On the seventh anniversary of the signing of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, working women are still fighting to close the gender wage gap — and Republicans, including Senator Pat Toomey, are standing in their way.
- Toomey voted against the Paycheck Fairness Act in 2015, 2014, and 2012.
- “Sen. Toomey consistently opposes legislation that would improve pay for all hard-working Americans, but especially for women,” according to an August op-ed in the Center Daily Times.
- Toomey effectively voted against legislation that would have helped women successfully sue employers for pay discrimination. The bill would have also “protect[ed] employees from retaliation” if they inquired about pay equity or filed a charge against their employer.
“Today in Pennsylvania, women make a fifth less than men for the same work. Instead of supporting equal pay for equal work and ending discriminatory practices that harm families and the economy, Sen. Toomey has stood in the way of creating equal opportunity for women,” said American Bridge President Jessica Mackler. “The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was a step in the right direction for equal pay. There’s more work to be done and Sen. Pat Toomey has proven he won’t stand up for hard working Pennsylvania women.”
Background:
Pat Toomey
Toomey Voted Against The Paycheck Fairness Act Three Times
2015: Toomey Voted Against The Paycheck Fairness Act. In March 2015, Toomey voted against an amendment to the Senate’s FY 2016 budget resolution that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] create[d] a deficit-neutral reserve fund to allow for legislation related to equal pay policies.” Specifically, according to a press release from Senator Barbara Mikulski, “U.S. Senator Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.), Dean of the Senate women and a senior member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, today was joined by Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.) in speaking out on the Senate floor calling for passage of the Paycheck Fairness Act, legislation which will help close the wage gap between women and men working equivalent jobs, costing women and their families $434,000 over their careers. Senator Mikulski introduced the legislation as an amendment to the Senate budget bill currently being debated.” The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 45 to 54. [Senate Vote 82, 3/24/15; Press Release – Office Of Senator Barbara Mikulski, 3/24/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/24/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11]
- Legislation Would Have Permitted Those Who Successfully Prove Pay Discrimination To Receive Compensatory And Punitive Damages In Addition To Back Pay And Liquidated Damages. According to the Congressional Research Service, “Under the EPA [Equal Pay Act], […] prevailing plaintiffs may recover backpay in an amount equal to the total difference between wages actually received and those to which they are lawfully entitled and an additional amount equal to the backpay award as liquidated damages. Compensatory damages are not authorized, and consequently, awards do not include sums for physical or mental distress, medical expenses, or other costs. The Paycheck Fairness Act would authorize EPA class actions and ‘such compensatory and punitive damages as may be appropriate.’” [CRS Report #RL31867, 11/22/13]
- Legislation Would Limit Valid Reasons Employers Could Give For Why A Particular Female Employee Was Paid Less Than A Comparable Male Employee, Such As Requiring That The Reason Be Job-Related. According to the Congressional Research Service, “In addition, the legislation would establish more restrictive standards for proof by employers of an affirmative defense to EPA liability based on any ‘bona fide factor other than sex.’ Thus, for a pay factor to be ‘bona fide,’ the employer would have to establish that it was ‘job related,’ consistent with ‘business necessity,’ and not derived from a sex-based differential in compensation, and that the employer’s purpose could not be accomplished by less discriminatory alternative means.” [CRS Report #RL31867, 11/22/13]
2014: Toomey Effectively Voted Against The Paycheck Fairness Act. In September 2014, Toomey effectively voted against the Paycheck Fairness Act, which, according to the Congressional Research Service, “increase penalties for employers who pay different wages to men and women for ‘equal work,’ and would add programs for training, research, technical assistance, and pay equity employer recognition awards. The legislation would also make it more difficult for employers to avoid [Equal Pay Act] EPA liability, and proposed safeguards would protect employees from retaliation for making inquiries or disclosures concerning employee wages and for filing a charge or participating in any manner in EPA proceedings. In short, while this legislation would adhere to current equal work standards of the EPA, it would reform the procedures and remedies for enforcing the law.” The vote was on a motion to end debate on the legislation, which required 60 votes to pass. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 52 to 40. [Senate Vote 262, 9/15/14; CRS Report #RL31867, 11/22/13]
2012: Toomey Voted Against The Paycheck Fairness Act. In June 2012, Toomey voted against the Paycheck Fairness Act, which, according to the Congressional Research Service, “would authorize [Equal Pay Act] class actions and ‘such compensatory and punitive damages as may be appropriate.’” The vote was on invoking cloture on the motion to proceed to the bill; it failed, 52-47. [Senate Vote 115, 6/5/12; Congressional Research Service, 6/1/12]
- 1963 Equal Pay Act Prohibits Paying Female Employees Lower Wages Than Male Employees For “Equal Work.”According to the Congressional Research Service, “The Equal Pay Act (EPA), which amends the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), prohibits covered employers from paying lower wages to female employees than male employees for ‘equal work’ on jobs requiring ‘equal skill, effort, and responsibility’ and performed ‘under similar working conditions’ at the same location.” The Equal Pay Act was enacted in 1963. [Congressional Research Service, 6/1/12]
- Currently, Plaintiffs Who Prove A Violation Of The Equal Pay Act May Recover Backpay, But Cannot Receive Compensatory Or Punitive Damages. According to the Congressional Research Service, “Under the EPA […] prevailing plaintiffs may recover backpay in an amount equal to the total difference between wages actually received and those to which they are lawfully entitled and an additional amount equal to the backpay award as liquidated damages. Compensatory damages are not authorized, and consequently, awards do not include sums for physical or mental distress, medical expenses, or other costs.” [Congressional Research Service, 6/1/12]
- Paycheck Fairness Act Would Have Authorized Compensatory – And In Some Cases, Punitive –Damages For Violations Of Equal Pay Act. According to the Congressional Research Service, “The Paycheck Fairness Act would authorize EPA class actions and ‘such compensatory and punitive damages as may be appropriate.’” [Congressional Research Service, 6/1/12]
- Supporters Claimed That Without Punitive Damages There Was Little Deterrent To Pay Discrimination. According to the National Organization For Women, “In fact, given the persistent nature of the wage gap, these deterrents are weak indeed. Without the ability to seek the compensatory and punitive damages added to the Equal Pay Act via this legislation, an employer may continue to treat its labor violations as merely a cost of doing business. The Paycheck Fairness Act’s measured approach also levels the playing field, ensuring that women can obtain the same types of damages as those subject to discrimination on the basis of race or national origin.” [National Organization for Women, Viewed 7/22/13]
- Opponents Claimed This Would Be A Giveaway For Trial Lawyers. According to The Hill, “The measure would also allow women to press for punitive damages for pay discrimination, which has led some Republicans on Capitol Hill to dub it a gift for trial lawyers.” [The Hill, 6/5/12]
Toomey Voted To Make It More Difficult For Women To Sue Their Employers Over Equal Pay
2014: Toomey Effectively Voted Against Making It Easier For Women To Successfully Sue Over Pay Discrimination, And Against Increasing Employer Penalties In Such Cases. In April 2014, Toomey effectively voted against the Paycheck Fairness Act. According to the Congressional Research Service, the legislation would “increase penalties for employers who pay different wages to men and women for ‘equal work,’ and would add programs for training, research, technical assistance, and pay equity employer recognition awards. The legislation would also make it more difficult for employers to avoid EPA [Equal Pay Act] liability, and proposed safeguards would protect employees from retaliation for making inquiries or disclosures concerning employee wages and for filing a charge or participating in any manner in EPA proceedings. In short, while this legislation would adhere to current equal work standards of the EPA, it would reform the procedures and remedies for enforcing the law.” The vote was on a motion to end debate on a motion to proceed to consider the legislation, which required 60 votes to succeed. The Senate rejected the motion by a vote of 53 to 44. [Senate Vote 103, 4/9/14; CRS Report #RL31867, 11/22/13]
Published: Jan 29, 2016