Ledbetter in Congress: The Limits of a Narrow Legislative Override

Abstract

In Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., the Supreme Court held that an employee was barred from suing her employer for pay discrimination under Title VII. The plaintiff, Lilly Ledbetter, was a twenty-year employee of Goodyear who, over the course of her employment, repeatedly received lower raises than her male counterparts because supervisors had given her negative evaluations due to her sex.2 By the end of her employment at Goodyear, Ledbetter's salary was significantly lower than those of any of her male peers.' The Supreme Court, however, held that Ledbetter could not recover because she failed to comply with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charge provision, which requires that plaintiffs file claims of employment discrimination with the EEOC within 18o days of the discriminatory act before they may sue under Title VII.4 The Court held that only the initial pay-setting decisions themselves constituted discrete acts of discrimination; subsequent paychecks were merely "adverse effects" lacking the intent required to establish disparate treatment.'