• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate Republicans Block Paycheck Fairness Act For Third Time

T

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
Senate Republicans blocked a vote on Wednesday to open debate on the Paycheck Fairness Act, which would hold employers more accountable for wage discrimination against women. The Senate voted 53 to 44 to move forward on the bill, falling short of the 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster.The bill would prohibit retaliation against employees who share their salary information with each other, which supporters say would eliminate the culture of silence that keeps women in the dark about pay discrimination. It would also require the Department of Labor to collect wage data from employers, broken down by race and gender, and require employers to show that wage differentials between men and women in the same jobs are for a reason other than sex.
All Republicans present and one Independent, Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), voted against proceeding to debate the bill. All Democrats and Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) voted in favor.
"At a time when the Obama economy is already hurting women so much, this legislation would double down on job loss, all while lining the pockets of trial lawyers," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said before the vote. "In other words, it's just another Democratic idea that threatens to hurt the very people that it claims to help."
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) criticized McConnell's caucus for opposing the bill.
"Are they so repulsed by equal pay for hardworking women that they'll obstruct equal pay for equal work?" he said Wednesday before the vote. "I'm at a loss as to why anyone would decline to debate this important issue."
Click to expand...


Read more @: Senate Republicans Block Paycheck Fairness Act For Third Time

The GOP stopped supporting equality in the 50's. The party of pitty. The party that represents inequality.
 
It seems like a lot of work for employers and the government. Valid complaints should be investigated and people can sue, but stacks of paperwork across the board?
 
TurtleDude said:
its bogus BS and the name is specious. It is already illegal to pay someone less for the same work due to gender. That is called Title VII
Click to expand...

:lamo
BS! Title VII is about discrimination, not pay.
 
TurtleDude said:
its bogus BS and the name is specious. It is already illegal to pay someone less for the same work due to gender. That is called Title VII
Click to expand...

The bill is just creating transparency. It doesn't matter if it's illegal if no one is aware it's taking place.

Honestly all salaries should be public information for all individuals. If anything it would lead to a truly fair and competitive labor market.
 
"At a time when the Obama economy is already hurting women so much, this legislation would double down on job loss, all while lining the pockets of trial lawyers," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said before the vote."

How does this bill double down on job loss? And when our country has created jobs every month for years now, how would a job loss be doubling down? Genuine questions. Obviously I don't expect McConnell to answer, but maybe someone else who has paid closer attention to this story than I have can explain.
 
Slyfox696 said:
"At a time when the Obama economy is already hurting women so much, this legislation would double down on job loss, all while lining the pockets of trial lawyers," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said before the vote."

How does this bill double down on job loss? And when our country has created jobs every month for years now, how would a job loss be doubling down? Genuine questions. Obviously I don't expect McConnell to answer, but maybe someone else who has paid closer attention to this story than I have can explain.
Click to expand...

Another question? If it's lining the pockets of trial lawyers wouldn't that mean there's massive pay discrimination going on but people just don't have access to the information?
 
TurtleDude said:
its bogus BS and the name is specious. It is already illegal to pay someone less for the same work due to gender. That is called Title VII
Click to expand...

You are ill informed:

"The bill would have barred employers from retaliating against employees who share salary information and limited the factors businesses can cite for paying women less than men."
 
iliveonramen said:
Another question? If it's lining the pockets of trial lawyers wouldn't that mean there's massive pay discrimination going on but people just don't have access to the information?
Click to expand...
Good point. The only thing I could think of is trial lawyers who might argue a legal challenge against the law.
 
iliveonramen said:
The bill is just creating transparency. It doesn't matter if it's illegal if no one is aware it's taking place.

Honestly all salaries should be public information for all individuals. If anything it would lead to a truly fair and competitive labor market.
Click to expand...

given it was a pure party line vote its most likely designed to create money or advantages for DNC allies and designed to hurt GOP allies
 
TurtleDude said:
given it was a pure party line vote its most likely designed to create money or advantages for DNC allies and designed to hurt GOP allies
Click to expand...

Yes because pay equality is bad right!? :roll:
 
Just ridiculous. Unequal pay for equal work is one of the biggest problems facing this country.
 
The German said:
You are ill informed:

"The bill would have barred employers from retaliating against employees who share salary information and limited the factors businesses can cite for paying women less than men."
Click to expand...

wrong you are. it has far more than that
 
TurtleDude said:
given it was a pure party line vote its most likely designed to create money or advantages for DNC allies and designed to hurt GOP allies
Click to expand...

Maybe...of course almost anything proposed by Obama seems to come down to a strict party vote.

At the end of the day it's just bad politics in my opinion by Republicans. They could easily say "yup...this supports competitive market ideals, let information fix any imbalances" and kill the issue for Dems. Instead they are voting against the bill for whatever reason.
 
Your Star said:
Just ridiculous. Unequal pay for equal work is one of the biggest problems facing this country.
Click to expand...

wrong-most of the supposed inequality is bogus

the classic example is a fourth year female associate and Biggs, Bucks and Moore being paid less than a guy who was in her same law class and was hired at the same time.

sounds unequal until you find out that the female associate took 6 months off for pregnancy and her billable hours over that 4 year period were 1000 less than his

Title VII provides an adequate remedy for this

to prevail the plaintiff has to show that

1) she is female
2) qualified for the job
3) was treated differently than a SIMILARLY situated male employee
4) and the employer does not have a valid non-discriminatory reason for the different treatment
 
iliveonramen said:
Maybe...of course almost anything proposed by Obama seems to come down to a strict party vote.

At the end of the day it's just bad politics in my opinion by Republicans. They could easily say "yup...this supports competitive market ideals, let information fix any imbalances" and kill the issue for Dems. Instead they are voting against the bill for whatever reason.
Click to expand...
so they should screw over employers to take the issue away from the deems

good thinking there
 
TurtleDude said:
given it was a pure party line vote its most likely designed to create money or advantages for DNC allies and designed to hurt GOP allies
Click to expand...

Yeah, if the GOP votes for something, it's because they're patriotic and trying to do what's best for the American people...but if the Dems vote for something, well, THAT automatically means that their motives were purely mercenary.

And of course it's pure tyranny to require that women get paid equal wages for equal work.

Actually, that's one thing that I loved about the military - everyone pretty much knew what everyone else was making. Equal pay for equal work was never an issue. But I forget - the military's a liberal bastion out to destroy conservative America....
 
TurtleDude said:
so they should screw over employers to take the issue away from the deems

good thinking there
Click to expand...

How are they screwing over employers? Maybe if you can tell me how that's happening I could respond. If we're in a world where equal access to information between two parties (employers/labor) is screwing over employees it shows you how broke our labor markets are.
 
TurtleDude said:
so they should screw over employers to take the issue away from the deems

good thinking there
Click to expand...
I've not been following this bill too closely. How did this bill screw over employers, aside from those who would engage in discriminatory pay practices?
 
Slyfox696 said:
I've not been following this bill too closely. How did this bill screw over employers, aside from those who would engage in discriminatory pay practices?
Click to expand...

anything that gives more ability for plaintiffs to sue hurts employers. bookkeeping requirements are very expensive
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom