iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Lilly Ledbetter

GET UPDATES FROM Lilly Ledbetter
 

Three Years Ago Today, Fairness Prevailed

Posted: 01/30/2012 8:37 pm

I grew up in Possum Trot, Ala., chopping cotton in the springtime and picking it in the fall. The work was hard on our hands and the sun was hot on our skin. But we learned early on -- boys and girls alike -- that we had to do a good day's work for a good day's pay.

Years later I was hired as an overnight manager at a Goodyear factory. I thought the same principle I learned in my poor, rural town still was true, so I worked just as hard as everyone else.

I got some treatment you might expect as a young woman at a factory in the South -- so I worked even harder to prove to the men around me that I was smart and good at what I did. I took pride in my job. And twice a month I went to my mailbox and found the paycheck I thought I'd earned.

One day I opened that mailbox and found something that would change my life. An anonymous coworker -- to this day, I don't know who -- had left a pencil-written note on a torn piece of paper with some numbers on it. It showed how much more my male coworkers were making, even though they had less education, training and experience.

I'd been at Goodyear almost 20 years, and was still making 20 percent less than the lowest-paid male supervisor in my same position. I'd been praised and promoted by my bosses, but rewarded with much smaller raises than my male coworkers got.

It hit me in the gut like a ton of bricks. I immediately thought of the countless overtime hours that I worked every chance I could, and realized I was paid for them based on an unfair salary. All those good days of work hadn't earned me the good day's pay I deserved.

It was about fairness, and it was against the law. It was about supporting my family -- school, doctors' bills, groceries and the mortgage. It was about my local economy, and the money I didn't have to spend in the community.

And it was about my retirement: Since that's based on our salaries, too, I'm still shortchanged long after I've stopped working. Because my Goodyear pension isn't enough to pay two bills, I burned through my small 401(k) in two years before I became eligible for Social Security.

So I went to court, and won. The company appealed and the case went all the way to the Supreme Court, where Goodyear won by one vote. The Court said I should have filed my complaint within six months of the first unfair paycheck I'd received almost two decades earlier. There was nothing the men could do that I couldn't -- but I couldn't fight for fair pay if I didn't even know I was being paid unfairly. Like so many women, I've never asked for or gotten a handout. I've only asked for a fair shot.

Barack Obama heard about my case and went to work. His grandmother worked in a bank her whole life, including long after she'd hit the glass ceiling. She even had to train the men who were paid higher salaries to do the work she'd showed them how to do. And he never wants his two girls to be disrespected in the same way.

As a senator he fought to give women enough time to file a complaint after we learn we're being discriminated against and underpaid. He believes we should reward hard work and responsibility. He stands up for the middle class because he's struggled, too. And he continues to fight because he knows what happened over a generation can't be fixed overnight.

I had to wait more than a decade and a half before I even knew I was being discriminated against. Within a week and a half after President Obama was inaugurated, he signed his name to the law that bears mine. Three years ago today, he made it the very first one he enacted.

I'll never see a cent of the salary I lost over all those years at Goodyear. My case is over and the Lilly Ledbetter law won't help Lilly Ledbetter. But in recognizing what's right and fair, President Obama's leadership has given me a much richer reward: knowing that my daughter, my granddaughter and every other woman in America will never again feel helpless when they don't get an equal day's pay for an equal day's work.

A version of this post appeared in the Charlotte Observer.

 
I grew up in Possum Trot, Ala., chopping cotton in the springtime and picking it in the fall. The work was hard on our hands and the sun was hot on our skin. But we learned early on -- boys and girls ...
I grew up in Possum Trot, Ala., chopping cotton in the springtime and picking it in the fall. The work was hard on our hands and the sun was hot on our skin. But we learned early on -- boys and girls ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 229
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
06:55 PM on 03/28/2012
Thank you for this article! it shows the President is doing more than the media and the GOP give him credit for and it opened my eyes too.
09:15 PM on 02/02/2012
This law is the final nail in the manufacturing base coffin. Why would anyone in their right minds work harder than the lowest common demoninator when we'll all get equal pay. Where's my incentive to work swing shift, overtime, weekends, work harder, do extra, help others? The gap between the ultra rich and the serfs has just widened due to this law. Everyone will now get $10.00 an hour with a 1.3% raise every year. The gang at the top thanks you for the profits they just made.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Vera Richardson
I am African-Amer and I support Pres Obama
05:15 AM on 02/01/2012
I am happy for the women that will benefit from Pres Obama’s decision to address Ledbetter’s case. I am disappointed that he hasn’t taken a similar interest or addressed my unlawful employment discrimination case that still harms minorities emotionally and financially.

For six years I have posted videos, sent emails, posted on various news, and Pres Obama websites seeking to give my case and African-American employment discrimination victims a voice and to have the Civil Right Act amended again to prevent one judge from unjustly dismissing employment discrimination cases. My latest efforts included a video and an open letter to President Obama that stated in part: “ On 1/29/09, you signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act which amended the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Like Ledbetter based on my belief that other Civil Rights Act of 1964 employment discrimination and retaliation victims will unjustly be denied a jury trial I am still fighting." I too could have given up and avoided the unimaginable pain and depression that continues to occur in my life 14 years after initially filing my Pro-Se lawsuit, ten years after the U S Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit refused to reverse the unjust dismissal of my lawsuit, 10 years since my disability retirement appeal wasunjustly denied, and 9 years after the Supreme Court refused to review my Pro-Se case.

When will Pres Obama help me?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
new beginning
Practice random acts of kindness-change the world
07:39 AM on 02/01/2012
Ah. You have illustrated the problem with language in bills that narrowly defines discrimination. Why should ANYONE have more "rights" than anyone else? Why is discrimination against one group prohibited by law, but others are permitted to continue?

I don't know the merits of your case, but can appreciate your frustration.
10:23 AM on 02/01/2012
Yes, yes, it is always discrimination, right?
02:27 AM on 02/01/2012
Ms. Ledbetter says, "I couldn't fight for fair pay if I didn't even know I was being paid unfairly." It is unfortunate that she did not raise this issue (called the discovery rule) in the Supreme Court. See 127 S. Ct. 2162, 2177 n.10 ("Because Ledbetter does not argue that such a [discovery] rule would change the outcome in her case, we have no occasion to address this issue.")
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
new beginning
Practice random acts of kindness-change the world
07:40 AM on 02/01/2012
If that is true, then what a huge omission!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
aprilglaspie
09:43 AM on 02/01/2012
If the Court had not been packed with activist pro-business reactionaries by crummy GOPer Presidents, they would have ruled in the plaintiff's favor on the basis of discovery.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paros
02:25 AM on 02/01/2012
Hey Lilly Ledbetter - you make Alabama proud!!!!
sanddc
Man may think he rules -God is still in charge..
06:34 AM on 02/01/2012
Ms. Lebetter you make me proud to know fighters still lives like my mother.
wsdave
Abusive or Insulting? I won't be responding.
11:11 PM on 01/31/2012
This law also marked the first broken promise of Obama's Presidency.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paros
02:26 AM on 02/01/2012
How so?
wsdave
Abusive or Insulting? I won't be responding.
03:15 AM on 02/01/2012
Obama promised to post all legislation on the White House website for 5 days before signing it. He signed this 2 days after receiving it.
09:57 PM on 01/31/2012
Good for you Lilly!
Wow, a lot a negativity for the comments on this one. I wasn't expecting it but I guess I should have been. Private citizens can pay their workers (above minimum wage) whatever they want. BUT if 2 employees are doing the same work, and one of them makes a good case (like the person being paid less has seniority, no negative counselings, etc) and is being paid 20 percent less. Then that, my constitution lovers, falls under the 14th amendment. So yes, there needs to be fairness in the workplace.
09:26 PM on 01/31/2012
Equal pay means work more for less. It works like this; when each house had one main breadwinner, typicaly the male, the household had a full time carer for the kids = mother, Dads pay was ample tto provide for the whole family, buy a house,buy a car, put kids through education and the kids had a sound upbrining and contributed to society etc. Now, with two income househols, the two parents have to work to afford all the same basics only this time they also have to pay for child care as well. The kids grow up not totally attached to their families because they hardly see the parents anymore and things decay slowly on the family front.
One the monetary front the extra income per houshold has sered to increase demand and push prices up. hence the work more for less outcome.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paros
02:27 AM on 02/01/2012
And for those women who are widows - they should receive less or better yet stay home with their hands outstretched?
08:49 PM on 02/01/2012
Not at all. My outline simply points to the end result of the simple equal pay issue as it has played out in other countries. My mother became a widow in 1957 and faced the same issues. she took up the proffession of accounting, raised 3 boys, put 2 through bording school built a house etc. All this from the base of being a Parsons wife on bare bones stipend. Let me tell you nothing was given to her accept the kindness of friends and relatives. I guess the point I'm making is that eah of us regardless of gender can aspire to whatever we want. Hard work and due dilligence and persistance will often see you through. Governments and fair wages etc can all help but at the end of the day we make our own individual choices on how we deal with things and move forewards.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Giggie
04:43 AM on 02/01/2012
"the kids grow up not totally attached to their families because they hardly see the parents"......that's the dumbest statement I have ever heard about two working parents. Where did you find that tidbit of information? Study after study has shown that pre school children who are sent to daycare, (due to working parents), do better developmentally than those who are left at home in the early years. Do you mean that because of 2 working parents they have access to better education, and as a result have a larger world view, and that this leads to more independence from the family cocoon? I also don't get how you then link this 2 person income household to inflation. I think the price increases necessitated the increase in household income.
QwertyPoiu4321
"Progressives" Love Violence
08:56 PM on 01/31/2012
Females receive equal pay for *equal work*: they have children and their income-work goes down 25% after age 24.

Violently demanding to be paid 25% *more* is *not* equal pay for *equal* work.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
new beginning
Practice random acts of kindness-change the world
07:53 AM on 02/01/2012
That is often the reality and shows why it isn't always clear what "equal work" constitutes. From the workers' perspective it may appear equal. From the employers'? Not so much.

The thing is that SOMEONE needs to be the principle caregiver and be able to take charge if their children get sick or need extra attention. And often this falls on the mom. Not always, but often.
08:32 PM on 01/31/2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwogDPh-Sow

Even if it is true that women are consistently paid less for "unfair" reasons, where does the government get the power to force private citizens to pay their employees fairly? Which part of the Constitution grants the federal government that power?
09:51 PM on 01/31/2012
The 14th Amendment
08:22 PM on 02/01/2012
Equal protection under the law does not grant the government to favor one group of people because they are [supposedly] being discriminated against. Equal protection under the law means the government cannot pass a law that affects one group and not another. There can be no favoritism by the government, even if it is to help a [supposedly] disadvantaged group.
09:57 PM on 01/31/2012
It is true, happens all the time. Still.
The part of the constitution that allows Congress & the President to make laws.
08:26 PM on 02/01/2012
So the federal government can do anything it wants with a 51% majority of the people? Could you and 200 million people vote to make me a slave? Could you vote to take every dollar I make in 2012? There are limits to what the government can do, and this is one of them. President Obama and Harry Reid do not have the power to force private businesses to pay women more than they want to.
08:11 PM on 01/31/2012
Lilly, If you felt you were not being paid what you were worth, why didn't you go work somewhere else where your abilities and skills would be truly appreciated? Also, did you do all the physical aspects of the job the men did? Finally, were your performance appraisals introduced into evidence to sow you were as competent as you claim? If not, why now?
12:13 AM on 02/01/2012
She didn't change jobs because she didn't know her employer was shortchanging her. Did you even read the article?
sanddc
Man may think he rules -God is still in charge..
06:41 AM on 02/01/2012
No evidently-read the first three lines.
07:38 AM on 02/01/2012
Yes I read the article. If you had read the article, you would have seen she stayed with the same company after she learned she was making less. Didn't you notice that?
02:48 AM on 02/01/2012
What is your hostile agenda to this woman and why do you not feel she was entitled to be paid fairly? She was a supervisor in a goodyear factory not a hard labourer. The bias in your comment renders it inflammatory...
07:41 AM on 02/01/2012
My agenda is to bring out the fact that equal pay for equal work demands that women perform the same work, including all physical, travel, certification requirements that men are obligated to perform. I investigate claims such as this for a living, and I am frequently presented with people who aren't performing all required tasks, or performing them with the same success as others, who claim racism or sexism when they do not advance.

The Lily Ledbetter law opens the door to promoting less comptent people in the name of "diversity".
07:29 PM on 01/31/2012
I thought that in the good old days a company made a perspective employee and offer - which they accepted or not? In the coming world that will be illegal? The government will set a standardized set of wages for a given type of work - and then dictate these wages to private industry? So much for the good old days?
09:58 PM on 01/31/2012
they weren't dictating wages. They were dictating people being paid fairly regardless of their race, creed, color, gender, sexual orientation. 14th Amendment.
11:21 PM on 01/31/2012
If the government can say how much a company must pay someone - how far is it from saying who they can hire, or fire? Or does the government do that already? Or like what if a caucasian person works at a certain wage and an ethnic person applies also, but is not as qualified. Should the company risk paying the ethnic person less - or maybe just not hire them to be on the safe side? I guess I see what the problem is - but I'm not sure about the government-run-everything solution to it?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Giggie
04:56 AM on 02/01/2012
Yeah good old days when people of colour were paid less for equal work of white people, and when children and women worked 15 hour days in mines. When companies are allowed free rein to do what they want, you end up with sweat shops, (see third world on that one). Some employers will expose their employees to serious health and safety risks if not forced to comply with regulations. The constitution is not the bible, it doesn't cover everything.....common sense should come into your though process.
12:54 PM on 02/01/2012
It's like the real story of American history is where the government just takes over everthing?
12:59 PM on 02/01/2012
Never mind - I already know the answer.
06:41 PM on 01/31/2012
Just the opposite in the military. Women do less and/or lighter work for the same pay. They get cushier and/or HQ assignments often working directly for flag officers, thus giving them faster promotions. Mid-level male supervisors often play favorites, either out of fear for their careers or for sexual purposes......and since women are outnumbered 6 to 1, they pretty much call the off-duty shots as well. These are ugly painful non-liberal truths. Don't believe it? Ask the GIs, anonymously, of course.
10:00 PM on 01/31/2012
Plenty of men sit in the same boat. A bunch of fat slobs sitting at a desk while others are working their butts off all day getting "smoked". Married people make more than single. There is a ton horrible pay issues in the military. Has little to do with gender.
10:02 PM on 01/31/2012
Cause it's awesome to be outnumbered 6 to 1? For every benefit they get, I assure you they pay for in having to work for jerks with 'sexual purposes' (not as fun as you might think that sounds), and all the rest of the prejudice.

That said, it's unfortunate, but true that people who lift heavy things often don't make as much money as that that sit at desks all day.
06:09 PM on 01/31/2012
Powerful stuff. Also shows how the Supreme Court is a disgrace, once again.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
eddy joe
welcome to the machine
05:40 PM on 01/31/2012
The Court said I should have filed my complaint within six months of the first unfair paycheck I'd received almost two decades earlier.... How could she file, if she didn't know? It should read within 6 months of discovering the truth.