Just another gut punch... Court: Employers can pay women less based on past salaries

[boston bean]

The decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower-court ruling that said pay differences based exclusively on prior salaries were discriminatory under the federal Equal Pay Act.

That's because women's earlier salaries are likely to be lower than men's because of gender bias, U.S. Magistrate Judge Michael Seng said in a 2015 decision.

A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit cited a 1982 ruling by the court that said employers could use previous salary information as long as they applied it reasonably and had a business policy that justified it.

"This decision is a step in the wrong direction if we're trying to really ensure that women have work opportunities of equal pay," said Deborah Rhode, who teaches gender equity law at Stanford Law School. "You can't allow prior discriminatory salary setting to justify future ones or you perpetuate the discrimination."

http://www.wcvb.com/article/court-employers-can-pay-women-less-based-on-past-salaries/9575465

We are still standing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

[WhiteTara]

1. "had a business policy that justified it"

yeah that policy is to make money off the backs of women who consistently give more in the workplace.

[MANative]

2. This is infuriating.

And the pay differential is real and pervasive.

My company just acquired a slightly smaller company, and as the HR VP, part of my charter was to examine all pay structures. The agreement called for all pay to remain whole, so I didn't have much (any) leeway to make changes for this budget year. Next year, that's a different story. The old company, owned by a guy in his mid-50s and his father before him, paid a VAST difference to men and women with the exact same job and exactly equivalent experience, both in years and in scope. In one case, the male was making 27% more than the female. In another, 26% more. On the whole, men in the company were making better than 20% more than the females, even when the females were in more responsible positions. To make matters even worse, people in the acquired company are making, on average, about 35% less than employees in our original company, with equivalent responsibility and experience. We won't talk about how none of the women in the company have had a raise, ever. Some in as long as 25 years.

My CEO, CFO, and I are all committed to making this right, but man, it's going to bust our salary budget next year.

[smirkymonkey]

3. K&R

[annabanana]

4. "based on past salaries" ??!?

You mean those salaries that were lower because of discrimination? Those salaries?

[GeorgeGist]

5. What business policy justifies paying women less ...

you fucking assholes?