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..
What is the relationship between paragraphs 7 and 8?
- A. Paragraph 8 presents a solution to a problem raised in paragraph 7.
- B. Paragraph 8 contrasts information in paragraph 7.
- C. Paragraph 8 applies a concept presented in paragraph 7.
- D. Paragraph 8 provides evidence for an issue presented in paragraph 7.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: B
Paragraph 7 introduces a specific idea or situation, while paragraph 8 presents a contrasting viewpoint or alternative perspective, highlighting differences rather than similarities. This contrast is essential for understanding the complexity of the topic. Option A is incorrect as there is no solution offered in paragraph 8; it merely contrasts the information. Option C misinterprets the relationship; applying a concept implies continuity rather than opposition. Option D suggests that paragraph 8 supports paragraph 7, which is not the case since it presents a differing perspective rather than evidence. Thus, the relationship is one of contrast.
Paragraph 7 introduces a specific idea or situation, while paragraph 8 presents a contrasting viewpoint or alternative perspective, highlighting differences rather than similarities. This contrast is essential for understanding the complexity of the topic. Option A is incorrect as there is no solution offered in paragraph 8; it merely contrasts the information. Option C misinterprets the relationship; applying a concept implies continuity rather than opposition. Option D suggests that paragraph 8 supports paragraph 7, which is not the case since it presents a differing perspective rather than evidence. Thus, the relationship is one of contrast.
Other Related Questions
And no one could have made any mistake about it but one who had something of the same kind in his head.' In this sentence, Sancho Panza is stating that
- A. he and Don Quixote have a relationship that
- B. he and Don Quixote think alike.
- C. Don Quixote makes hasty decisions.
- D. Don Quixote has a distorted vision of the world.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: D
Sancho Panza's statement implies that only someone with a similar mindset could misinterpret the situation, suggesting that Don Quixote's perspective is skewed. This indicates a distorted view of reality, aligning with option D. Option A is incorrect as it suggests a broader relationship without addressing the specific context of perception. Option B implies that they share thoughts, which does not capture the essence of misunderstanding. Option C focuses on decision-making rather than perception, failing to recognize the core issue of distorted vision. Thus, the emphasis is on Don Quixote's flawed worldview, making option D the most accurate interpretation.
Sancho Panza's statement implies that only someone with a similar mindset could misinterpret the situation, suggesting that Don Quixote's perspective is skewed. This indicates a distorted view of reality, aligning with option D. Option A is incorrect as it suggests a broader relationship without addressing the specific context of perception. Option B implies that they share thoughts, which does not capture the essence of misunderstanding. Option C focuses on decision-making rather than perception, failing to recognize the core issue of distorted vision. Thus, the emphasis is on Don Quixote's flawed worldview, making option D the most accurate interpretation.
How does paragraph 3 function in the article?
- A. It develops the general point made in paragraph 2 by giving specific examples.
- B. It presents a counterargument to a claim made in paragraph 2.
- C. It discusses general topics that are further developed by concrete examples in paragraph 4.
- D. It provides a transition between a controversial topic begun in paragraph 2 and finished in paragraph 4.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: A
Paragraph 3 effectively supports the general point established in paragraph 2 by presenting specific examples that illustrate the broader claim. This approach enhances understanding by grounding abstract ideas in concrete instances. Option B is incorrect as paragraph 3 does not introduce a counterargument; rather, it reinforces the main idea. Option C misrepresents the function of paragraph 3, as it does not merely discuss general topics but rather focuses on specific examples. Option D fails to capture the essence of paragraph 3, as it does not serve primarily as a transition but as a means to elaborate on the preceding claim.
Paragraph 3 effectively supports the general point established in paragraph 2 by presenting specific examples that illustrate the broader claim. This approach enhances understanding by grounding abstract ideas in concrete instances. Option B is incorrect as paragraph 3 does not introduce a counterargument; rather, it reinforces the main idea. Option C misrepresents the function of paragraph 3, as it does not merely discuss general topics but rather focuses on specific examples. Option D fails to capture the essence of paragraph 3, as it does not serve primarily as a transition but as a means to elaborate on the preceding claim.
This law amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 so that discriminatory intent is recognized even if the events of intention occur outside the statute of limitations. What can readers infer from this sentence?
- A. Ledbetter waited to file her claim.
- B. Ledbetter's lawsuit created significant change.
- C. Ledbetter's employer ignored the existing law.
- D. Ledbetter felt cheated by her employer
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: B
The statement indicates that this law addresses discriminatory intent beyond the statute of limitations, suggesting that Ledbetter's case had a significant impact on civil rights legislation. This implies that her lawsuit led to important changes in how discrimination is addressed legally. Option A is incorrect because it focuses on the timing of Ledbetter's claim rather than the implications of the law. Option C suggests negligence on the employer's part, which is not directly inferred from the statement. Option D, while it may be true, does not reflect the broader legal implications highlighted in the sentence. Thus, the emphasis is on the transformative effect of Ledbetter's lawsuit.
The statement indicates that this law addresses discriminatory intent beyond the statute of limitations, suggesting that Ledbetter's case had a significant impact on civil rights legislation. This implies that her lawsuit led to important changes in how discrimination is addressed legally. Option A is incorrect because it focuses on the timing of Ledbetter's claim rather than the implications of the law. Option C suggests negligence on the employer's part, which is not directly inferred from the statement. Option D, while it may be true, does not reflect the broader legal implications highlighted in the sentence. Thus, the emphasis is on the transformative effect of Ledbetter's lawsuit.
Based on the email, which description characterizes the relationship between the profitability of the small shops near Juniper Estates and the opening of a Brannick's Superstore?
- A. The size of Brannick's would allow it to offer lower prices, possibly forcing the small shops out of business.
- B. Brannick's would attract new customers to the area, bringing business to the small shops.
- C. The small shops charge higher prices than Brannick's would, potentially allowing them to offer better wages to their workers.
- D. The small shops carry products too specialized for Brannick's, ensuring the loyalty of their customers.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: A
The relationship between the profitability of small shops near Juniper Estates and the opening of Brannick's Superstore is primarily characterized by competitive pricing. Brannick's larger size enables it to offer lower prices, which may drive small shops out of business due to reduced customer traffic. Option B suggests that Brannick's would attract new customers, which is unlikely to benefit small shops if they cannot compete on price. Option C incorrectly assumes that higher prices lead to better wages, which generally isn't sustainable against lower-priced competitors. Option D overlooks the impact of pricing competition, as even specialized products may not suffice to retain customers when faced with significantly lower prices from a superstore.
The relationship between the profitability of small shops near Juniper Estates and the opening of Brannick's Superstore is primarily characterized by competitive pricing. Brannick's larger size enables it to offer lower prices, which may drive small shops out of business due to reduced customer traffic. Option B suggests that Brannick's would attract new customers, which is unlikely to benefit small shops if they cannot compete on price. Option C incorrectly assumes that higher prices lead to better wages, which generally isn't sustainable against lower-priced competitors. Option D overlooks the impact of pricing competition, as even specialized products may not suffice to retain customers when faced with significantly lower prices from a superstore.