Senator Brown casts vote against wage bill
A local newspaper has this story elevated right to the front of page A8. On the web, they have the story behind a paywall, so I won’t bother to provide a link or name the newspaper. They did provide these paragraphs of explanation:
Other Republican moderates, including Senators Olympia J. Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, who Democrats had hoped would support the bill, agreed with the Bay State Republican, saying that the legislation would impose too much of a burden on employers and spawn frivolous lawsuits.
Supporters of the bill had hoped to build on the Equal Pay Act of 1963, and more recently the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, by requiring employers to provide a reason for pay gaps when asked, and barring companies from retaliating against employees who discuss pay.
.
.
.
Republicans said the bill would restrict an employer’s ability to reward employees based on performance, provide bonus pay for hazardous work, or differentiate pay rates based on regional standards. And it would subject employers to unlimited damages, even for what they said could be unintentional pay differences.
If these paragraphs are close to being a fair description (and why should I assume that), then there are a few serious flaws in the Republicans’ excuse for not voting for this.
The law “requiring employers to provide a reason for pay gaps when asked” doesn’t seem to be that onerous. If any of the supposed legitimate reasons mentioned by Republicans for a pay gap were the real reason, then all the employer would have to do is to say so. However, don’t you have to wonder why the Republicans think that there might be systematic differences in pay “based on performance”? Do they really think men do the job so much better than women that they merit a 30% wage differential?
The Elizabeth Warren campaign is onto this issue.
See the link, Tell Scott Brown that women deserve to earn fair wages | Elizabeth Warren, Senator for Massachusetts.
Apparently Scott Brown, Senator for the rich in Massachusetts, thinks it would be too big a burden for companies to explain wage disparities.
He also seems to think that a systematic difference between men’s pay and women’s pay might be based on merit. Does that mean that on average he doesn’t think female workers are as good as male workers?
Scott Brown claims to be working for all of Massachusetts, but he always finds a reason why a particular law to help the middle-class would be bad, and he never finds a reason why a particular law to help the wealthy would be bad. Is this sort of like Faux Noise’s “fair and balanced”?
