by the way... Thanks!

Answer Question
 
Anonymous

Asked by Anonymous at 7:52 PM on Jan. 29, 2009 in Politics & Current Events

Answers (12)

  • If the wage she was paid was one a person could live on, then I don't agree with this.
    If she didn't like how much she was paid, she should have looked for a job someplace else.

    Businesses should be able to pay whatever they want to whomever they want.
    If people don't like the payrate, they should leave. If the business can't find people to work for what they will pay, they should go out of business. No one id "made" to do anything in this matter, and that's hoe it should be.
    mustbeGRACE

    Answer by mustbeGRACE at 8:00 PM on Jan. 29, 2009

  • DawnA72

    Answer by DawnA72 at 8:04 PM on Jan. 29, 2009

  • Why should a woman have to settle for less then a man? most of us work just as hard as they do.
    As to the OP you would probably have to get some sort of court order that would allow the courts to see your pay against your job discription and also what the pay is of the person that you think is making more
    Havahsmommy

    Answer by Havahsmommy at 8:19 PM on Jan. 29, 2009

  • The problem with this is going to result in women of child-bearing age NOT being given the same consideration for a position that her male counterpart would have. EEOC laws are easily circumvented, as long as an interview is granted, any excuse can be given for not being hired!

    15 years ago, when I was ENGAGED, I was TOLD by my recruiter NOT to wear my engagement ring to the interviews! Because 1.) Employers are not going to tolerate potential "wedding on the brain" employees 2.) Taking extra days/hours off to plan and go on a honeymoon, and of course 3.) pregnancy and kids!

    Employers lose when hiring what are considered "volatile" women. They're PERCEIVED as not being as reliable as males (with or without children). Children's illnesses/doctor appts, teacher conferences, after school activities, etc., cut into productivity, and forces others to pick up the slack or not do it at all, yet they can demand the same pay?!
    LoriKeet

    Answer by LoriKeet at 8:31 PM on Jan. 29, 2009

  • OP here - this woman is beyond child bearing years - been established in the company for quite some time, knows the ins and outs and can do just about every position within the company. Look for another job? Think it's easy to find one in this day & age? This has just recently happened while the economy is so bad and jobs are very scarce. How can it be justified that someone who puts in 10x the work get paid so little while someone else who doesn't even do his job half the time get paid so much more? Not the owner, but another man in the company? Someone who can't even multi-task or do what little is asked of him in the first place?
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 8:45 PM on Jan. 29, 2009

  • LoriKeet, I think that used to be the case. However, the younger generation (my generation) spends less than 3 months on average at a job. From my experience, as well as my husbands, being married and having a child is more appealing to them because they know we NEED the job to survive, we can't just go back home to mommy and daddy. Working isn't just something to do, it's necessary for us. We are considered more dependable because of it.
    melamommy24

    Answer by melamommy24 at 8:56 PM on Jan. 29, 2009

  • I was told that I was a "non-essential" employee of the company. Doesn't make sense. If I were non-essential, why, then do I run the entire office and do every other job that no one else wants there? Why is it if I'm out a day, nothing gets done b/c no one knows how? If I were to leave, no one there could do what I do. There are 2 guys in the office and neither one seem to know from one day to the next what to do.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 9:23 PM on Jan. 29, 2009


  • Here is what determines what people are paid:

    1) How easily replaced are your skills?
    2) How long does it take to educate someone who will replace you?
    I am a business owner and a college graduate.
    Businesses are in business to make money.
    mustbeGRACE

    Answer by mustbeGRACE at 10:08 PM on Jan. 29, 2009

  • There are so many considerations for what someone's pay is. Even sheer will and negotiating power comes into play.

    Women typically choose lower paying jobs in return for flexibility to raise their families. It's not necessarily discrimination. Sure there are legit cases and Ms. Ledbetter might be one, but I feel like this legislation is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

    Instead of litigating, women should read "Nice Girls Don't Get the Corner Office" by Lois Frankel.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 10:30 PM on Jan. 29, 2009

  • mustbe GRACE you need to read the full story . Why she did what she needed to do.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 11:16 PM on Jan. 29, 2009

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.