Paycheck Fairness Act
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, and I would like to address several of the arguments that we have heard against it, first, that this is some bonanza for trial lawyers. What this is is an opportunity for women who have…
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, and I would like to address several of the arguments that we have heard against it, first, that this is some bonanza for trial lawyers.
What this is is an opportunity for women who have been discriminated against to get a lawyer. If you work as a sales clerk or in a factory, you can't afford to pay a lawyer the hourly fee that he or she needs to represent you. The only way you are going to get represented is through a contingent fee arrangement where a lawyer would recover, would get to keep part of what you recover as part of the deal.
Now, the problem with the Equal Pay Act is its remedies are limited so much to just twice what your salary is that the damages are never high enough to justify legal representation. This is about getting lawyers for people who have a valid claim who cannot afford the thousands of dollars that it would be.
Second, there was a representation made that defenses are stripped from employers. That's not accurate. What is accurate is that if an employer alleges that some reason other than gender was the reason that he paid the woman less than the man, it has to be a legitimate reason, like level of education or experience. It has to be a legitimate reason. The present law doesn't require that legitimacy.
Finally, the statement was made that an employer cannot discharge an employee for talking about pay scales publicly, that's not accurate. What the law does is to say that it protects employees that are custodians and guardians of pay records. But it certainly doesn't restrict in any way an employer's right to enforce a legitimate and realistic company policy.
This is a good bill. It's an excellent proposal that will help lift the economic status of women who work very hard, every day, in some cases 7 days a week, and deserve it.
I would urge a ``yes'' vote.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey, a member of the committee who has worked very diligently on this issue, Mr. Holt.
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlelady who really makes the trains run on time around here, the Chair of the Rules Committee, Ms. Slaughter from New York.
Mr. Speaker, I am now pleased to yield 1 minute to the very hardworking gentlelady from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter).
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased at this time to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Peters), one of our new Members who is already delivering justice for the hardworking women of his district.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to a very strong voice for workers' rights in this country, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).
Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time each side has remaining.
Mr. Speaker, at this time I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton), a distinguished employment lawyer before she came to this body.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to a strong and compassionate voice for working women all over this country, the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).
Mr. Speaker, at this time I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the very principled and articulate gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards).
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield at this time 1 minute to a life-long fighter against discrimination, the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda).
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), who speaks with great authority for constituents and her beliefs.
(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the remaining time left on each side.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York City (Mrs. Maloney), a strong advocate of women's rights.
I am pleased to yield 1 minute to a very effective and knowledgeable member of our committee, the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis).
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to a wise and strong voice for the rights of our country, the gentleman from Chicago (Mr. Davis).
Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen), a strong advocate for his constituents.
Mr. Speaker, that is correct. The only remaining speaker is our chairman.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of our time.
I want to thank my friend and colleague, Rosa DeLauro, for her hard work on this. And this is the bill that is for the women who are office managers who are being underpaid for the men who are being called executive vice presidents. This is the bill for the women who do the work, make the decisions, shoulder the responsibility but don't get the pay. Now, that's been illegal for 46 years, but that remedy has been wholly ineffective until this bill came along. You couldn't get represented by a lawyer, under the present law, because your damages couldn't be enough because of the cap that were put on damages.
We live in a world where women do the work, take the responsibility, shoulder the burden, but do not get the compensation. This makes the promise of the Equal Pay Act a reality for working women around this country.
I'm proud that in the 19 years she's served in this body, the author of this bill has fought for this bill; and I say to her, to you, Mr. Speaker, and Americans all over this country, it will become law because of what we're about to do here today.
I yield back the balance of my time.
If the Securities and Exchange Commission filed a civil suit against one of the people accused in the Wall Street wrongdoing, and there was a proposal on this floor that said the SEC can spend as much money as it wants to on its side of the case, but the Wall Street defendants accused of the wrongdoing are capped on how much they can spend on their legal defenses, I think the Members in the minority would say that's unfair. It is. So is this.
To interfere in how much lawyers are paid is a matter the judges should take a look at under this law. It's not something this Congress should interfere with. And it frankly, I believe, is a diversionary tactic to take us away from the real purpose of this law, and that's a woman that is selling real estate or teaching school or sweeping floors should make, penny for penny, dollar for dollar, everything a man makes to do the same job. That is the issue before the House.
Let's defeat this diversionary amendment. Let's pass the underlying bill and bring long-awaited justice to American women.