Randall Love PA

The Equal Pay Act prohibits wage discrimination on the basis of s*x. It requires that men and women be paid equal wages for equal work performed under similar working conditions, requiring equal skill, effort, and responsibility. The EPA applies to employers engaged in interstate commerce and covers both men and women equally, despite its original intent to address wage disparities faced by women. The EPA imposes strict liability on employers for wage discrimination, meaning that a plaintiff does not need to prove discriminatory intent. To establish a prima facie case under the EPA, a plaintiff must demonstrate that employees of opposite s*xes are paid differently for equal work. Once this is established, the burden shifts to the employer to justify the pay disparity as being based on other than gender.

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed a summary judgment in favor of International Paper Company on an Equal Pay Act claim brought by a female water quality engineer who alleged she was paid less than a male air quality engineer. The Court affirmed because the employer demonstrated that although the male air quality engineer was paid more than the female water quality engineer, the duties and responsibilities of the air quality engineer were significantly greater than those of a water quality engineer. Thus, the plaintiff could not demonstrate that she was paid less for performing the same job as a male coworker.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced Pro Pallet, LLC, a Pennsylvania-based construction company, will pay $50,000 to settle a lawsuit brought on behalf of a former human resources manager who it is alleged was forced to resign after investigating a claim of s*xual harassment against the company’s general manager. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, alleged the employer retaliated against the human resources manager for opposing unlawful employment practices in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The settlement also requires the employer to revise its policies on discrimination and retaliation, mandates Title VII training, and requires the employer to report information to the EEOC for three years.

An Olive Garden restaurant has agreed to pay $30,000 to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit filed in federal court. According to the lawsuit, Olive Garden’s general manager interviewed an applicant with a disability for a busser position. During the interview, the general manager asked the applicant various unpermitted questions related to the applicant’s disability, including questions about his use of a cane to walk and the extent of the disability. Olive Garden then declined to hire the applicant. The EEOC sued on behalf of the applicant, alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. The employer denied any wrongdoing, and no findings of fact were made by the trial court prior to settlement.