Evaluation of the Paycheck Fairness Act Legislative Process

Running Head: ECONOMICS 1
The Paycheck Fairness Act Legislative Process
Name
Affiliation
Date

ECONOMICS 2
Memorandum
To: Staff
From: The manager
Date: 28th April 2019
Subject: Evaluation of the Paycheck Fairness Act legislative process
The scope of the legislation
The legislation was aimed at amending the equal standards of the Act of 1938 that aimed
at providing more effective ways to people who are discriminated in the ways they are paid their
salaries on the concept of sex and other different purposes. In this case, the legislation reflects
that of 1963 where President Kennedy implemented the "Equal Pay Act" to reduce
discriminations basing on sex. Further, the ACT passed on the "Fair Labor Standards Act" which
illustrated that employers are not supposed to pay their employees fewer wages as compared to
opposite gender employee if they perform the same workload. However, this act may be
exempted in case the payments are made considering other factors apart from sex, that is to say,
seniority or merit system (American Women, 2016). Given the fact that the Act primary focus
was about women discrimination in wage payments at the workplace, both sexes are protected
from unequal wages. Congress realized that even if the "Equal Pay Act of 1963" was enacted,
very many women still faced discrimination at the workplace by earning significantly lower
wages as compared to men. These pay discriminations happen in both government and private
sectors. It is understood the pay disparities commonly affect girls and women of color. The
legislation indicates that in most cases, disparities in the pay can be as a result of the lingering
experience of the previous discrimination or continually discrimination that is intentional.

ECONOMICS 3
However, after regulating for occupation, industry, union status race, education attainment, labor
force, and ethnicity about 40% of the wage differences remain unexplained (Dodge and
McFetridge, 2011)
The legislation asserts that artificial hindrances to the elimination of labor discrimination
in terms of payments basically on sex continuously exist years after the "Fair Labor Standards
Act of 1938" was enacted and the "Civil Rights Act of 1964." The barriers have been understood
to have resulted in a significant part due to the fact that the "Equal Pay Act of 1963" has not yet
performed as it was expected by Congress. Therefore, the "Paycheck Fairness Act 116th
Congress" intends to modify and improve the law so as to ensure that the "Equal Pay Act"
provides ample protection to the people affected (Porter, 2014).
Its sponsor
The sponsors of the "Paycheck Fairness Act" are; the United States Senator Patty Murray
(D-wash) and the United States Representative DeLauro (D-conn). The sponsors explained that
the Act would help enforcement agencies, employers and employees are supported and benefit
effectively (Nicole, 2011).
Target constituency
The Paycheck Fairness Act was first introduced by the Congresswoman called "Rosa
DeLauro" on 30 January 2019. Later the bill was taken to the "House of Committee on Education
and labor" on 27/03, 2019, and then the House passed legislation. On passage, the results
obtained from the yes and the nos is 242-187. The Senate then received the legislation on 28th
March 2019. The first reading was done on 2nd April 2019 and was read on 3rd April 2019 the
2nd time. After the legislation was on the "Senate Legislative Calendar" following the General

ECONOMICS 4
Orders on Calendar number fifty-three. After accepted in the Senate Legislative, it will be
presented to the President and then become a low (U.S gov’t accountability office, 2011).
Change of policy that is proposing
 The change in the policy gives authorities to the "secretary of labor" to ask for additional
punitive or compensatory damages to discrimination actions on sex.
 Establishes all employees as members of the class action "(with their written consent)".
Unless the employee hands in a documented notification that requests not be included in
the class action it’s when he or she should be left out (Melissa, 2011).
 Denies employers retaliation in case an employee discusses, discloses or discusses the
salary of the coworker responding to the charge or complaint.
 The changes also continue to discourage or deny paying employees different rates in case
they do the same work unless various "bona fide factors" are satisfied by the business but
also revisions should be made on how the factors are performed. Therefore, the
organization employers need to ensure that the wage differentials are not; sex-based, job-
related, and consistent with the necessity of the business. Therefore, the defense is
applicable in case employees show that; the organization employer failed to copy up with
a given alternative practice and related employment could have been attained minus
creating a difference in the wage (Institute for Women’s Policy Research, 2018).
Reasons for the proposed change
 The proposed change of the Act would benefit various individuals in organizations. It is
believed that the proposed change would benefit the employers, enforcement agencies
and employees in the following ways;