Letters to the Editor
-
Re: Clearing up ambiguity
The EEOC, which is supposed to enforce the relevant laws (see here: http://eeoc.gov/policy/laws.html), and which has considerable experience with them, thought it was abundantly clear that Goodyear's behavior was illegal and Ledbetter had been wronged.
The SC majority just reversed decades of precedent and accepted interpretations of the existing law. Alito's calling those those interpretations and decisions "policy" instead of precedence and differing interpretations is disingenuous. It's no different from the Bush administration dismissing questions about the legality of some of their behavior as "political."
By the way, the laws themselves are linked from that URL above, so you can read for yourself and see if they seem "ambiguous."
-
Two points
1) Re: Alex O'Neal's point, just wanted to mention that it was Mr. Stare Decisis Alito -- the man who testified in his confirmation hearing that precedent was a powerful force, who wrote the opinion.
2) Lynx may have something, even if, as Kathleen L. points out, it isn't worth it to sue. Because of how hard and fast the time limit now is, it possibly cannot be considered frivolous to file regardless of what the paycheck says, on grounds that you need to make the deadline in case you find something wrong. So if people were enterprising enough, hundreds or maybe thousands of cases could be filed in each court, every two weeks, regardless of future outcome. I agree with Lynx that this would bring the court decision to its knees.
-
This ruling is so unreasonable that
among the corrections the legislative branch should apply to this problem is to require all employers to publicly post the salary or hourly wage of every single employee.
The rationale for this is so that employees will immediately know if they are being discriminated against.
-
Thanks, ondelette!
I forgot about that comment of Alito's! See, this is how disingenuous the man is—he will say whatever works to accomplish his goals. I remember the precedence comment during his confirmation hearings. Then, of course the first thing he does is reverse precedent on two major issues.
Quite maddening.
-
As a small business owner I can attest
that 90% of sexual harrasment and racial discrimination claims are bogus. It is unfortunate for the other 10% but that is what happens when you fish with chum; you end up catching a lot of sharks. Where are the "civil rights" types when the bogus claims come up? They are in the back helping the cases along and cheering. After all, this is really about transfering wealth from one class of people (white, male, citzen, with property) and giving it to more deserving people.
-
Ghingis Can, you can attest all you want,
but you are not ultimately the person who makes the final decision. Furthermore, as an employer, you may not exactly have the employees' best interests at heart in the first place. Maybe your eye is on the bottom line.
Tell you what you can do to make certain everything is fair: Publish for your employees the wages and salaries of each of them so that they can compare.
-
Memo to AKA Smith
I wish you were my employee so I could fire you.
First of all, I can't publish their wages because I have to protect my employees privacy. They don't like other people knowing how much they make. It is none of your business. It is also none of your business where they spent it.
Plus I have a right to privacy. One reason I keep salaries confidential is that there is always some loser who's inflated ego is larger than their contribution to my bottom line. Everyone else has to listen to them bitch and it takes away from productivity. We want a cheerful workplace.
Lastly, why don't you pay someone's wages instead of just sucking off of others. I take huge financial risks. I work longer hours then any of my employees and I have for years. All of my employees could have done what I did but they chose not to.
Smith, clean your desk out and get out of here in 10 minutes or I will have my secretary call the cops.
-
Someone has clearly drunk the kool-aid
"All of my employees could have done what I did but they chose not to." --Ghingis Can
In what planet are you living? You must *have* something to *start* something, in this case money and opportunity.
I have worked long hours both as an entrepreneur and as an employee. The most I've worked at one job as an employee, I was salaried. Because of layoffs, my workload was unnaturally larger, but I received no recompense for regularly working 70-80 hour weeks. In my last year I only had three weekends, and was working remotely on Christmas Day. It was that, or lose my job.
I've also worked three jobs and gone to school full-time.
As an entrepreneur, I've managed every aspect of a business, but was unable to make it profitable because I did not have funding for advertising.
Right now I'm working as a contractor and have absolutely no benefits, nor can I expect them in the near future. My staffing firm lied about benefits (they went so far as to include literature on benefits with the contract, and then told me I had none after I'd begun working). My employer is known for keeping people as contractors for years in the same role; the shortest I've heard before being hired permanently was two and a half years, the longest was nine years. Because my expenses are more than I expected when I took the job, I must work a second job, which makes it much harder and less likely I can (a) get a better, new job, (b) start my own business, or (c) complete my graduate degree.
I can attest to the fact that all too frequently in life, opportunity is not available for smart, hard-working people who would indeed make the most of it. Get off your high horse and count your blessings.
Anonymous only because my contract says I can't work a second job....
-
You need talent also
To the last message:
I am sorry your business failed. That's how it works. You were unable to add value to your customers bottom line. My guess is that you have the same problem as an employee but it is your employer that is pulling your dead weight now.
I have a suggestion. Why don't we force people to publish how much they pay in taxes. The ones who take out more than they put in can be sued by white business owner Republicans for slacking off and go to debtors prison. You can wear a striped orange jump suit and pick up beer cans on the side of the freeway. That's if you can handle it.