I have to admit that I'm conflicted on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act.
On one hand, it's unlikely that a person would know within their first 6 months on the job that they are paid less than other workers. So, I understand why we should extend the ability to sue.
On the other hand, remuneration is between employer and employee. If an employee agrees to work for a certain pay rate or salary, then that's what they've agreed to. I'm not entirely convinced that what other people make is relevant. If an employee subsequently determines that other people are making more, then they can go to their supervisor and ask for a raise. I don't see why the employer should have to give them a post-dated raise or why the deals other people cut with the employer should be applied to everybody. It's on the employee to negotiate their pay and then either accept it or not.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comments:
Yes, I too thought it was not a public issue, but after taking a lot of flak from students, I switched. There are all kinds of disparities in information and bargaining power between employee and employer that make this increasingly an unlevel (is that a word?) playing field. And more and more, the public thinks it IS a public issue. Almost all levels of government maintain an open employee salary policy (in letter, but getting the information is often another story). And this is beginning to be applied to government contracts as well. And aren't we all in favor of "transparency" now? I'm afraid that boat has sailed; save your energy to overturn the ban on the import on the import Roquefort cheese.
Post a Comment