McCain dismisses legislation allowing women to fight for equal pay

by nvrgnbk 7 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  nvrgnbk

  McCain dismisses equal pay legislation, says women need more ‘training and education.’ »

  Today, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) skipped the vote on the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which “restores the longstanding interpretation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act,” overturned last year by a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling. In New Orleans today, McCain explained his opposition to the bill by claiming it “opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems.” Later in New Orleans, he added that instead of legislation allowing women to fight for equal pay, they simply need “education and training“:

  “They need the education and training, particularly since more and more women are heads of their households, as much or more than anybody else,” McCain said. “And it’s hard for them to leave their families when they don’t have somebody to take care of them.

  “It’s a vicious cycle that’s affecting women, particularly in a part of the country like this, where mining is the mainstay; traditionally, women have not gone into that line of work, to say the least,” he said.

  The issue is not “education and training.” When denied equal pay by her supervisor, Lilly Ledbetter was doing the exact same job as her male counterparts and received numerous performance-based awards. McCain has a long record of failure on women’s issues, earning him a 0 percent rating from NARAL ProChoice America six years in a row, from 2001-2007. (HT: TortDeform)
• 

  BurnTheShips

  Let's get full quotes, shan't we?

  "I am all in favor of pay equity for women, but this kind of legislation, as is typical of what's being proposed by my friends on the other side of the aisle, opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems," the expected GOP presidential nominee told reporters. "This is government playing a much, much greater role in the business of a private enterprise system."

  "They need the education and training, particularly since more and more women are heads of their households, as much or more than anybody else," McCain said. "And it's hard for them to leave their families when they don't have somebody to take care of them.
• 

  nvrgnbk

  What do you make of Ledbetter's situation, Burn?

  I am all in favor of pay equity for women

  Lipservice?

  This is government playing a much, much greater role in the business of a private enterprise system

  Spoken like a good little Republican.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  What do you make of Ledbetter's situation, Burn ?

  I am all in favor of pay equity for women

  Lipservice?

  This is government playing a much, much greater role in the business of a private enterprise system

  Spoken like a good little Republican.

  Nice to see you making comments of substance again, Nvr. BTS
• 

  John Doe

  Statistics are manipulated by both sides of the issues. I've been told, sorry, no source, that some comparisons of pay between men and women do not take different positions into account. For instance, nurses and doctors are grouped into the same category as "health care workers." This skews the results towards men in a lot of cases, because historically more men get the training to be doctors. In that case, complaining about unequal pay for the same job is not valid, but talking about opening up opportunity for training is.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  It's basically a PR stunt, the LedBetter Fair Pay act was bad law. It isn't even about "fair pay"-- this is already protected by the EEOC-- it is about statutes of limitations.

  There are statutes of limitation on all kinds of things. The Ledbetter act would have removed all statutes of limitations on this particular type of discrimination. It would have been a trough full of green for lawyers.

  Of course, we know this is going to get used anyway by McCain's opposition. Expect stupid legislation being proposed in the Senate with headline grabbing titles to be making the rounds from here through November.

  http://www.pointoflaw.com/archives/2008/04/ledbetter-no-limitations-just.php

  It was as stinker timed by the Democrat controlled congress to coincide with the Presidential race.
• 

  potentialJWconvertswife

  I don't think that's accurate Burn- the act would have allowed folks to sue on the fair pay issues for (I think) 6 months after their last discriminated paycheck. The thing about this case is that the poor lady didn't know until the very end! She had been getting underpaid all those years, then just before she retired an anonymous source tipped her off. The decision had been that she would be able to sue, thing BAM! Next thing you know the decision is reversed so that in order to sue you must do so within (again, I think) 6 months of receiving your first discriminatory paycheck. Now how the hell is that even possible,if you don't know it's going on?!!! This makes the law completely useless IMO. You'd have to start investigating your employer immediately after being hired. Who does that, unless they have a really strong feeling that something is wrong? That woman trusted her employer to take care of her, never imagining that they were secretly screwing her over. What was it- 78 cents on the dollar compared to the male counterparts? I know Ruth Bader Ginsberg put out a statement on the decision deriding her co-justices for their lame vote. I need to read that! -Potential
• 

  UnConfused

  What do you make of Ledbetter's situation, Burn?

  I am all in favor of pay equity for women

  Lipservice?

  This is government playing a much, much greater role in the business of a private enterprise system

  Spoken like a good little Republican.

  Nvr, spoken in defense of women with the same credibility as Ted Kennedy. Lipservice?