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..
Based on information from both the article and the letter to the editor, what can the reader infer about the authors?
- A. Both authors feel they have personally paid a price as women in the workplace.
- B. Both authors advocate for legal action to reduce pay inequity.
- C. Both authors support reforms to help women gain equality in the workplace
- D. Both authors want businesses to be leaders in ending pay inequality
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: C
The inference that both authors support reforms to help women gain equality in the workplace is substantiated by their discussions on systemic barriers and the need for change. They emphasize the importance of addressing inequalities through actionable reforms rather than merely highlighting personal experiences or advocating for legal action alone. Option A is incorrect because while personal experiences may be mentioned, the focus is on broader reforms rather than individual sacrifices. Option B misinterprets their stance; the authors promote change rather than specifically advocating for legal actions. Option D, while relevant, is too narrow, as their emphasis is on comprehensive reforms rather than solely on business leadership.
The inference that both authors support reforms to help women gain equality in the workplace is substantiated by their discussions on systemic barriers and the need for change. They emphasize the importance of addressing inequalities through actionable reforms rather than merely highlighting personal experiences or advocating for legal action alone. Option A is incorrect because while personal experiences may be mentioned, the focus is on broader reforms rather than individual sacrifices. Option B misinterprets their stance; the authors promote change rather than specifically advocating for legal actions. Option D, while relevant, is too narrow, as their emphasis is on comprehensive reforms rather than solely on business leadership.
Other Related Questions
Which statement expresses a theme in the excerpt?
- A. Reality may be a matter of interpretation.
- B. Any hero may suddenly fall from glory.
- C. The use of violence is rarely justified.
- D. Bravery is created from inner conviction.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: A
Option A highlights the theme that reality can vary based on individual perspectives, suggesting that different characters may perceive the same situation differently. This aligns with the excerpt’s nuanced portrayal of events and characters. Option B, while it addresses the potential for a hero's downfall, does not capture the broader theme of interpretation present in the text. Option C focuses on violence, which may be discussed but does not reflect the central theme of subjective reality. Option D emphasizes bravery, yet it does not encompass the key idea of varying interpretations that define the excerpt’s message.
Option A highlights the theme that reality can vary based on individual perspectives, suggesting that different characters may perceive the same situation differently. This aligns with the excerpt’s nuanced portrayal of events and characters. Option B, while it addresses the potential for a hero's downfall, does not capture the broader theme of interpretation present in the text. Option C focuses on violence, which may be discussed but does not reflect the central theme of subjective reality. Option D emphasizes bravery, yet it does not encompass the key idea of varying interpretations that define the excerpt’s message.
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.
A slight breeze at this moment sprang up, and the great sails began to move, seeing which Don Quixote exclaimed, 'Though ye flourish more arms than the giant Briareus, ye have to reckon with me.' According to Greek legend, Briareus was a giant with a hundred arms and fifty heads who helped the gods in battles against foes. How does the author's comparison of the windmills to mythological giant function in the excerpt?
- A. The comparison advances the author's perspective about the dangers involved in acting before considering the consequences
- B. The comparison supports the author's characterization of Don Quixote as brave but misguided.
- C. The comparison advances the author's view that helping someone in need is an indication of true friendship.
- D. The comparison supports the author's purpose of showing the foolishness of Don Quixote for attacking windmills
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: B
The comparison to Briareus highlights Don Quixote's bravery and misguided perception of reality. By equating the windmills to a formidable giant, the author emphasizes Don Quixote's noble intentions but also his delusions, showcasing his valor in the face of imaginary threats. Option A misinterprets the focus on bravery, as the excerpt centers more on Don Quixote's misconceptions than on the consequences of actions. Option C is irrelevant, as the passage does not address friendship or helping others. Option D, while touching on foolishness, overlooks the deeper characterization of Don Quixote's courage amidst his folly.
The comparison to Briareus highlights Don Quixote's bravery and misguided perception of reality. By equating the windmills to a formidable giant, the author emphasizes Don Quixote's noble intentions but also his delusions, showcasing his valor in the face of imaginary threats. Option A misinterprets the focus on bravery, as the excerpt centers more on Don Quixote's misconceptions than on the consequences of actions. Option C is irrelevant, as the passage does not address friendship or helping others. Option D, while touching on foolishness, overlooks the deeper characterization of Don Quixote's courage amidst his folly.
The rooms were very grand. How would the meaning of this sentence be changed if the word 'grand' were replaced with 'large'?
- A. The sentence would describe the size of the room but not their magnificence.
- B. The sentence would provide information about the historical period in which these rooms were used.
- C. The sentence would offer insight into the particular decorations of the rooms but not the dimensions.
- D. The sentence would refer to the number of people the rooms would accommodate.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: A
Replacing "grand" with "large" alters the focus of the description. "Grand" conveys a sense of magnificence, elegance, and impressive beauty, while "large" simply indicates size without any connotation of splendor. Thus, option A accurately reflects that the sentence shifts from describing both size and magnificence to solely addressing size. Option B incorrectly suggests a historical context, which isn't implied by either term. Option C misinterprets the focus on decorations rather than size. Option D mistakenly assumes a focus on capacity, which is not relevant to the original meaning about the rooms.
Replacing "grand" with "large" alters the focus of the description. "Grand" conveys a sense of magnificence, elegance, and impressive beauty, while "large" simply indicates size without any connotation of splendor. Thus, option A accurately reflects that the sentence shifts from describing both size and magnificence to solely addressing size. Option B incorrectly suggests a historical context, which isn't implied by either term. Option C misinterprets the focus on decorations rather than size. Option D mistakenly assumes a focus on capacity, which is not relevant to the original meaning about the rooms.