Legal Definitions - Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 is a federal law named after Lilly Ledbetter, who sued her employer for pay discrimination. This Act was passed by Congress to make it easier for individuals to challenge unfair pay practices based on sex, race, national origin, religion, age, or disability.

It specifically changed how the time limit (known as the statute of limitations) for filing a pay discrimination complaint is calculated. Before this Act, the Supreme Court ruled that the 180-day clock for filing a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) began when the discriminatory pay decision was first made, even if the employee didn't know about it. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act overturned this ruling, establishing that a new 180-day period for filing a complaint begins each time an employee receives a paycheck affected by a discriminatory pay decision. This means that every discriminatory paycheck resets the clock, providing victims of pay discrimination more time to discover and challenge unfair pay.

Here are some examples of how the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act applies:

• Example 1: Long-Term, Undiscovered Discrimination

  Maria has worked at Tech Solutions for 15 years. For much of that time, she suspected she was paid less than male colleagues with similar experience and responsibilities, but she lacked concrete proof. Recently, a new company policy requiring salary transparency for similar roles revealed that she has consistently been paid 15% less than her male counterparts for over a decade. Under the law before the Lilly Ledbetter Act, Maria's claim might have been dismissed because the initial discriminatory pay decision occurred many years ago, well past the 180-day limit. However, thanks to the Act, each paycheck Maria receives that reflects this discriminatory pay resets the 180-day clock, allowing her to file a complaint with the EEOC even after many years.

• Example 2: Discrimination Discovered After a Promotion

  David, a new hire at a marketing firm, is promoted to Senior Marketing Manager. A few months into his new role, he learns that Sarah, a female colleague who was promoted to the exact same position two years prior, was started at a significantly lower salary. Despite receiving regular raises, her current pay remains less than his, creating an ongoing pay gap for identical work. Without the Lilly Ledbetter Act, Sarah might have been unable to challenge this disparity because the initial discriminatory decision about her starting salary happened more than 180 days ago. However, the Act ensures that every paycheck Sarah receives that reflects this lower, discriminatory pay restarts the 180-day period, giving her the opportunity to file a complaint.

• Example 3: Age-Based Pay Discrimination

  Mark, a 55-year-old software engineer, was hired by a startup five years ago. He recently discovered through an internal company forum that younger engineers with comparable experience and qualifications hired around the same time or even later were given higher starting salaries. This initial pay disparity has compounded over the years with subsequent raises, resulting in Mark consistently earning less. While the Act is named after a sex discrimination case, its principles apply to other protected characteristics, including age. Because each paycheck Mark receives continues to reflect the discriminatory pay decision, the Lilly Ledbetter Act allows him to challenge this age-based pay discrimination, even though the initial decision was made five years ago.