Barack Obama and his surrogates are trying to win the all-important, election-determining women's vote by throwing everything like spaghetti against the wall to see what sticks. They're trying to argue contraceptives, abortion rights and something called the Lilly Ledbetter Act. If you're like most busy women, you don't have an idea about what the Lilly Ledbetter Act is, but don't like anything that sells women short when they do equal work. Politgal Network's put this short piece together to explain why what Obama's touting really isn't good for any of us - much less women, who are more proned to start small businesses and could find the Lilly Ledbetter Act a detriment to their businesses.
What does the Lilly Ledbetter Act do?
It is important to note that the Lilly Ledbetter Act (LLA) does not create equal pay for women. Equal pay for women has existed since 1963.... When we hear President Barack Obama and his surrogates say that Obama has provided for equal pay for women, especially when they say that he has provided it for the first time, this is absolutely untrue.
The LLA changes the 180 day rule, and says instead that you can bring the claim within 180 days of any paycheck that was affected by the discrimination. For example, if Male X is promoted over Female Y in 1974 but Female Y is still working for that company in 2012, receiving regular paychecks, she can sue within 180 days of her most recent paycheck. She may sue on the grounds that she is still being paid less than she would have been paid had she received that promotion or raise back in 1974. And, she can sue for damages for all of those paychecks - since 1974 - regardless of when she learned of the discrimination.
What are the ramifications of the Lilly Ledbetter Act?
Of course, employers objected to this change, because it opens the door to unlimited litigation over discrimination that may have happened decades earlier. The manager who made the decision may be long gone. The company may be under new ownership. The company may not even have records back that far, as in the example of the woman who sues in 2012 over a 1974 issue.
More on the issue HERE.