Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 10-21-2008, 08:28 AM   #1 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Obama and Equal Pay

Again, Obama actions are not consistent with his words. Although he is highly critical of McCain, Republicans and business in general, when he has an opportunity to serve as a role model what do we get? On the issue of equal pay we get Obama paying his female paid staff less than his male staff on average. McCain on average pays his female staff people more than the males. I wonder why we are not concerned with the inconsistencies between Obama's words and his actions?

Quote:
But McCain's campaign cited Senate records to assert that McCain pays women better in his office than Obama does.

"Barack Obama says he's for equal pay for women, but women working in his Senate office earn an average of $9,000 less than men. By contrast, women in John McCain's Senate office actually earn an average of nearly $2,000 more than men. The American people understand that real leadership for the change we need is all about what you do, not just empty words," McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said in a statement.

The study that McCain's campaign cites, however, notes that a major reason for the disparity is that McCain has more women in senior, higher-paid positions -- not that women are being paid less than men for the same job.
McCain rebuts Obama ad on equal pay - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Political Intelligence - Boston.com

Of course we get the footnote about woman not holding the same jobs, I think I have heard that thousands of times before, but when business says it - it is b.s., isn't it?
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 08:32 AM   #2 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
LOL.......are yoi going to cover every issue across the board with your less than complete (cherrypicked?) critique of Obama?

Hurry ....time is running outl!
-----Added 21/10/2008 at 12 : 36 : 19-----
I think the voters know pretty well where the candidates stand on issues affecting women....be it equal pay, family/medical leave act, violence against women's act or the most basic, women's choice.....McCain has voted against all of them.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Last edited by dc_dux; 10-21-2008 at 08:37 AM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
dc_dux is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 08:38 AM   #3 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Not interested in issues. Rather discuss ACORN some more. I understand.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 08:41 AM   #4 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
The issue is that Obama supports equal pay....and McCain voted against it, as well voting against the family/medical leave act, violence against women's act (both were before Obama's time in the Senate) and doesnt have a litmus test for Supreme Court appointments, but wont appoint someone who supports Roe....and now will accept a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, which he previously opposed.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Last edited by dc_dux; 10-21-2008 at 08:43 AM..
dc_dux is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 08:46 AM   #5 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Actions vs. words.

McCain had reasons for his votes. Do those reasons not matter?

Do Obama's actions not matter? Obama says running his campaign is an example of his operational experience, I know the above is regarding his Senate staff but why not look at what he has done?

Sure you don't want to talk about Ayers or Wright? What about Palin dancing on SNL?
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 08:49 AM   #6 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
Regarding the Senate, much of pay differentials between the two staffs has to do with seniority as well as averaging the pay of administrative staff (more women than men) into the overall salary average, with McCain's staff being on the Senate payroll for a much longer time.

Its not that hard to understand.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire
dc_dux is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 08:52 AM   #7 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
So, why is it so hard for people to understand when Business gives the exact same answer?
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 08:59 AM   #8 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
ace, comparing the difference between Oabama's and McCain's staff to general practices within a specific business (or office) is apples and oranges.

Equal pay legislation addresses disparities in pay between those with same levels of experience. That is not the case in the differences in pay between Obama's staff and McCain's.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire
dc_dux is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 09:02 AM   #9 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
What, so is this some sort of back alley attempt to talk about pay inequity in private businesses?

You're about as coherent as a Sarah Palin debate response, Ace.
filtherton is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 09:05 AM   #10 (permalink)
Living in a Warmer Insanity
 
Tully Mars's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Yucatan, Mexico
I think it's hard to take it seriously when the info is (yet again) cherry picked to try to distort the facts. Here's the whole article-

Quote:
John McCain's campaign reacted today with specific figures to rebut a TV ad from Democratic rival Barack Obama on equal pay for women.

The ad says that women make on average 77 cents on the dollar compared to men, and accuses McCain of voting against an equal pay law.

"It's one more thing that John McCain doesn't get about our economy," the female announcer says. "A burden on business? How about the burden on our families?"

Equal pay, along with abortion rights, is one of the key issues Obama and Democrats are counting on to keep women from defecting to McCain.

But McCain's campaign cited Senate records to assert that McCain pays women better in his office than Obama does.

"Barack Obama says he's for equal pay for women, but women working in his Senate office earn an average of $9,000 less than men. By contrast, women in John McCain's Senate office actually earn an average of nearly $2,000 more than men. The American people understand that real leadership for the change we need is all about what you do, not just empty words," McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said in a statement.

The study that McCain's campaign cites, however, notes that a major reason for the disparity is that McCain has more women in senior, higher-paid positions -- not that women are being paid less than men for the same job.

The ad, first reported by Politico, is the latest in a series of hard-hitting spots Obama is running in individual battleground states, but not unveiling to the national media. Politico says it is airing at least in Virginia, which Obama is trying to bring into the Democratic column.
__________________
I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo

Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club
Tully Mars is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 10:24 AM   #11 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tully Mars View Post
I think it's hard to take it seriously when the info is (yet again) cherry picked to try to distort the facts. Here's the whole article-
The same information was included in my post. O.k. - I raise the "white flag", we have no plans of addressing the questions raised.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 10:26 AM   #12 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
The same information was included in my post. O.k. - I raise the "white flag", we have no plans of addressing the questions raised.
ace...perhaps the question was addressed in ways you dont like or accept.

The record of the candidates on equal pay and other women's issues is clear....what more need be said?
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire
dc_dux is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 10:35 AM   #13 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux View Post
....what more need be said?
Of course the questions have been addressed and of course I don't accept the manner in which the questions have been addressed. I apologize to all Obama supporters for being dense and having the gall to question Obama.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 10:37 AM   #14 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
ace....I know the facts can be hard to accept.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire
dc_dux is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 10:58 AM   #15 (permalink)
Living in a Warmer Insanity
 
Tully Mars's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Yucatan, Mexico
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
The same information was included in my post. O.k. - I raise the "white flag", we have no plans of addressing the questions raised.
I'll admit I didn't see that in your post. But with that information what is your point? Seems like you're trying to compare apples to oranges and then make a complaint regarding the color of the fruit inside.
__________________
I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo

Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club
Tully Mars is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 11:12 AM   #16 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
Of course the questions have been addressed and of course I don't accept the manner in which the questions have been addressed. I apologize to all Obama supporters for being dense and having the gall to question Obama.
Geez, can't you even concede a point without acting like a baby?
filtherton is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 11:13 AM   #17 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tully Mars View Post
I'll admit I didn't see that in your post. But with that information what is your point? Seems like you're trying to compare apples to oranges and then make a complaint regarding the color of the fruit inside.
Someone tried to rationalize Obama's actions using an argument that Business has used in the past regarding equal pay for equal work. I pointed that out, I also pointed it out in the OP.

Republican administrations have a track record of inclusion, including the Bush administration being diverse with no regard for sex or race. McCain chooses a female as his running mate and has females in high level staff positions, more so than does Obama. But Democrats want to call Republicans sexists. I don't get it, and I ask you folks some questions. My questions get laughed at. I know...it is always about me and my failings...I get it...no need to repeat it...please...I am whatever you think I am...but my questions are my questions.
-----Added 21/10/2008 at 03 : 14 : 20-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by filtherton View Post
Geez, can't you even concede a point without acting like a baby?
And what point would that be?
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."


Last edited by aceventura3; 10-21-2008 at 11:14 AM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 11:26 AM   #18 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
And what point would that be?
That the main point of your OP is bunk. One would expect such an astute economic expert as yourself wouldn't be so confused by the fairly straightforward reason that women are on average paid less than men among Obama's campaign staff.

I'm more interested in the disparities between what the different campaigns have paid Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae lobbyists (as in, which campaign has employed them as campaign staff) and how those disparities mesh with each campaigns professed desires about "keeping the special interests out of Washington," but that's just me.

By all means, let's talk about distorted interpretations of statistics like they aren't distortions and then act all incredulous when we're ignored.
filtherton is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 11:43 AM   #19 (permalink)
Living in a Warmer Insanity
 
Tully Mars's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Yucatan, Mexico
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
Someone tried to rationalize Obama's actions using an argument that Business has used in the past regarding equal pay for equal work. I pointed that out, I also pointed it out in the OP.

Republican administrations have a track record of inclusion, including the Bush administration being diverse with no regard for sex or race. McCain chooses a female as his running mate and has females in high level staff positions, more so than does Obama. But Democrats want to call Republicans sexists. I don't get it, and I ask you folks some questions. My questions get laughed at. I know...it is always about me and my failings...I get it...no need to repeat it...please...I am whatever you think I am...but my questions are my questions.
I think if you checked you'd find there's far more people of color registered Dem then GOP. I think there's a reason for that.

Quote:
My questions get laughed at. I know...it is always about me and my failings...I get it...no need to repeat it...please...I am whatever you think I am...but my questions are my questions.
I don't even understand your point/questions well enough to laugh at them and you seem to be bringing up that "it's all about you" way more then anyone else.
__________________
I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo

Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club
Tully Mars is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 11:47 AM   #20 (permalink)
Please touch this.
 
Halx's Avatar
 
Owner/Admin
Location: Manhattan
ace, can I have your attention for a moment? I have read this thread and am prepared to comment on the issue.

First, your point that Obama's campaign is paying women less than the men on average is nullified by the paragraph that Tully Mars highlighted. The one point that you based this entire thread on was discounted in your own original post. There are simply less women in senior roles for McCain and therefore the math cannot possibly add up for Obama.

Second, this point is based off of improperly organized statistics. If we were to compare women of the same role to men of the same role within Obama's campaign, versus the same scope within McCain's campaign, we might have an argument. Instead, these numbers simply reflect the total women in each campaign against the total men in each campaign. This is not good statistical analysis. It is irresponsible news reporting.

Now that I have responded to your points directly (instead of working on you personally) are you willing to concede this point or push further?
__________________
You have found this post informative.
-The Administrator
[Don't Feed The Animals]
Halx is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 11:51 AM   #21 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halx View Post
ace, can I have your attention for a moment? I have read this thread and am prepared to comment on the issue.

First, your point that Obama's campaign is paying women less than the men on average is nullified by the paragraph that Tully Mars highlighted. The one point that you based this entire thread on was discounted in your own original post. There are simply less women in senior roles for McCain and therefore the math cannot possibly add up for Obama.

Second, this point is based off of improperly organized statistics. If we were to compare women of the same role to men of the same role within Obama's campaign, versus the same scope within McCain's campaign, we might have an argument. Instead, these numbers simply reflect the total women in each campaign against the total men in each campaign. This is not good statistical analysis. It is irresponsible news reporting.

Now that I have responded to your points directly (instead of working on you personally) are you willing to concede this point or push further?
Thank you.

Next level - Obama has made attacks against McCain on the Equal pay issue, you agree there are complexities to the issue - are Obama's attacks against McCain fair? Are Obama's attacks on "business" fair?
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 11:55 AM   #22 (permalink)
Please touch this.
 
Halx's Avatar
 
Owner/Admin
Location: Manhattan
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
Thank you.

Next level - Obama has made attacks against McCain on the Equal pay issue, you agree there are complexities to the issue - are Obama's attacks against McCain fair? Are Obama's attacks on "business" fair?
You'll have to provide me with some source material. The only "attack" on "business" that I've detected from Obama center on big corporations. He seems to favor small businesses with his spoken word. Give me a quote in context and we can evaluate it as a community.
__________________
You have found this post informative.
-The Administrator
[Don't Feed The Animals]
Halx is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 12:55 PM   #23 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halx View Post
You'll have to provide me with some source material. The only "attack" on "business" that I've detected from Obama center on big corporations. He seems to favor small businesses with his spoken word. Give me a quote in context and we can evaluate it as a community.
Here is an Obama ad on the subject:


and here is a summary of one of the bills McCain did not support.

Quote:
(3)(A) For purposes of this section, an unlawful employment practice occurs, with respect to discrimination in compensation in violation of this title, when a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice is adopted, when an individual becomes subject to a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice, or when an individual is affected by application of a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice, including each time wages, benefits, or other compensation is paid, resulting in whole or in part from such a decision or other practice.`


(B) Liability may accrue and (in addition to any relief authorized by section 1977A of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1981a)), an aggrieved person may obtain relief as provided in subsection (g)(1), including recovery of back pay for up to 2 years preceding the filing of the charge, in an action under this title concerning an unlawful employment practice with regard to discrimination in compensation, where the unlawful employment practice that has occurred during the charge filing period is similar or related to an unlawful employment practice with regard to discrimination in compensation that occurred outside the charge filing period.'.
Here is one of the things McCain said:

Quote:
"I am all in favor of pay equity for women, but this kind of legislation, as is typical of what's being proposed by my friends on the other side of the aisle, opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems," the expected GOP presidential nominee told reporters. "This is government playing a much, much greater role in the business of a private enterprise system."


The bill sought to counteract a Supreme Court decision limiting how long workers can wait before suing for pay discrimination.

It is named for Lilly Ledbetter, a supervisor at the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.'s plant in Gadsden, Ala., who sued for pay discrimination just before retiring after a 19-year career there. By the time she retired, Ledbetter made $6,500 less than the lowest-paid male supervisor and claimed earlier decisions by supervisors kept her from making more.

The Supreme Court voted 5-4 last year to throw out her complaint, saying she had waited too long to sue.
McCain opposes equal pay bill in Senate

This bill could bankrupt small businesses. A simple strategy for every woman would be to file a lawsuit after leaving a company and be eligible for not only legitimate damages but 2 years of additional compensation. Why not? the employer (accept for Obama) is going to be presumed guilty based on our histroy.

The Ledbetter decision was decided correctly and properly frames potential damages and the time frames for correcting any wrong doing. There are often legitimate reasons for pay discrepancies and legitimate reasons to vote against legislation.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 01:15 PM   #24 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
This bill could bankrupt small businesses. A simple strategy for every woman would be to file a lawsuit after leaving a company and be eligible for not only legitimate damages but 2 years of additional compensation. Why not? the employer (accept for Obama) is going to be presumed guilty based on our histroy.
I think you're misreading the law. I think that it allows for additional back pay if the discrimination experienced past the end date of the filing period is similar or the same as the discrimination experienced during the filing period. It says that if you miss the filing period, but the discrimination persists, you can get up to two years of back pay. That doesn't seem that egregious to me, and I'm not sure about how effective your "simple strategy" would be. Though I should mention (and the preceding statement might have made it quite obvious) that I'm no lawyer.

Quote:
The Ledbetter decision was decided correctly and properly frames potential damages and the time frames for correcting any wrong doing. There are often legitimate reasons for pay discrepancies and legitimate reasons to vote against legislation.
Sez you. My small mind is so busy rationalizing my Obama apologetics, I'm having a hard time following your reasoning. It's also still trying to understand the relevance of your statistical magic tricks.
filtherton is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 01:21 PM   #25 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
The Supreme Court effectively affirmed that a woman couldnt file a pay discrimination lawsuit after six months of the first discriminatory paycheck.

The Fair Pay Restoration Act that McCain opposed (but did not vote) would have expanded the opportunity for women to file a pay discrimination claim.

Such clams are very difficult to prove and very time consuming in preparing and are denied more often than not. Six months to file a lawsuit after first discovering possible pay discrimination is not a hell of alot of time.

Pay discrimination is not frivolous...its a fact.

There is nothing to suggest that it would lead to a "strategy for women to file lawsuits" ...unless they had a legitimate claim

And there is even less to suggest that it would bankrupt small businesses.

But if thats what McCain believes, thats what he should be judged on. Although I dont quite understand how he can dismiss the issue with a comment like "They (women) need education and training" ...as the solution to pay discrimination.

Just as Obama should be judged on his voting record, not some silly notion as the OP's "his actions are not consistent with his word" and a baseless comparison of salaries of his staff vs McCain's staff.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Last edited by dc_dux; 10-21-2008 at 01:32 PM..
dc_dux is offline  
Old 10-21-2008, 01:46 PM   #26 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Right here
I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that the Ledbetter decision hinged on good law.
It seems like you've formed your opinion based on secondary and third party sources, rather than primary ones.

How could Ledbetter sue for damages any earlier than she knew she had been payed inappropriately?
Maybe she wasn't discriminated against, but her suit couldn't even go forward to determine that since the justices focused on the statute of limitations. A number of crimes don't have statute of limitations for good reasons, and there are good reasons for maintaining statutes of limitations in other cases, but I'm not sure how you justify barring people from suing for redress within a reasonable time when they learn a potential harm has been done to them.
__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman
smooth is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 04:48 AM   #27 (permalink)
You had me at hello
 
Poppinjay's Avatar
 
Location: DC/Coastal VA
Quote:
This bill could bankrupt small businesses.
I'd like to ask you to examine this rationale that you've exhibited on many of your recent
Quote:
Obama did this
threads.

The economy could bankrupt small businesses. The McCain tax cut could destabilize the SBA. A butterfly flapping its wings could cause Pop's Li'l IT Shop to close.

If your business isn't good enough to pay women in equal positions equal pay, then why do you exist? I don't want you putting tires on my car.
__________________
I think the Apocalypse is happening all around us. We go on eating desserts and watching TV. I know I do. I wish we were more capable of sustained passion and sustained resistance. We should be screaming and what we do is gossip. -Lydia Millet
Poppinjay is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 07:22 AM   #28 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poppinjay View Post
I'd like to ask you to examine this rationale that you've exhibited on many of your recent threads.
According to the EEOC here is a link to the report: Equal Pay Act Charges (includes concurrent charges with Title VII, ADEA, and ADA) )
in 1997 they resolved 1,172 cases (keep in mind that many prefer to file lawsuits rather than have the EEOC resolve their claims) with a average resolution amount of $2,047. In 2007 the EEOC resolved 796 cases with an average resolution amount of $11,683. There are two questions, why did the number of resolved cases go down ( and actually the number of filed cases) and why did the average resolution amount go up, given the lessening disparity in pay? Then the question is what would happen under the proposed legislation?

If a case is worthy of punitive damages a person filing a claim has a right to claim punitive damages in a lawsuit. I don't see the necessity to change the existing law. I simply see changes as a new opportunity to file lawsuits and do it after employment ends rather than having issues resolved during employment. I think situations similar to Obama's could easily be the basis for new types of lawsuits under these new laws subjecting small business to additional uncertainty and more lawsuits. I don't think these new laws will promote equal pay, and they will be harmful to small business.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 07:45 AM   #29 (permalink)
Mad Philosopher
 
asaris's Avatar
 
Location: Washington, DC
The problem is that the current statute, as interpreted by SCOTUS, will often bar people from recovery for the sole reason that they didn't discover the pay disparity until the statute of limitations had passed. That would seem to be a problem; if they current law is fair (and it seems to me to largely be unfair to people with claims, not the other way around), then this seems like a reasonable fix.
__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche
asaris is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 07:49 AM   #30 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by asaris View Post
The problem is that the current statute, as interpreted by SCOTUS, will often bar people from recovery for the sole reason that they didn't discover the pay disparity until the statute of limitations had passed. That would seem to be a problem; if they current law is fair (and it seems to me to largely be unfair to people with claims, not the other way around), then this seems like a reasonable fix.
I understand that point but I ask, is there a reasonable time limit for a business' exposure to a lawsuit on this issue?
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 08:17 AM   #31 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
I understand that point but I ask, is there a reasonable time limit for a business' exposure to a lawsuit on this issue?
ace....it sounds like you're trying to sidetrack the issue again.

But if you want play "what if" scenarios, the Supreme Court decision effectively tells employers that if you can "cover up potential pay discrimination for six months, then you are home free and can discriminate openly." (the Court said that workers must uncover and claim pay discrimination within 180 days of the first alleged discrepancy.)

BTW, the Fair Pay Restoration Act did not remove the cap on damages....so another argument of yours is invalid.

Back to the central issue of the OP, in terms of the issue of equal pay, I suspect most voters will judge Obama and McCain on their voting records and public statements.

Obama voted for the Fair Pay Restoration Act and McCain opposed it but did not vote and offered a ludicrous solution to the pay equity issue..."They (women) need education and training..."
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Last edited by dc_dux; 10-22-2008 at 08:31 AM..
dc_dux is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 08:29 AM   #32 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
According to the EEOC here is a link to the report: Equal Pay Act Charges (includes concurrent charges with Title VII, ADEA, and ADA) )
in 1997 they resolved 1,172 cases (keep in mind that many prefer to file lawsuits rather than have the EEOC resolve their claims) with a average resolution amount of $2,047. In 2007 the EEOC resolved 796 cases with an average resolution amount of $11,683. There are two questions, why did the number of resolved cases go down ( and actually the number of filed cases) and why did the average resolution amount go up, given the lessening disparity in pay? Then the question is what would happen under the proposed legislation?
What does the first question have to do with the second? Nothing. You can't make a trend out of two data points. Perhaps instead of trying to infer a basis for your position from such a limited dataset you could find some direct evidence that a significant number of small businesses are currently suffering from erroneous pay discrimination claims.

What would happen under the proposed legislation? Presumably, a person would be able to receive the money they were due if they could prove in a court of law that they had experienced wage discrimination, but failed to file a claim within the standard statute of limitations.

Your position seems to be: I don't want to allow legitimate legal recourse to people who have been subject to wage discrimination because I am afraid that there might be some people who file erroneous claims. Seems like you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater.


Quote:
If a case is worthy of punitive damages a person filing a claim has a right to claim punitive damages in a lawsuit. I don't see the necessity to change the existing law. I simply see changes as a new opportunity to file lawsuits and do it after employment ends rather than having issues resolved during employment. I think situations similar to Obama's could easily be the basis for new types of lawsuits under these new laws subjecting small business to additional uncertainty and more lawsuits. I don't think these new laws will promote equal pay, and they will be harmful to small business.
Where does the law you cited have anything relevant to say about claims made after employment has ended? I'm fairly certain that all it does is provide a de facto extension of the statute of limitations if wage discrimination persists beyond the end of the initial statute of limitations. I think you're swinging at phantoms here.
filtherton is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 12:09 PM   #33 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux View Post
ace....it sounds like you're trying to sidetrack the issue again.

But if you want play "what if" scenarios, the Supreme Court decision effectively tells employers that if you can "cover up potential pay discrimination for six months, then you are home free and can discriminate openly." (the Court said that workers must uncover and claim pay discrimination within 180 days of the first alleged discrepancy.)
My question was not clear. Regardless of the Court's decision what do you think is a reasonable timeframe, if any, for making a claim and filing a lawsuit?

Quote:
BTW, the Fair Pay Restoration Act did not remove the cap on damages....so another argument of yours is invalid.
If I suggested or stated that it did, I was in error. However, compensatory and punitive damages are available to aggrieved parties.

Quote:
Back to the central issue of the OP, in terms of the issue of equal pay, I suspect most voters will judge Obama and McCain on their voting records and public statements.
Why not also look at their employment practices?

I am still baffled by the fact that we can look at national general statistics and conclude there is a problem. From a legal stand point a claimant can make a prima facia case against an employer on general statistics for that employer. But when we look at Obama's statistics, we immediately accept an explanation that normally would carry no weight until the statistics were proven. Given Obama's ad against McCain, I would think it fair to take a deeper look into Obama's employment practices.

Quote:
Obama voted for the Fair Pay Restoration Act and McCain opposed it but did not vote and offered a ludicrous solution to the pay equity issue..."They (women) need education and training..."
Is your explanation for the statistical difference due primarily to discrimination? Do you not believe education and training are factors? I clearly think McCain is more right than wrong on this issue.

I also think the discrepancies in pay based on race has more to do with education and training than racial discrimination. Do you agree?
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 12:12 PM   #34 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Right here
why are you talking about punitive damages?
did you mean something else? because punitive damages are not for compensation of the harm done, but rather damages meant to elicit changes in behavior.

For example, let's say my cell company regulary jacks people around on their bills. I sue for $300 (the excess charges) in damages and 1 million dollars in punitive damages. The million is simply to make my cell phone company think twice before jacking people's bills anymore, not on the basis of any real damages I've incurred from them.
__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman
smooth is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 12:23 PM   #35 (permalink)
Mad Philosopher
 
asaris's Avatar
 
Location: Washington, DC
Actually, Ace, the Supreme Court has consistently held, over and over again, that statistics alone cannot prove employment discrimination. (Interesting side note: I met my girlfriend in my Employment Discrimination class. Hi Sweetie!)

And the issue isn't the timeframe for filing suit as such. It's whether or not the time should toll until such a time as the employee knew or should have known about the disparity. That's all.
__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche
asaris is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 12:25 PM   #36 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by filtherton View Post
What does the first question have to do with the second? Nothing. You can't make a trend out of two data points. Perhaps instead of trying to infer a basis for your position from such a limited dataset you could find some direct evidence that a significant number of small businesses are currently suffering from erroneous pay discrimination claims.

What would happen under the proposed legislation? Presumably, a person would be able to receive the money they were due if they could prove in a court of law that they had experienced wage discrimination, but failed to file a claim within the standard statute of limitations.

Your position seems to be: I don't want to allow legitimate legal recourse to people who have been subject to wage discrimination because I am afraid that there might be some people who file erroneous claims. Seems like you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater.


Where does the law you cited have anything relevant to say about claims made after employment has ended? I'm fairly certain that all it does is provide a de facto extension of the statute of limitations if wage discrimination persists beyond the end of the initial statute of limitations. I think you're swinging at phantoms here.
In the bill cited a person would be entitled to two years of back pay outside of the charge filing period.

People currently have legitimate legal recourse. But, my position is that I think people should make attempts to resolve problems while the problems can be resolved. For example if a female is coaching a female college volleyball team and is being paid $30,000, and a male is coaching a male college volleyball team and is being paid $40,000 and the salaries are public. I personally would want the female to make a claim with the administration at a time when the administration can do something, not for example after she retires or gets fired. In some cases the discrepancy can be willful, in other cases the discrepancy might be an oversight. If the discrepancy is willful and the complaint is ignored, I would be the first one to support, nominal compensatory and punitive damages.

I think the general trend for legitimate pay discrimination is positive (less of it) and I think with increased awareness of the issue with proactive action the number of formal complaints should be going down. Given what I think, I would not support legislation intended to change those trends when there is no underlying need to. Perhaps, trial attorneys don't agree, and certainly Obama does not agree.
-----Added 22/10/2008 at 04 : 27 : 04-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by smooth View Post
why are you talking about punitive damages?
did you mean something else? because punitive damages are not for compensation of the harm done, but rather damages meant to elicit changes in behavior.

For example, let's say my cell company regulary jacks people around on their bills. I sue for $300 (the excess charges) in damages and 1 million dollars in punitive damages. The million is simply to make my cell phone company think twice before jacking people's bills anymore, not on the basis of any real damages I've incurred from them.
Depending on the circumstances a court may award punitive damages.
-----Added 22/10/2008 at 04 : 36 : 33-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by asaris View Post
Actually, Ace, the Supreme Court has consistently held, over and over again, that statistics alone cannot prove employment discrimination. (Interesting side note: I met my girlfriend in my Employment Discrimination class. Hi Sweetie!)
Statistics play an important role in making a case, especially in large organizations. If an employer can prove away the statistical variance with reasons other than sex, the employer should win.



Quote:
And the issue isn't the timeframe for filing suit as such. It's whether or not the time should toll until such a time as the employee knew or should have known about the disparity. That's all.
Would you be comfortable with going back 25 years, 50 years? Would you allow a grandchild to sue on behalf of a dead grandmother? A corporate entity may not have an expiration date, would you allow class action lawsuits against companies dating back to their inception dates? I am not a lawyer and I don't know what should be reasonable, that is why I ask the question. And the question is intended to paint you or whoever answers it into a corner. At some point reasonable people would draw a line, McCain drew his so to speak, and at that point Obama makes the claim that McCain is against equal pay. I would guess the same could be said for anyone who would impose any restrictions regarding a woman's right to recover. Do you think Obama's claim against McCain is fair?
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."


Last edited by aceventura3; 10-22-2008 at 12:36 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 12:47 PM   #37 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Right here
I don't think you get punitive damages easily for salary disputes. I could be wrong, but they aren't generally awarded over contractual disputes and the behaviors has to be malicious and egregious; I also think juries award punitive damages and judges can adjust them. At least, the point is that they aren't generally of the nature of "ask and ye shall receive". There's probably a lot more to it, civil law is a world apart from criminal law, but whatever the type of damages are not what's at issue here so if I were you I'd drop that prong of your argument unless you were absolutely sure it's necessary to argue over the type of damages (as in looked it up yourself and read the relevant cases, not damn I'm never wrong sure) because it's not going to add any weight to your point.

there's obviously an argument to be made for the way things currently are, I'd start by reading the supreme's decision, but it only harms rather than helps one's stance to form spurious arguments. at least, it's already been decided, so read how they arrived at their conclusions and reframe your argument in a stronger fashion rather than piling up other factors and abandoning what the original issue was. it's annoying to meet a moving target.
__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

Last edited by smooth; 10-22-2008 at 12:54 PM..
smooth is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 12:54 PM   #38 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by smooth View Post
I don't think you get punitive damages for salary disputes. I could be wrong, but they aren't generally awarded over contractual disputes and the behaviors has to be malicious and egregious; I also think juries award punitive damages and judges can adjust them. There's probably a lot more to it, civil law is a world apart from criminal law, but whatever the type of damages are not what's at issue here so if I were you I'd drop that prong of your argument unless you were absolutely sure (as in looked it up yourself and read the relevant cases, not damn I'm never wrong sure) because it's not going to add any weight to your point.

there's obviously an argument to be made for the way things currently are, I'd start by reading the supreme's decision, but it only harms rather than helps one's stance to form spurious arguments.
Different types of damages are available. Here is a case:

Quote:
In an EEOC lawsuit under EPA and Title VII, a federal jury awarded $2.2 million to a former employee of Outback Steakhouse who alleged that the restaurant chain discriminated against her by paying a male counterpart a significantly larger salary and then firing her after she complained. Following four days of trial, the jury deliberated about five hours before awarding the female plaintiff $27,000 for the difference in earnings, $36,800 in back pay, $50,000 in compensatory damages for emotional pain and suffering, and $2.1 million in punitive damages.
Highlights of Equal Pay Act Cases
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 01:21 PM   #39 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Right here
like I said, I wasn't sure.
but also like I said, it's not the point.

you said that you didn't have a problem with punitive damages, and didn't see why the current law should be changed.
that's a non-sequitur the way you posted it, so I asked why you were brining it into the discussion.
the current law doesn't need to be changed with regard to punitive damages, it needs to be changed because you can't sue someone six months after the first discriminatory paycheck.

so go back to your argument, and reframe it without the logical fallacy.
__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman
smooth is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 01:27 PM   #40 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
In the bill cited a person would be entitled to two years of back pay outside of the charge filing period.
Read the last part of section B:

Quote:
where the unlawful employment practice that has occurred during the charge filing period is similar or related to an unlawful employment practice with regard to discrimination in compensation that occurred outside the charge filing period.'
It seems to say that the discrimination must continue beyond the normal charge filing period. If your employer has been discriminating against you, and the filing period has ended, you can still get back pay if you can show that the same (or similar) discrimination that occurred before the end of the filing period continued to occur after the end of the filing period.

If you don't work for someone, then they can't discriminate against you via pay. How could someone quit their job, wait a while, and then sue their former employer for back pay?


Quote:
People currently have legitimate legal recourse. But, my position is that I think people should make attempts to resolve problems while the problems can be resolved. For example if a female is coaching a female college volleyball team and is being paid $30,000, and a male is coaching a male college volleyball team and is being paid $40,000 and the salaries are public. I personally would want the female to make a claim with the administration at a time when the administration can do something, not for example after she retires or gets fired.
In some cases the discrepancy can be willful, in other cases the discrepancy might be an oversight. If the discrepancy is willful and the complaint is ignored, I would be the first one to support, nominal compensatory and punitive damages.
I agree that one shouldn't twiddle their thumbs where there are employers to sue. But in most cases, the salaries aren't public. How would you propose someone respond in a situation where they don't find out that the discrimination occurred until it is too late to actually do anything about it?

Quote:
I think the general trend for legitimate pay discrimination is positive (less of it) and I think with increased awareness of the issue with proactive action the number of formal complaints should be going down. Given what I think, I would not support legislation intended to change those trends when there is no underlying need to. Perhaps, trial attorneys don't agree, and certainly Obama does not agree.
I know what you think, I just haven't seen any evidence to validate what you think. Maybe the 2007 award/case ratio is higher because a greater portion of that year's pay discrimination caseload dealt with higher salaried employees. Without more information, any conclusion is necessarily more personal prejudice based than anything else.
filtherton is offline  
 

Tags
equal, obama, pay

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:34 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360