9th Circuit Upholds Wage Discrimination Against Women
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by DonViejo (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).
Source: Chicago Tribune
On April 27, 2017, the 9th U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a ruling that said paying women less than men for equal work based on prior lower wages was discriminatory under the federal Equal Pay Act.
In a 2015 decision by a lower court, U. S. Magistrate Michael Seng ruled that women's lower prior salaries are likely due to discrimination based on gender bias.
This ruling was overturned by the 9th Circuit. In citing a 1982 ruling, the three-judge panel wrote employers could use previous salary information as long as they applied it "reasonably" (quotations mine) and had a business policy that justified it.
Read more: cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/04/27/16-15372.pdf
This ruling institutionalizes wage discrimination against women by permitting past wage discrimination to be a reason for new discrimination. Justice for all?
(P. S. I know this news is over 12 hours old, however, it is important news, nonetheless.)
shenmue
(38,501 posts)cstanleytech
(26,080 posts)plus it was posted already in LBN when it was fresh https://www.democraticunderground.com/10141762401
Demit
(11,238 posts)"The panel held that under Kouba v. Allstate Ins. Co., 691 F.2d 873 (9th Cir. 1982), prior salary alone can be a factor other than sex if the defendant shows that its use of prior salary was reasonable and effectuated a business policy. The panel remanded the case for further proceedings, with instructions that the district court evaluate the business reasons offered by the defendant and determine whether the defendant used prior salary reasonably.
"
On remand, the district court must evaluate the four business reasons offered by the County and determine whether the County used prior salary reasonably in light of [its] stated purpose[s] as well as its other practices. Kouba, 691 F.2d at 87677. We emphasize that because these matters relate to the Countys affirmative defense rather than to the elements of the plaintiffs claim, the County has the burden of persuasion."
IOW, It's not over.
DonViejo
(60,536 posts)From the SOP of the LBN Forum: