Washington – A Supreme Court once again split by the thinnest of margins ruled Tuesday that workers may not sue their employers over unequal pay caused by discrimination alleged to have occurred years earlier.
The court ruled 5 to 4 that Lilly Ledbetter, the lone female supervisor at a tire plant in Gadsden, Ala., did not file her lawsuit against Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. in the timely manner specified by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The decision moved Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to read a dissent from the bench, a rare occurrence that she has now employed twice in the past six weeks to criticize the majority for opinions she said undermine women’s rights.
“In our view, the court does not comprehend, or is indifferent to, the insidious way in which women can be victims of pay discrimination,” she said.
Last month, Ginsburg rebuked the same majority for upholding the federal Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act.
Tuesday, she said “Title VII was meant to govern real- world employment practices, and that world is what the court today ignores.” She called on Congress to fix what she says is the court’s mistake.
In a case that Justice Samuel Alito said was easily decided on the statute “as written,” Ginsburg’s statement from the bench was noteworthy.
Marcia Greenberger of the National Women’s Law Center said Ginsburg’s dissents are a “clarion call to the American people that this slim majority of the court is headed in the wrong direction.”
Business groups applauded the “fair decision” that, in the words of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, “eliminates a potential windfall against employers by employees trying to dredge up stale pay claims.”
A jury originally had awarded Ledbetter more than $3.5 million because it found it “more likely than not” that sex discrimination during her 19- year career led to her being paid substantially less than her male counterparts.
An appeals court reversed, saying the law requires that a suit be filed within 180 days “after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred,” and Ledbetter could not prove discrimination within that time period. She had argued she was discriminated against throughout her career, receiving smaller raises than the men got, and that each paycheck that was less because of that was a new violation.
The majority disagreed.
“Current effects alone can’t breathe life into prior, uncharged discrimination,” Alito wrote for the majority, including Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
