Ledbetter Lowdown
ANOTHER REASON FOR HILLARY SUPPORTERS TO VOTE FOR MCCAIN?
By Mande Wilkes
FITSNews - July 2, 2008 - Apparently more interested in form over substance, Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama isn’t practicing what he preaches with regard to workplace equality.
According to a report by the Secretary of the Senate, men are overrepresented among Obama’s staff and the average male employee makes $6,000 more than his female counterpart.
This data has been released amid Obama’s recent support of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act, a bill which sought to relax time limits for sex discrimination suits. Though the bill eventually failed, Obama voted for it - a fact which he incessantly repeats as part of his effort to court Hillary Clinton supporters.
In fact, Obama spoke just last week in New Mexico about his commitment to workplace equality and his support of the defunct Lilly Ledbetter bill.
New Mexico is a swing state, so it’s no surprise that he’s invoking his support for the Ledbetter legislation as he campaigns for the state’s female voters.
Of course, Obama isn’t mentioning the gender discrepancy among his own staff.
The ironic twist to all this is that GOP nominee John McCain’s staff is overrrepresented by women, and those women are paid more on average than male staffers - despite McCain’s relative silence on the matter of workplace equality.
McCain did not vote on the Lilly Ledbetter bill, though he voiced some disagreement with it. Of course, Obama’s got plenty to say about that:
He opposed the Fair Pay Restoration Act. He suggested that the reason women don’t have equal pay isn’t discrimination on the job - it’s because they need more education and training. That’s just totally wrong. Lilly Ledbetter’s problem was not that she was somehow unqualified or unprepared for higher-paying positions… Her problem was that her employer paid her less than men doing the exact same work.
Hmmmm …
Now, there’s no evidence that Obama’s female staffers do exactly the same work as the higher-paid men, but that’s precisely the problem with workplace litigation zealots like Obama himself.
In this PC litigious world, there appears to be a rebuttable presumption that discrimination has occurred merely because of a salary difference.
And if Obama himself happened to trip up on this issue in his headlong rush to court Hillary backers, c’est la vie …
After all, there’s nothing more satisfying to us than someone else’s sanctimoniousness blowing up in their faces.
Comments
By rick on July 2nd, 2008 at 8:07 am
Wow, Alan Colmes in drag…..scared the heck outta me
By FWFIV on July 2nd, 2008 at 8:27 am
The Lilly Ledbetter act was in response to her case before the Supreme Court. In that case the court ruled that although there was provable salary discrimination, she did not make an issue of it within a specific time frame. In the court’s view because she did not complain within a matter of months her claim was not valid, not that she was not the victim of discrimination. You do your readers a dis-service by not accuratley reporting the facts surrounding that case and bill.
By Negatron on July 2nd, 2008 at 8:53 am
You make an accusation, then eviscerate it, and think you made a point! I hope you become a defense lawyer and oppose all my cases.
By didi on July 2nd, 2008 at 10:05 am
This website has no moral basis to challenge any form of sexism. Shut it, dumbass.
By rick on July 2nd, 2008 at 10:23 am
Why, because they stand when they urinate. Since when does moral basis have a basis for anything? To extrapolate you’re contention, since your not a male, you have no moral basis in any male issue, since you’re not jewish, all discussions on jewish topics leave you with no moral equalivalency, black…sorry you’re out, Indian oops, Starting to get the idea dumbass? Sorry that you’re not pleased with the moral basis, but since this is a free country I choose to exercise mine by saying, please exercise yours by limiting your displays of ignorance to your employer, he/she pays to care.
By 10% on July 2nd, 2008 at 10:55 am
Mande, you said it all in your first sentance. This clown has absolutely no substance whatsoever. He is a textbook case of a Liberal Dem. wannabe with nothing to offer but bla-bla-bla, aint I just wonderful. His dream will be this nation’s nightmare.
By no wonder Mande can't pass the bar on July 2nd, 2008 at 11:59 am
In this PC litigious world, there appears to be a rebuttable presumption that discrimination has occurred merely because of a salary difference.
Don’t know much about employment law, do you? The ignorance here is astounding. Don’t expect “balance” but would accuracy be too much trouble?
For those not too stupid or lazy to do research:
http://www.eeoc.gov/types/epa.html
By RepublicanGoneAmuck on July 2nd, 2008 at 1:07 pm
The spirit of this article belies what we have come to expect from FITSNews.
Mande, if you are putting your faith in McCain [who cheated on his first wife to hook-up with the Stepford Wife that is Cindy]…you are younger and more pollyanna than I would have ever thought!
“And that makes me sad.” [GB button ordered]
“And that makes me old.” [GB button suggested]
By didi on July 2nd, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Mand failed the bar? That explains a lot.
By Mande on July 2nd, 2008 at 6:29 pm
RepublicanGoneAmuck- Definitely not putting my faith in McCain. Just pointing out what may be Obama’s hypocrisy, and illuminating it against McCain’s lack of that particular problem. Like you, I have major reservations about any politician who leaves a spouse for someone else - especially Cindy. In fact, I wrote just a couple days ago about her Stepford-ness. http://mandewilkes.com/?p=83
Didi: Indeed. http://www.judicial.state.sc.us/bar/feb2008Results.htm See that #378? That’s me. Read em’ and weep.
By RepublicanGoneAmuck/Avowed Hillacrat on July 2nd, 2008 at 8:45 pm
Mande — Wow. I didn’t know you had your own site. I will check it out! The Stepford-ness thing is THE MOST relevant factor in picking our first spouse. Bill would still be a great one. No pre-programmed responses there. Although, I’m sure there are many who would like to try to accomplish just that!
By dimmu borgir on July 30th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Mande Wilkes writes:
[In this PC litigious world, there appears to be a rebuttable presumption that discrimination has occurred merely because of a salary difference.]
Amen sister!
We have become such an equity obsessed culture where individual ability is secondary to the communal goals of victim groups.
Sorry ladies, because of groups like NOW and the AAUW, you are considered victims of the ‘evil, white, male patriarchy.’
This Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act will create billions in frivolous lawsuits. Huge payouts by major companies will result in higher prices and ultimately create lees money to pay employees.
I always wondered, if women are paid less money for the same work as a man, than why would any company hire a man when its cheaper to hire a female?
………………………………………………..
Recommended reading: Selwyn Duke: ‘ Barack Obama and equal pay for women’
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/duke/080710
Excerpt:
‘So it’s entirely possible that Senator Obama is a sexist, misogynistic creep who gleefully rubs his hands together and laughs demonically while scheming to persecute his female employees. Maybe he has nothing better to do. But far more likely is that the aforementioned factors explain his office’s inter-sex pay differential. Perhaps his male employees work more hours, have been more likely to accept promotions involving greater responsibility, have more experience, sacrificed “personal fulfillment” and instead chose more lucrative fields, and/or have greater seniority. Whatever the reasons, I’m quite sure of one thing: The phenomenon is attributable to natural, market-based factors and not a conscious desire to disenfranchise women.’