Words vs. Deeds in Equal Employment Opportunity
The Letter of the Law
by Anne Versteen
1. In 1979, the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company in Gadsden, Alabama, hired Lilly Ledbetter: She worked long hours as an overnight supervisor on the late shift from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. and labored alongside men for nearly 20 years, doing the same work as they did for the company.
2. By the time she was ready to retire in 1998, Ledbetter was earning $3,727 per month. She had no idea what the men were making in comparison to her until shortly before her retirement. As her last days on the job drew near, she learned that her male counterparts, who held her same position and worked the same job, were all being paid substantially more than she was. They made between 54,286 and $5,236 per month. Company policy prohibited employees from speaking to one another about pay, so Ledbetter had not known all those years that her wages were less than those of her male equivalents.
3. Understandably, Ledbetter felt cheated and filed a complaint against Goodyear with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Then she sued the company for gender discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, alleging that the company had given her a low salary because of her gender. Goodyear denied her allegations, stating that Ledbetter was paid less because the quality of her work was poor. A jury awarded Ledbetter $3.6 million. Even though the amount was reduced to $300,000 by a district court, she had still won a monumental case for the cause of women everywhere.
4. Good year appealed and the 2007 employment discrimination case Ledbetter v. Goodyear eventually reached the Supreme Court, The Court ruled by A 5-4 vote that Ledbetter's claim was time-barred by Title VII's limitations period. Title VII holds discriminatory intent or the deliberate act of causing harm, as a crucial element of a claim, and Ledbetter would have needed to file within 180 days of a discriminatory salary decision to fall within the alloted time period. The court did not consider it relevant that the paychecks Ledbetter received within 180 days before her claim were affected by past discrimination. Unfortunately, each instance of Goodyear’s discriminatory intent fell outside the limitation period
5. The Court stated that the short statute of limitations, the period of time an employee has to file a complaint against the employer, is intended to ensure quick resolution or pay. Such instances become more difficult to defend as time passes. If the Court had accepted Ledbetter's argument, the decision would have allowed discriminatory pay decisions from years ago to be the subject of Title VII claims, In dissent. Justice Ruth Bader Ginshury clearly sided with Ledbetter, calling the majority's ruling a cramped interpretation of Title VII, incompatible with the statute's broad..
According to paragraphs 1 and 2 of 'The Letter of the Law,' Lilly Ledbetter worked for Goodyear for nearly 20 years; however, conflict arose in 1998 when Ledbetter was nearing retirement. What can the reader infer from the information in these paragraphs?
- A. Women at Goodyear received fewer promotions than men.
- B. Male supervisors were indifferent about the salaries paid to the female supervisors.
- C. Company policy made it easier for Goodyear to violate the law.
- D. Female employees performed less strenuous tasks than their male counterparts
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: C
The inference that company policy made it easier for Goodyear to violate the law aligns with the context of conflict arising as Lilly Ledbetter approached retirement. This suggests systemic issues that may have facilitated unfair practices. Option A, while plausible, lacks direct evidence from the text regarding promotions. Option B assumes indifference without supporting details about supervisors’ attitudes toward salaries. Option D inaccurately generalizes the nature of tasks assigned to female employees, which is not mentioned in the paragraphs and does not directly relate to the conflict described.
The inference that company policy made it easier for Goodyear to violate the law aligns with the context of conflict arising as Lilly Ledbetter approached retirement. This suggests systemic issues that may have facilitated unfair practices. Option A, while plausible, lacks direct evidence from the text regarding promotions. Option B assumes indifference without supporting details about supervisors’ attitudes toward salaries. Option D inaccurately generalizes the nature of tasks assigned to female employees, which is not mentioned in the paragraphs and does not directly relate to the conflict described.
Other Related Questions
Burl refers to the thief as an 'artiste' in the story because
- A. the thief arranges the jars in patterns.
- B. the thief scrawls a drawing on the back of an IOU.
- C. the thief leaves beautiful objects rather than money.
- D. the thief avoids getting caught by being creative.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: A
Burl refers to the thief as an 'artiste' primarily because of the thief's ability to arrange the jars in visually appealing patterns (Option A). This artistic presentation elevates the act of theft to an expression of creativity. Option B, while mentioning a drawing, does not highlight the thief's overall artistic flair as effectively as the arrangement of jars. Option C suggests that leaving beautiful objects is significant, but it lacks the direct connection to artistry implied by the careful arrangement. Option D focuses on the thief's creativity in avoiding capture, which, although clever, does not specifically relate to artistry in the same way as the aesthetic arrangement of jars.
Burl refers to the thief as an 'artiste' primarily because of the thief's ability to arrange the jars in visually appealing patterns (Option A). This artistic presentation elevates the act of theft to an expression of creativity. Option B, while mentioning a drawing, does not highlight the thief's overall artistic flair as effectively as the arrangement of jars. Option C suggests that leaving beautiful objects is significant, but it lacks the direct connection to artistry implied by the careful arrangement. Option D focuses on the thief's creativity in avoiding capture, which, although clever, does not specifically relate to artistry in the same way as the aesthetic arrangement of jars.
What technique does the author use to reveal the narrator's perspective about the ladies at the concert?
- A. She compares the ladies to perfectly decorated dolls.
- B. She repeats descriptive words to show the ladies' perfection.
- C. She exaggerates the appearance of the ladies.
- D. She describes two extremes of the ladies' dresses.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: A
The author's technique of comparing the ladies to perfectly decorated dolls effectively illustrates the narrator's perspective, highlighting their superficial beauty and lack of depth. This metaphor emphasizes the idealized and artificial nature of the ladies, suggesting a critique of societal standards. Option B, while focusing on repetition, does not capture the nuanced perspective as effectively as the metaphor does. Option C, exaggeration, may convey a sense of irony but lacks the specific imagery that reinforces the narrator's view. Option D introduces contrast but does not fully encapsulate the narrator's overall impression of the ladies’ superficiality.
The author's technique of comparing the ladies to perfectly decorated dolls effectively illustrates the narrator's perspective, highlighting their superficial beauty and lack of depth. This metaphor emphasizes the idealized and artificial nature of the ladies, suggesting a critique of societal standards. Option B, while focusing on repetition, does not capture the nuanced perspective as effectively as the metaphor does. Option C, exaggeration, may convey a sense of irony but lacks the specific imagery that reinforces the narrator's view. Option D introduces contrast but does not fully encapsulate the narrator's overall impression of the ladies’ superficiality.
Which summary best describes the events found in paragraphs 1-4 of the excerpt?
- A. Don Quixote and Sancho seek to make their fortunes, and Don Quixote sees their opportunity when they discover a field of windmills. The field has thirty or forty windmills.
- B. Don Quixote and Sancho came to a field of windmills, which Don Quixote says are giants that he will destroy. Sancho tries to convince Don Quixote these are really windmills.
- C. Don Quixote and Sancho find a field of windmills. Sancho explains to Don Quixote that the wind blows the sails and turns the millstone.
- D. Don Quixote and Sancho discover a field of giants disguised as windmills. Don Quixote vows to defeat the giants, but Sancho is afraid and tries to convince Don Quixote not to fight.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: B
Option B accurately captures the essence of the events in the first four paragraphs, highlighting Don Quixote's misinterpretation of the windmills as giants and Sancho's attempt to reason with him. This dynamic illustrates the central conflict between reality and illusion. Option A misrepresents the characters' motivations; they are not primarily seeking fortune but rather engaging in a fantastical quest. Option C focuses too much on the mechanics of the windmills, neglecting the dramatic tension between Don Quixote and Sancho. Option D inaccurately frames the windmills as giants rather than emphasizing Don Quixote's delusion, which is critical to understanding the narrative.
Option B accurately captures the essence of the events in the first four paragraphs, highlighting Don Quixote's misinterpretation of the windmills as giants and Sancho's attempt to reason with him. This dynamic illustrates the central conflict between reality and illusion. Option A misrepresents the characters' motivations; they are not primarily seeking fortune but rather engaging in a fantastical quest. Option C focuses too much on the mechanics of the windmills, neglecting the dramatic tension between Don Quixote and Sancho. Option D inaccurately frames the windmills as giants rather than emphasizing Don Quixote's delusion, which is critical to understanding the narrative.
Read this sentence from paragraph 1. 'People know that landfills are a disgusting, if necessary, evil and that they spread disease and pestilence throughout populated communities.' The reasoning in this sentence is unsound because it claims something is true simply because
- A. it has not been proven false.
- B. experts say it is.
- C. a popular opinion makes it correct.
- D. it has always been that way.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: C
The reasoning in the sentence is flawed because it relies on the idea that widespread belief or popular opinion validates a claim. Just because many people think landfills are harmful does not inherently make it true; it requires scientific evidence to support such assertions. Option A is incorrect since the absence of proof does not automatically confirm a statement's validity. Option B is misleading, as expert opinion must be backed by research and data rather than being accepted as fact. Option D is also wrong, as tradition or historical precedent does not guarantee the accuracy of a claim; beliefs must evolve with new evidence.
The reasoning in the sentence is flawed because it relies on the idea that widespread belief or popular opinion validates a claim. Just because many people think landfills are harmful does not inherently make it true; it requires scientific evidence to support such assertions. Option A is incorrect since the absence of proof does not automatically confirm a statement's validity. Option B is misleading, as expert opinion must be backed by research and data rather than being accepted as fact. Option D is also wrong, as tradition or historical precedent does not guarantee the accuracy of a claim; beliefs must evolve with new evidence.