President Obama’s First Law

Way to Go President Obama you have been a great President so Far you make me Proud! Justice for all!

That doesn’t make the Constitutional prohibition on Secretary Salazar any less of a Constitutional prohibition

jpt writes:
“the new law says that the 180-day statute of limitations for pay discrimination cases is applicable to each allegedly discriminatory paycheck, not merely the date when the pay was agreed upon.”
Uh … tinkering with the red tape is “change”? It’s sure not as much “change” as going along with the right on tax cuts, contraception, WHATever — then boozing it up with ‘em after they rebuff His most craven caving.
“Making it easier to sue” is … uh … fine as far as it goes, for those with access to lawyers.
Better He should do something about the FDA’s poison peanut butter standards.

It is troubling that anyone would speak against a bill aimed at on-the-job fairness. Yet some of the commenters have made shameful remarks, and worse, only three Republicans in the House (all men, BTW, & one of them an old friend of mine) voted for this bill. The Republicans are not bereft of ideas, as I something think; their ideas are anti-American, inhumane & indefensible.

Concerned in OH—we know your right-wing mantra by heart. we read it every day. racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia—the pilonidal cyst, Rush Limbaugh (The Rush Limbaugh Institute of Advanced Conservative Studies, ROFLMFAO) exudes the purulent discharge posted on blog after blog, blindly, by his followers.
Limbaugh’s idea of how to treat women?—make fun of an american soldier who lost multiple limbs serving our nation in Iraq. her crime? not agreeing with the war.
this guy is an intellectual lightweight and his kindred’s hatefulness will drive even more away from the GOP. but who cares?

And the first political payoff goes to – the trial lawyers! Yep, this is nothing but a quid pro quo to the trial lawyer vermin who are the real power for the demonrats. Now they can do even more of what they do best – extortion. And, the government-schooled, hate-filled liberal voters will trot off to them in tantrums, because “WAA-it’s not FAAAIIR!!!” The same tired old liberal mantra, gimme gimme gimme, play the ‘victim’ card, born out of the selfishness and self-absorption that is at the heart of liberalism.
So now, more regulatory costs on business, thousands more lawsuits enabled by this, which will drive up the cost of everything, and cause businesses to think 3 times before hiring anymore would-be plaintiffs. This after all the unemployment caused by the forced increase in the liberal minimum wage last year. All so that liberals can feel even more smug and greedy than they already are. Meanwhile, libs lurk around and call names at anyone who disagrees with them – because there is no real justification for their support of the disgraceful, un-American trial lawyers and THEIR so-called president (he’s not mine!) Øbama is a disgrace.

soon for every man who will refuse to hire a qualified women because of this, there will be another woman willing to hire her.
and besides businesses who do not discriminate on the bases of pay, will have no problems.
the sad thing is there needed to be a law put into place to stop companies from pay discrimination.

R.I.P.-USA: if businesses treated women equally there never would have been a bill or litigation.
no one cares who your president is, Limbaugh is your king. The purulent discharge of your Almighty Limbaugh chills people’s hearts. the hatred He and His followers has is truly astounding.
this is a good day for women and americans who want to live in a society that values equality. that you or your puppetmaster see equality as unamerican could not make me care less. get on your AM radio and suck it up.

RIP-the USA: He is not your president? Do you live in the USA? If so then he IS your president, same as disastrous,worst-ever-president George W. Bush was mine.

…and the Republicans almost all voted against it. Wow.
That party is in a serious death spiral – appealing to the approx. 20% of the electorate who are very conservative republicans, and increasingly offensive to the rest of us.
Farewell, GOP

A new double standard. If you’re a man and you want a pay-raise you have to prove you deserve it and then you have to work up the courage to ask for it. If you’re a woman, all you have to do is wait for one of your male colleagues to do that and then you passively get an automatic pay raise.

Well that settles it – I’m going to law school. It’s either that or live off or work for the government.
McCain was right – this is just going to set off an explosion of lawsuits.

According to Gallup and FoxNews his approval rating is 65%
“whatever you learn at The Rush Limbaugh Center for Advanced Conservative Studies. discrimination is his forte, and apparently yours as well.” Paul Wall

For the most part women don’t deserve the same pay as men.
I have many years, & many experiences in the work force to know this. It is not just my opinion. There are some ‘non-physical’ jobs where women are of equal value, but they are the exception.
Probably 60% of jobs (especially at lower pay scales) will require some physical work where men completely outpace women (and this is expected of men – and I never hear phemi-phems scream about this). I have had many of these types of jobs and many women get paid the same as men, if not more, but they are no where near as useful to their employers. In some of these cases I was employed by a woman (or women) and they very blatantly favored the women, but they never got sued (and everyone knows the Govt. & Courts totally favor women in these type cases). The media has made this type mindset totally acceptable which is part of the on-going media indoctrination of the masses (just like their favoritism of Obum – which brought about a Media Induced President). Men are simply more versatile, capable of doing the mental as well as the physical work.
Women are also held to a different (lower) standard concerning personal conduct on the job. Many of them snipe & argue like children, but seldom get fired. They wear their emotions on their sleeves, and often act totally Un-Professional. Some will argue with each other, their male co-workers and even customers at the drop of a hat, with little consequence. This type of behavior is seldom tolerated of men (even by male supervisors). Men are held to a ‘Much’ higher level of Professionalism.
In the less physically oriented jobs (I have had several of these also) women can be as capable as men but are often less valuable in the long run. They get pregnant & need to be out for months (god forbid that you train a woman for a very necessary job then they are out for months, etc., etc.). A lot of women are just looking for ‘secondary’ income, or just ‘spending money’ for themselves. They often quit at the ‘first sign’ of more difficult work, or if their husband gets a better job, or if they get married, etc., etc.
Women are seldom held to the same standard as men, on the job or in society. Few women get blamed if the family finances fail; It is the Man who will get blamed (now where is all that EQUALISM on this issue) The concept of EQUALISM normally evaporated about that time (phemi-phemism, and women’s rights aren’t about EQUALITY, they are about MORE than EQUALISM for WOMEN when they want something, and no mention of the word when it suites them).
Also, why is it their employer’s responsibility to suffer a loss of work (and competitiveness) when a well trained woman decides to get pregnant (and I have seen this many times). Why is it the employer’s responsibility to help someone when they decide to have a child. That was that particular woman’s or Families’ decision. To force a particular employer to financially help out with a pregnancy, or raising a child is CLASSIC SOCIALISM.
Obviously, the claims that ‘OBAMA IS A SOCIALIST’ were right on the money.

I know I am better than most women and men so I am not worried. However, I can see how insecure men would be against it. They now have to compete on a more level ground. No more playing pocket pool in the bathroom! The only women I can see against it are the morons.

just reading the thread you can see the pattern emerging from the radical right: white, heterosexual, christian, male, “native-born”, uneducated, bigotted, racist= good American
women, minorities, immigrants, believers in other faiths, gays, handicapped individuals, people who seek a pluralistic society and believe in civil rights and equal protection= evil, terrorist, socialists, bad American
it’s getting stale and smells just like Limbaugh’s pilonidal cyst.

Paul’
If women do equal work they ‘do’ deserve equal pay.
However, they seldom do equal work.

I can see I hit you liberals with Too many truths at one, and it overloaded your Emotion Receptors.
God forbid you face truths that you thought you and the Liberal Media swept under the rug, long ago.

Concerned in OH—fascism is the trademark of the GOP. civil rights are a Democratic and populist and pluralist conncern. people who think minorities, women, the disabled, gays, immigrants aren’t “real”, “good” americans smacks of 1930s Germany.

Well now ‘Kevvie’ Baby,
Are you Stereotyping about My Work History.
How do you know what I have done.
If the truth were known I almost invariably would have worked you in the ground several times over, And doubly, triply so for most of the women I worked with, who often got paid more.
Now stop fanaticizing, and stick to the logic of the discussion if you have the capability (your emotions get the better of you also, don’t they – a common problem with Liberals & Socialists)

Anon—-no we are still waiting to hear a truth. and when confronted with justifying outlandish claims you call others “emotional.” why is everyone who believes in civil rights and equal rights so bad and socialists. that’s some emotional diatribe. whatever you radical conservatives call yourselves now “socialist” has never sounded so good. one smell of Limaugh’s purulent, pilonidal cyst makes me proud to be called a socialist.

Anon—please say ONE SINGLE FACT. enough of your catch-phrase cliches from Limbaugh. man up and state some facts instead of bigoted, misogynist remarks. please. we’ve been waiting.
your earlier post stands out as the sine qua non of stereotyping. some please come correct or don’t come at all.

Are you Stereotyping about My Work History.” you’ve talked a whole lot about it but we have no facts. not that anyone cares. you say you have a lot of experience in the workforce. 10 years? 20 years? 6 months? at McDonals? Wall Street? prison? you had no problem stereotyping all women in your post do you. now you know they feel.

“we see who the Real Hatemongers and Bigots are”
_________________________________
Name calling as talking points.

“typical of handout seeking Socialists”
________________________________________
Name calling as talking point.

Some women get more pay, and some women get less pay for same work, as some men get more pay and some men get less pay for same work. And I agree on this point. But Obama Offended today most major religions in the World ,by making his law on this. And the Bible say that all men created equal, and say nothing about women. Obama offended a lot of important people and religions around the World , and I dont think this is a good thing.

“I think Anon’s comments graphically demonstrate why women need a law to “protect” them.”
Posted by: Skip
But Skip, I thought women were stowong (strong) !!!

BAM!
Anon? That sound you just heard is the door closing behind the woman you were holding hostage. She just decided to walk into the 21st century.
RUN! LADY! RUN!
Posted by: WHAT!

Anon—no sir, no facts. you talked about your experience. well i can talk about my experience. i have worked over 28 years where the woerkforce has included men and women. but that’s my experience. i see no reason why a woman should be paid less to do my job. and if a woman perform better than i she should receive a larger raise than me. you think women bicker and fight and are lazy and half-hearted in their work. an opinion. my opinion is that women are equal to me and should have the same rights as me. i know to you and the right that’s “socialism.”
i find working with women a rewarding, engaging, meaningful part of my life. my experience has been that women are my equals and peers and deserve as much respect and equality (and pay) as i get.

“bertieW
you can try and insult me all you want.
but today the president signed into law
that you nor any other man will make one dollar for every 78cents a woman makes.
and I feel great about it.
so if it makes you feel good to insult”
If you posted something with a relationship to reality you wouldnt get insulted.
People get raises all the time at variable rates.
People start jobs with a variety of job offers.
This is just a invitation to stimulate the Bar association.

BertieW—quit being so disingenuous and come to terms with the fact that what “jgaw” wrote was about one man and one women getting equally paid for the same exact job at the same company or institution. that’s what this is about. not all the variable you use to obfuscate, confusem and muddle the issue in typical neo-con fashion.

If this is socialism, GIVE US MORE SOCIALISM!

“it’s applicable to all women who are doing the same job, the same position for the same institution or company and are conpensate differently on the basis of gender.”
Well how do you know they are compensated differently on the basis of gender- litigate!
If Todd and Mary are paid two different amount how to you know the cause is gender related? Maybe Todd came in two years later and it was a tighter job market and he didnt take the same salary offer Mary got when she joined. He held out and now makes more even though he has been there less time and does the same job.
How are you ever going to unravel the *real* causes of every pay disparity?

“How are you ever going to unravel the *real* causes of every pay disparity?”
make a law that makes gender dsicrimination illegal.
employers can be fair or go to court. the discrimination has to stop and to stop it you need laws. there had to be a civil rights act. evrey discriminated has to get legal protection because otherwise, left to our own devices, we will never naturally (Christians though we are, lol) do the right thing. the U.S. has to live up to its promise of equal oppertunity under the law and not be the laughing stock of every plural democracy on this planet.
you must be wealthy, retired or a man.

“Quite clearly, through performance reviews bertW. Have you ever worked anywhere?”
Is that you Pot? Its me Kettle.
I just gave you a scenario. Mary found out Todd makes more than she does and she is up in arms! After burning her bra, she wants to know why. It could be any number of reasonable factors:
- Todd started a a different pay level
- Todd has negotiated a mid-cycle pay raise
- Todd had had better increases because of merit evaluations.
Acme Co.’s HR department cant tell Mary about Todd evaluations, and they cant tell her his pay history.
So how do you determine if Mary is getting an unfair deal because of her sex? Litigate.

I love the way the msm is reporting on the Obama presidency.”Obamas first law” “Obamas first press conference” etc. As if the media is the proud parent showing of their scrapbook of baby pictures to every one they meet.They seem so pleased at what they have created.

” People can bring lawsuits on any thing they want.”
You can in theory bring a lawsuit about anything. But the limiting factor is your probability of a payoff. Unprofitable suits dont get brought because there is no payoff.
However under this legislation the chance of a payoff went up dramatically. My client is paid less then men with the same job title? Give me all of your HR records back 15 years so I can determine what the reason is. Some of those people came in from acquisition- you better pray you kept the old companies records. How do I dont my client isnt behind because she had a manager who gave women lower performance ratings- give me all his ratings back the last 10 years too.
Hit up a bunch of big companies and you can give annoying them until the lawyer wakes away with a nice payday. And the company adds another layer of HR for everyone to deal with.

AnaB,
I don’t dispute that men and women should be compensated equally for equal performance.
I am not an attorney, but as a supporter of business, in my mind (and in many others) what this does is enable women (or anyone for that matter) who feels they have been wronged and indefinite period of time to file litigation against employers. I’m pretty confident that this will lead to more lawsuits, which many businesses will settle out of court (regardless of merit) in an effort to save on legal costs and avoid bad publicity. At a former employer (a very large conglomerate) we settled almost everything out of court, regardless of merit.
And while you may not be an ambulance chaser, you know as well as I do there are tons o’ attorneys who are…
Congratulations lawyers (they are toasting Obama tonight). In the same week were Obama lobbies for a “stimulus” package to create job growth he punishes business (who actually create jobs) with two very bad moves (Ledbetter and CA emissions approval). I just don’t get it. Is it part of a marxist (gain control of the means of production) plan? It would seem so…

and what many of the people concerned about frivilous lawsuits forget that plaintiffs attorneys usually only get paid if they win or settle (the attorney usually takes about 33%, the maximum allowable). if they fear spending years on a case that has no merit there is no incentive to file suit or take on that particular client.
also many attorneys working in this field (and other fields of discrimination like age, race…) are civil rights litigation attorneys who make much less and sometimes pro-bono.
and no one thinks of the attorneys who defend these suits, who never get paid on a win-only basis like a plaintiff’s attorney. defense attorneys charge for everything at astounding hourly rates. so the fat cat lawyers in these cases are usually the defense attorneys (republicans). so you basically have defense attorneys making the big bucks—they are at every republican politician’s doorstep whining about lawsuit abuse, but vote democratic every time. and donate to judges re-election campaigns.

@ Paul Wall,
I have no problems will anyone filing suits in which they were treated/compensated unjustly. But my question for you is how much time does one need to figure out that they have been unjustly compensated? 6 months (previous statute of limitations)? 1 year? 10 years? 20 years?
As stated by a prior post, what this law will do is require to employers to file and maintain detailed and lengthy descriptions of employee job descriptions and employee performance records in perpetuity.
As time passes it will be more and more difficult to piece together what did or didn’t happen (mostly due to the transition of managers and people involved). It is a lawyer’s dream.
I used to work as a manufacturing manager at a plant in NC. I’m glad I’m no longer doing this role as I know first-hand the new demands that would be placed on me from a record keeping standpoint….
Honestly, I think there should be a “snooze-you-lose” component to this law…extend the statute of limitations to 1 year, 2 years, or even 5 years. But don’t punish businesses and make it indefinite. Business cannot win and in the end it is ultimately the employers who lose when businesses downsize, relocate, or close down.
Lawyers win again. Obama is their guy.
BTW – Since I’m thinking of lawyers, when was the last time the Democrats had a presidential candidate who what not a lawyer? It always puzzled me why anyone would EVER want to put a lawyer in charge of ANYTHING…but yet we do.

Error in prior post:
Business cannot win and in the end it is ultimately the EMPLOYEES who lose when businesses downsize, relocate, or close down.
@ Paul Wall – You have made my point with your comments. Employers will settle the vast majority of these lawsuits out of court because (a.) they do not want to incur protracted legal costs and (b.) they don’t want bad publicity.
In the company I worked for we settled out of court almost every time we were threatened with litigation (even if we could have won the suit).
Label me whatever you wish, but I know first hand what it is like to lay workers off and how families are impacted. There is nothing harder I have ever done. We scratch and claw for any cost savings and efficiencies we could find to be competitive and our doors open. Ledbetter is not a good law.
Label me whatever you wish. Have you ever created a job or employed anyone or have you ever told anyone you had to let them go? I’m guessing not – Which is something you have in common with our President.

tjp612—i think that discrimination in this society is unacceptable. my employer keeps meticulous records for each employee. so they will either be able to defend themselves or explain discrimination.
as to statue of limitations i guess i feel the longer the better. why be discriminated against for decades, realize it and then be told “uh-oh you’re too late”?
it’s so easy to be the white male, with all the meritless prestige of white-privilege. no one needs any rights. attorneys are bad. evrybodys a marxist. if white men in the US had to put up with one one-hundredth of what blacks, hispanics, women, immigrants, gays, disabled people have had to put up with, then there would be cries for justice, pleadings for mercy!
“liberals” “socialists” “marxists” is just Limbaugh-speak for blacks, women and gays…anyone who is not a white male.

People in this country have had enough I voted dem my whole life but since I have gotten my president that didnt think would every happen I feel as his election has liberated me from the dem party, I can now vote for any praty that has the best ideas I used to think my dems had the right answers because they sounded better than Bush, now that he’s on the ranch, I will be supporting the GOP to balance out congress. I never thought that my own party would dupe me boy was I wrong

@ Paul Wall,
Appreciate your latest comments. I’ll close out the evening with this: If companies are doing wrong by their employers (and I’ve been on the employer side) then employees should receive appropriate compensation to right the wrong. But I think a statute of limitations of 5 years would be a fair compromise…I just feel that while some employees (and their lawyers) may win in the the short-term, the cumulative effect of frivilous litigation, regulation, and oversight (mind you, not the “important and necessary” litigation, regulation to legitimately protect worker safety and rights, and the community in which companies operate) have the potential (and have) to hurt employees long term when businesses get tired of fighting and decide to move on. I’ve seen it first hand…

Everyone has their own vision of America. And, whether you agree or disagree with others’ visions of America, it is one of the things that make this country great.

“Everyone has their own vision of America. And, whether you agree or disagree with others’ visions of America, it is one of the things that make this country great.”
—tjp612, Jan 30, 2009 1:06:37 AM
very well-said. true. and that really puts things in perspective.

Oh and the Republicans are the party of anal retentive white males.

@pefors
I understand what u r saying but the politcal pendelum always swings back its fine that you dont support the GOP now but you will change your mind once my dems ruin this country to the point that hell I will vote a GOP candidate until the balance of power is nuetralized and fiscal sanity is restore dem=more taxes and tons of welfare which is the called
stimulus package

I should say ‘half a trillion overbudget spending every year.’
My Republicans really set a terrible standard. Half a trillion dollars further in debt every year 2002 through 2006. Why it made being in debt seem like some kind of trivial joke – especially with cutting back taxes as if nobody really has to pay.
Well we’re paying now aren’t we! I can’t forgive them for promising ‘small government’ and delivering record deficits and record debts.

“The Bush administration made plans for war and for Iraq’s oil before the 9/11 attacks, sparking a policy battle between neo-cons and Big Oil, BBC’s Newsnight has revealed.”
Actually the “plans” to invade Iraq started in 1996 when the DOD was tasked to develop a plan to invade Iraq. Exercises of the plan were held in 97, 98, and 2000. I guess if you slap on the word Bush and Oil, you can make it say whatever you want.

so if women are to be treated equally should college teams start making two locker rooms for every team so women can play football and baseball like the men do? or should the women stay in their own sports like softball and volleyball

BertieW—wow, you went to wikipedia i see. why not read Rawls? justice and equality shouldn’t be so threatening to you.