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
What is the function of the phrase 'On the other hand' in the last sentence of paragraph 11?
- A. It reinforces the positive image consumers have of local produce.
- B. It emphasizes the difference in the time it takes store-bought produce and local produce to get to consumers.
- C. It illustrates the dislike consumers have of store-bought produce.
- D. It distinguishes between consumers of store-bought produce and consumers of local produce.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: B
The phrase "On the other hand" serves to highlight a contrasting point regarding the time it takes for different types of produce to reach consumers. This indicates a significant difference in freshness and availability between local and store-bought options, aligning with option B. Option A is incorrect because it does not focus on the time aspect; instead, it suggests a positive perception that is not the primary focus of the phrase. Option C misinterprets the phrase's intent, as it does not address consumer dislike but rather a comparison. Option D inaccurately suggests a distinction between two consumer groups, which is not the main emphasis of the sentence.
The phrase "On the other hand" serves to highlight a contrasting point regarding the time it takes for different types of produce to reach consumers. This indicates a significant difference in freshness and availability between local and store-bought options, aligning with option B. Option A is incorrect because it does not focus on the time aspect; instead, it suggests a positive perception that is not the primary focus of the phrase. Option C misinterprets the phrase's intent, as it does not address consumer dislike but rather a comparison. Option D inaccurately suggests a distinction between two consumer groups, which is not the main emphasis of the sentence.
Currently, the technology exists to meet a significant portion of the world's energy demands by converting wave power to electricity. If the author removed the word 'significant' from this sentence, the new sentence would
- A. show diminished potential for this technology.
- B. allow the reader to infer the importance of the technology.
- C. create a realistic portrayal of the technology.
- D. indicate a greater reliance on the technology.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: A
Removing the word "significant" diminishes the perceived potential of wave power technology. Without it, the sentence suggests that the technology may only meet a minor portion of energy demands, which undercuts its viability and importance. Option B incorrectly implies that the omission would enhance the reader's understanding of the technology's importance, which is not the case. Option C suggests a realistic portrayal, but the removal leads to a less optimistic view rather than a realistic one. Option D misinterprets the change, as it does not indicate greater reliance; instead, it suggests a lesser impact.
Removing the word "significant" diminishes the perceived potential of wave power technology. Without it, the sentence suggests that the technology may only meet a minor portion of energy demands, which undercuts its viability and importance. Option B incorrectly implies that the omission would enhance the reader's understanding of the technology's importance, which is not the case. Option C suggests a realistic portrayal, but the removal leads to a less optimistic view rather than a realistic one. Option D misinterprets the change, as it does not indicate greater reliance; instead, it suggests a lesser impact.
You have up to 45 minutes for reading, planning, writing, and editing your response.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer:
**Correct answer:** Allocate time wisely among reading, planning, writing, and editing to maximize the quality of your response. **Rationale:** Efficient time management is crucial for producing a well-structured response. Reading thoroughly ensures comprehension of the prompt, while planning helps organize thoughts logically. Writing is where ideas come to life, and dedicating time to editing enhances clarity and correctness. Other options may suggest focusing too heavily on one aspect, such as writing without sufficient planning or editing. This can lead to incomplete or unclear responses that fail to meet the task's requirements. Balancing all phases is essential for success.
**Correct answer:** Allocate time wisely among reading, planning, writing, and editing to maximize the quality of your response. **Rationale:** Efficient time management is crucial for producing a well-structured response. Reading thoroughly ensures comprehension of the prompt, while planning helps organize thoughts logically. Writing is where ideas come to life, and dedicating time to editing enhances clarity and correctness. Other options may suggest focusing too heavily on one aspect, such as writing without sufficient planning or editing. This can lead to incomplete or unclear responses that fail to meet the task's requirements. Balancing all phases is essential for success.
Which conclusion is supported by the story?
- A. Burl will ask the widows to keep watch to protect the honey from thieves.
- B. Burl will make an attempt to better market his honey to consumers.
- C. Burl will continue to independently produce honey.
- D. Burl will work persistently to discover who took his honey.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: C
The conclusion that Burl will continue to independently produce honey is supported by his determination and passion for beekeeping demonstrated throughout the story. This reflects his commitment to maintaining his craft despite challenges. Option A is incorrect as there is no indication that Burl seeks help from the widows for protection. Option B, while plausible, lacks direct support in the narrative, which focuses more on his production than marketing strategies. Option D suggests a shift in focus towards investigation rather than production, which contradicts Burl's established dedication to his craft.
The conclusion that Burl will continue to independently produce honey is supported by his determination and passion for beekeeping demonstrated throughout the story. This reflects his commitment to maintaining his craft despite challenges. Option A is incorrect as there is no indication that Burl seeks help from the widows for protection. Option B, while plausible, lacks direct support in the narrative, which focuses more on his production than marketing strategies. Option D suggests a shift in focus towards investigation rather than production, which contradicts Burl's established dedication to his craft.