TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

Martinez Owes Better Account For Voting Against Equal-Pay Law

ADVERTISEMENT

The Tampa Tribune

Published: May 10, 2008

One of the U.S. Supreme Court's more controversial rulings last term involved the tight deadline for employees to file claims of job discrimination. The high court said that even when employees don't know they're being discriminated against, the restrictive timeline must be followed.

The case centered on Lilly Ledbetter, once the only woman among 17 managers at the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. plant in Gadsden, Ala. After 20 years on the job, she discovered in 1998 that she was being paid 40 percent less than the men.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission agreed she'd been discriminated against. So did a federal jury. But the appeals court in Atlanta erased the verdict because Ledbetter failed to file her complaint within 180 days of her first discriminatory paycheck, as required by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The high court agreed.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the court's only woman, read her dissent aloud. "In our view, the court does not comprehend, or is indifferent to, the insidious way in which women can be victims of pay discrimination.

"Once again," Ginsburg ended her opinion, "the ball is in Congress' court."

The House, to its credit, heeded her words. It passed a bill named after Ledbetter that would give people 180 days to file legitimate claims after their latest unequal paycheck.

The Senate, however, blocked consideration last month by a 56-42 cloture vote cast largely along party lines. The margin was not enough to override a threatened veto by President Bush, who believes the Ledbetter bill would spur a flood of lawsuits.

One of the senators who voted against the Ledbetter bill was Florida's Mel Martinez. When asked about his vote during a visit to the Tribune's editorial board the other day, it became clear Martinez didn't understand the legislation.

Martinez, a former trial lawyer, said there should be a reasonable time period to file lawsuits after discovering discrimination - the purpose of the legislation. A staff member reminded him that the bill would have removed the statute of limitations, which is not quite accurate. The legislation would have required people like Ledbetter to file suit within 180 days after discovering the discrimination, a pretty short window by civil-court standards.

The senator also said that Congress has no business trying to override the court's ruling, which left us puzzled. After all, Congress is supposed to set policy, not judges.

In Martinez's defense, the bill was fast-tracked and never discussed in any Senate committees. Still, the senator told us he'd personally read it.

Given his reasoned sentiments about fairness, it appears Martinez voted against women like Ledbetter simply to conform with party politics, not because he thought it was the right thing to do.

And that's the reality of how Washington and Tallahassee work. Party leaders expect ironclad allegiance to partisan agendas. They offer no incentive for members to reach across the aisle. Indeed, those who try find themselves stripped of good committee assignments and their pet legislation sent to Siberia.

Look at the label given Sen. John McCain, who has courageously worked with Democrats to get things done. Maverick is what many Republicans call him, and it's not meant as a compliment.

Still, it's disappointing to see a moderate senator like Martinez put his party ahead of people.

The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions should get to work on a new Ledbetter bill, complete with the statutory safeguards Martinez cares about. Fairness and equal pay should enjoy bipartisan support. Only businesses with discriminatory policies should be concerned.

Lilly Ledbetter, who is now 70, will face the effects of discriminatory pay for the rest of her life, with smaller pension and Social Security payments.

Employment law should be changed to ensure others won't suffer the same inequity. The Senate should set a reasonable time limit to get it done.

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT