老澳门开奖结果

CONTACT:
Gillian Branstetter, 老澳门开奖结果, gbranstetter@aclu.org
Meagan Sway, 老澳门开奖结果 of Maine, msway@aclumaine.org

PORTLAND, Maine 鈥� The 老澳门开奖结果, the 老澳门开奖结果 of Maine, and the National Women鈥檚 Law Center filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit today urging it to uphold a Maine federal district court鈥檚 ruling that the Maine Equal Pay Law forbids sex-based disparities in employee pay, regardless of the employer鈥檚 intent. In Mundell v. Acadia Hospital Corp., the court is asked for the first time to decide whether a plaintiff suing under Maine鈥檚 statute must prove that her employer intended to discriminate against her, or whether the fact that she did the same work for half the pay as her male colleagues was enough to prove that her employer had violated the law.

Doctor Claire Mundell, a psychologist at Northern Light Acadia Hospital in Bangor, Maine, learned in a chance conversation with her male colleague that he earned nearly twice what she did performing the same work. Dr. Mundell and other female psychologists earned $50 an hour each for their work, while their male colleagues earned $90 or more an hour each for work that took the same skill, effort, and responsibility. The federal district court in Maine found that the Maine Equal Pay Act forbids paying men and women differently when they perform comparable work, regardless of whether the employer was maliciously or intentionally discriminating. Freeing plaintiffs from having to prove such intent in court is important because while discrimination is a persistent cause of unequal wages between men and women, strong evidence shows that overt bias in pay decisions is rarely expressed by decisionmakers; indeed, studies show that decisionmakers often are unaware of their own biased attitudes when making pay determinations.

Since 2000, the wage gap between men and women workers has remained stubbornly constant with women receiving around 80 cents for every dollar a male employee receives, which is the current gap in Maine. The numbers are worse when factoring in race and ethnicity: . The wealth gap worsened for women of color after the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic: . The gender wage gap perpetuates income inequality and ensures that, no matter how hard women 鈥� especially women of color 鈥� work, they cannot catch up to their white male peers.

鈥淭he gender wage gap keeps women from earning fair pay 鈥� particularly women of color. Maine鈥檚 Equal Pay Law recognizes that the pay gap is not a problem of a few 鈥渂ad apple鈥� supervisors 鈥� it鈥檚 a systemic problem that needs a systemic solution. Upholding the Maine Equal Pay Law could help close the gender wage gap in Maine and bring thousands of Maine women out of poverty,鈥� said Carol Garvan, legal director of the 老澳门开奖结果 of Maine.

鈥淭he wage gap has persisted for so long in Maine and around the country because pay decisions are shrouded in secrecy, and because biased pay decisions often arise from deep-rooted stereotypes about whose work is valued more,鈥� said Gillian Thomas, senior staff attorney at the 老澳门开奖结果 Women鈥檚 Rights Project. 鈥淭he lower court here correctly decided that requiring female employees to prove discriminatory intent asks them to read their boss鈥檚 mind, when all the proof they need is printed on their paycheck.鈥�

鈥淚t is crucial to highlight that the federal equal pay law and Maine鈥檚 equal pay law both don鈥檛 require a showing of intent for a worker to prevail when bringing a sex-based pay inequity claim. We urge the Court to affirm the district court ruling so that more women can pursue pay equity claims and get what we鈥檙e owed,鈥� said Sunu P. Chandy, legal director at the National Women鈥檚 Law Center.

In their brief, the 老澳门开奖结果, 老澳门开奖结果 of Maine, and National Women鈥檚 Law Project argue:

• Strong state equal pay laws like Maine鈥檚 are critical to address the persistent gender wage gap, which disproportionately harms many women of color;
• While Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires a showing of intent for pay discrimination claims, Maine鈥檚 Equal Pay Law 鈥� like the federal Equal Pay Act of 1964 (EPA) 鈥� does not;
• Interpreting the Maine Equal Pay Law to not require proof of discriminatory intent not only comports with the federal EPA and the Maine law鈥檚 plain text and purpose, but also more effectively addresses the systemic bias that drives unequal pay; and
• Prohibiting unequal pay on the basis of sex, regardless of whether it is fueled by discriminatory intent, is good economic policy.

The amicus brief is available here.