OFFICIALS LEGISLATION INTEREST GROUPS PUBLIC STATEMENTS COMMITTEES VETOES

Paycheck Fairness Act

Date: July 31, 2008
Location: Washington, DC
Issues: Employment and Affirmative Action


PAYCHECK FAIRNESS ACT -- (House of Representatives - July 31, 2008)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to speak on H.R. 1338.

I want to thank the ranking member of the committee, Representative Buck McKeon of California, for his leadership here today.

I know we can all agree that discrimination in the workplace is unacceptable. That is why employment discrimination, including pay discrimination, based on gender is already prohibited by law. As an attorney myself, I believe there are already considerable legal ramifications for discrimination in our Federal laws, which makes the legislation we are considering here today unnecessary and redundant.

Additionally, it seems the premise for bringing this bill to the floor today is in response to potential wage gaps between men and women in the workforce. I would remind my colleagues that research into this issue, including a report by the Government Accountability Office, GAO, concluded that the ``wage gap'' was not simply derived from sex discrimination or pay discrimination. In fact, the reasons for such a gap can be numerous.

But to the bill itself, I am concerned that this legislation will not strengthen current laws or improve workplace protections but rather create additional and greater potential for individuals, well-meaning or otherwise, to abuse these protections in our courts.

This bill does two very damaging things to current law. It allows for unlimited compensatory and punitive damages for claims brought under the Equal Pay Act, and it does not require proof of intent to discriminate in those claims. These two components could have unintended consequences for employers and employees, and they make it more attractive for unsubstantiated claims before the courts.

I welcome a healthy debate on employee and employer protections in the workplace. In fact, I would hope that before going forward, the debate on these issues would be more open where both the minority and majority might have greater opportunity to offer amendments to strengthen legislation and address the real concern of America's hardworking families.

I want to thank Ranking Member Buck McKeon for his leadership, and I encourage my colleagues to oppose this legislation. American workers deserve reasonable protections that are enforced. This bill would undermine those efforts in America's workforce.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT


Source
arrow_upward