5 ms·

Nah, if gender-based wage discrimination is 'proven' in court, the people who got shorted are going be awarded some multiple of the amount of wages that can be

by ble 9y ago

Nah, if gender-based wage discrimination is 'proven' in court, the people who got shorted are going be awarded some multiple of the amount of wages that can be attributed, according to whatever calculation gets used to determine the existence or non-existence and magnitude of any such discrimination. (Not a lawyer, but I've listened to Lilly Ledbetter give a speech.) Please tell me that your focus on "contracts" doesn't mean you are a sincere, "omg the right to contracts" libertarian?

rusk 9y ago
> you are a sincere, "omg the right to contracts" libertarian? No .. I just understand that's how most Western legal jurisdictions work. Hadn't considered the compensation claim aspect but surely it could be argued it's just an emergent pattern - not as a result of any policy decision? Would be a very interesting test-case ...
- ble 9y ago
  So IANAL but "an emergent pattern" (which doesn't sound as bad as, e.g., internal memos to the effect of "let's pay the gurls less hahaha") may be more than enough for the government to categorize Google's behavior as gender-based wage discrimination. If/when the government does that, I think 2 things happen: 1. the government announces some punitive action against Google; things they must do, things they must pay, etc; 2. the probability of every Jane, Jill, and Hillary who worked for Google winning a wage discrimination case skyrockets, at least some workers file such cases or enter negotiations to settle such discrimination. The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 means (pardon my rough summarization) that a worker can sue over discriminatory pay even if the discrimination / 'lost' wages occurred a while ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilly_Ledbetter_Fair_Pay_Act_of_2009 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilly_Ledbetter_Fair_Pay_Act_o...
  - rusk 9y ago
    That's why I think it could be an interesting case ... if the data showed this to be the case I don't think it would be an open and shut case for those bringing complaint. If google were shown to not have taken steps to balance things then maybe. But on the other hand then if google demonstrated that they had and this pattern emerged anyway what then? I guess this is the kind of discussion google would want to avoid anyway but whatever the outcome could set an important legal precedent.
jnbiche 9y ago
> Please tell me that your focus on "contracts" doesn't mean you are a sincere, "omg the right to contracts" libertarian? Can we please focus on rational arguments instead of insults and ad hominems? This country needs much more rational discussion (like the previous comments) and much less name-calling.
- ble 9y ago
  Educated adults should understand: just because it's written in a contract doesn't mean it's enforceable. The viewpoint of "contracts uber alles" (which I hope nobody holds as anything other than a tactic to pursue their own self interest) may have cheerleaders, but is just incorrect as far as the legal system goes. On the meta-discourse level: is it appropriate to make fun of a belief that one honestly believes is Bad if I don't say that person X holds that belief and hence is bad?
  - rusk 9y ago
    I find your opening statement quite insulting and condescending.
    - ble 9y ago
      I'm sorry. My intent is not to insult, but to express a thought that only recently occurred to me: democratic societies need a basic legal "literacy" class in the education of every citizen as much as people who may need to save money for retirement or borrow for a home purchase need basic financial "literacy" classes. In my public schooling, I had two year-long classes about the structure and function of the United States government. One was in middle school and one was in high school; I was not required to take any course on the subject as part of undergrad. Neither course taught me much more about courts than that the Supreme Court is the highest court of appeal and interprets the Constitutionality of laws. Courts are complicated and laws and regulations are different from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but there are some fundamental, low-level principles that apply to proceedings across most (possibly all?) courts in the US. An educated citizenry in the US would, ideally, have at least some exposure to these fundamentals; these basic principles (which would include at least a little on contracts) are too important for the vast majority of the population (i.e. almost all non-lawyers) to not understand. I told a lawyer friend about this idea and she strongly agreed. She said that her sister had taken an undergrad class which roughly fit my description-- "pre-pre-law" was how she described it. Her sister's evaluation of the course was that it's description of legal principles and their operation in courts helped explain a lot of the mechanics of how government, private institutions, and society function.
jdavis703 9y ago
US workers generally don't work on "contracts", that's more of a European phrase. I'm guessing OP probably works in a European environment which probably has different rules around this.
- rusk 9y ago
  You're correct! But I was given to thinking property law and contract law were the fundaments of US law too?
  - jdavis703 9y ago
    Yes, but for example, in the U.S. you can get a lot more damages for certain legal concepts which I don't think are present or as well recognized in many European countries. For example, there's the idea of "pain and suffering." So if you're physically harmed by someone, you can claim costs for your hospital stay, damage to your property, missed work, etc, but you can also get an additional sum because of the "pain and suffering" you had to endure.
    - rusk 9y ago
      Oh you mean "damages"? Yes we have that too.

by ble 9y ago

rusk 9y ago

> you are a sincere, "omg the right to contracts" libertarian? No .. I just understand that's how most Western legal jurisdictions work. Hadn't considered the compensation claim aspect but surely it could be argued it's just an emergent pattern - not as a result of any policy decision? Would be a very interesting test-case ...

ble 9y ago
So IANAL but "an emergent pattern" (which doesn't sound as bad as, e.g., internal memos to the effect of "let's pay the gurls less hahaha") may be more than enough for the government to categorize Google's behavior as gender-based wage discrimination. If/when the government does that, I think 2 things happen: 1. the government announces some punitive action against Google; things they must do, things they must pay, etc; 2. the probability of every Jane, Jill, and Hillary who worked for Google winning a wage discrimination case skyrockets, at least some workers file such cases or enter negotiations to settle such discrimination. The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 means (pardon my rough summarization) that a worker can sue over discriminatory pay even if the discrimination / 'lost' wages occurred a while ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilly_Ledbetter_Fair_Pay_Act_of_2009 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilly_Ledbetter_Fair_Pay_Act_o...
- rusk 9y ago
  That's why I think it could be an interesting case ... if the data showed this to be the case I don't think it would be an open and shut case for those bringing complaint. If google were shown to not have taken steps to balance things then maybe. But on the other hand then if google demonstrated that they had and this pattern emerged anyway what then? I guess this is the kind of discussion google would want to avoid anyway but whatever the outcome could set an important legal precedent.

jnbiche 9y ago

> Please tell me that your focus on "contracts" doesn't mean you are a sincere, "omg the right to contracts" libertarian? Can we please focus on rational arguments instead of insults and ad hominems? This country needs much more rational discussion (like the previous comments) and much less name-calling.

ble 9y ago
Educated adults should understand: just because it's written in a contract doesn't mean it's enforceable. The viewpoint of "contracts uber alles" (which I hope nobody holds as anything other than a tactic to pursue their own self interest) may have cheerleaders, but is just incorrect as far as the legal system goes. On the meta-discourse level: is it appropriate to make fun of a belief that one honestly believes is Bad if I don't say that person X holds that belief and hence is bad?
- rusk 9y ago
  I find your opening statement quite insulting and condescending.
  - ble 9y ago
    I'm sorry. My intent is not to insult, but to express a thought that only recently occurred to me: democratic societies need a basic legal "literacy" class in the education of every citizen as much as people who may need to save money for retirement or borrow for a home purchase need basic financial "literacy" classes. In my public schooling, I had two year-long classes about the structure and function of the United States government. One was in middle school and one was in high school; I was not required to take any course on the subject as part of undergrad. Neither course taught me much more about courts than that the Supreme Court is the highest court of appeal and interprets the Constitutionality of laws. Courts are complicated and laws and regulations are different from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but there are some fundamental, low-level principles that apply to proceedings across most (possibly all?) courts in the US. An educated citizenry in the US would, ideally, have at least some exposure to these fundamentals; these basic principles (which would include at least a little on contracts) are too important for the vast majority of the population (i.e. almost all non-lawyers) to not understand. I told a lawyer friend about this idea and she strongly agreed. She said that her sister had taken an undergrad class which roughly fit my description-- "pre-pre-law" was how she described it. Her sister's evaluation of the course was that it's description of legal principles and their operation in courts helped explain a lot of the mechanics of how government, private institutions, and society function.

jdavis703 9y ago

US workers generally don't work on "contracts", that's more of a European phrase. I'm guessing OP probably works in a European environment which probably has different rules around this.

rusk 9y ago
You're correct! But I was given to thinking property law and contract law were the fundaments of US law too?
- jdavis703 9y ago
  Yes, but for example, in the U.S. you can get a lot more damages for certain legal concepts which I don't think are present or as well recognized in many European countries. For example, there's the idea of "pain and suffering." So if you're physically harmed by someone, you can claim costs for your hospital stay, damage to your property, missed work, etc, but you can also get an additional sum because of the "pain and suffering" you had to endure.
  - rusk 9y ago
    Oh you mean "damages"? Yes we have that too.