3 ms·

> Does he have grounds to sue? I imagine the women who were promoted above him, but are nevertheless earning the same amount of money as someone below them on

> Does he have grounds to sue? I imagine the women who were promoted above him, but are nevertheless earning the same amount of money as someone below them on the org chart (and presumably, less than some of their peers) might have a more compelling case in court. An "I'm being overpaid for my job title" situation is going to require a pretty nuanced approach when it comes to showing damages, compared to a lot of other job discrimination lawsuits, I would think. (this seems like something where a lawyer would say "you want to do what?")

aksss 3y ago
Titles have value. Two people with same pay, their rank in the company and relative progression in their career is determined by title. Arguably titles can even trump pay. Would you take the title of CxO even if we leave your total comp the same? Many people would say yes, if only to get it on the resume, spend a couple years with it, and jump laterally to shore up the comp aspect. I use title CxO as extreme example but same behavior applies to any senior leadership position at least.
anon373839 3y ago
There could be a discrimination claim, because being denied a promotion is an adverse employment action irrespective of pay. Damages can be shown from the loss of career opportunities that a fancier title would carry. That can be established with different types of evidence, one being expert testimony. The difficulty with this sort of case is showing causation, because the company will always produce some alternate reasons other than gender to justify its decision. It’s a surmountable hurdle, but not every case is strong enough to even make it to a jury. Of course, on a practical level, you have all of the politics surrounding this. Depending on your judge and jury pool, you may or may not have a fighting chance.
- justin66 3y ago
  I'm not a lawyer, and I'm aware that the law might be infinitely more ridiculous than what I've seen as a mere observer working in business, but: > Damages can be shown from the loss of career opportunities that a fancier title would carry. The guy is going to sue his employer because, while he's arguably overpaid in the way that's easy to measure (pay for a given job title) he's arguably underpaid in the way that's difficult to quantify (was he provably more worthy of a promotion than the person who got it?). And not even he claims that he is not receiving equal pay for equal work? Honest question - has anyone (a person that can be named, not a message board hypothetical) ever won a lawsuit like that? Did the victory involve anything more than a court ordering that they be awarded a "fancier title?"
  - TylerE 3y ago
    Titles don’t have to be a zero sum game. No reason can’t have 2 ‘Senior/Executive” Whatevers
    - hansvm 3y ago
      They do if you're trying to use a crude metric like proportion of a given title held by each gender to (dis)prove discrimination claims.
      - TylerE 3y ago
        Don’t put words in my mouth. I made absolutely no such assertion. At no point in my comment did I mention gender at all, or proportion at all. I literally can’t understand how you can take that from what I wrote.
        hansvm 3y ago
        You're responding in a (transitive) sub-thread describing gender discrimination applied to men and asked why you can't have 2 "Senior/Executive" Whatevers. I answered that the titles being zero-sum is often precisely the point; if you hand out more titles you throw off the gender ratio you're looking for. At no point did I put any words in your mouth, and I literally can't understand how you can take that from what I wrote.
  - anon373839 3y ago
    > And not even he claims that he is not receiving equal pay for equal work? You’re confusing two different things: equal pay and discrimination. These are separate issues with (in California) separate code sections governing them. So, this hypothetical person would bring a discrimination claim, not a pay claim. The relevant elements he has to prove are that he experienced an “adverse employment action” (denial of a promotion is textbook for this), that his gender was a “substantial motivating reason” for the adverse action, and that he was harmed in some way by the loss of the promotion. The fact that his pay was advanced might be evidence to undercut the causal element (“why no, we would never discriminate against a man - look at his paycheck”). But it’s not conclusive. Suppose there was a documented policy that men cannot qualify for VP roles. Then, pay becomes almost irrelevant - we have discriminatory animus on paper. Anyway, yes, this is purely hypothetical. You need real facts to breathe life into a case and know if it has legs. Especially when it presents an uncommon application of the law. You need 3 things: facts that tick the right legal boxes; evidence that establishes those facts; and a compelling narrative that presents a real injustice that someone experienced. > Honest question - has anyone (a person that can be named, not a message board hypothetical) ever won a lawsuit like that? I can’t think of an example for this specific pattern, but employees do win (or settle favorably) in cases you might not expect. Many companies have implemented diversity policies in ways that actually do break the law, and I expect to see an uptick in claims challenging this.

aksss 3y ago

Titles have value. Two people with same pay, their rank in the company and relative progression in their career is determined by title. Arguably titles can even trump pay. Would you take the title of CxO even if we leave your total comp the same? Many people would say yes, if only to get it on the resume, spend a couple years with it, and jump laterally to shore up the comp aspect. I use title CxO as extreme example but same behavior applies to any senior leadership position at least.

anon373839 3y ago

There could be a discrimination claim, because being denied a promotion is an adverse employment action irrespective of pay. Damages can be shown from the loss of career opportunities that a fancier title would carry. That can be established with different types of evidence, one being expert testimony. The difficulty with this sort of case is showing causation, because the company will always produce some alternate reasons other than gender to justify its decision. It’s a surmountable hurdle, but not every case is strong enough to even make it to a jury. Of course, on a practical level, you have all of the politics surrounding this. Depending on your judge and jury pool, you may or may not have a fighting chance.

justin66 3y ago
I'm not a lawyer, and I'm aware that the law might be infinitely more ridiculous than what I've seen as a mere observer working in business, but: > Damages can be shown from the loss of career opportunities that a fancier title would carry. The guy is going to sue his employer because, while he's arguably overpaid in the way that's easy to measure (pay for a given job title) he's arguably underpaid in the way that's difficult to quantify (was he provably more worthy of a promotion than the person who got it?). And not even he claims that he is not receiving equal pay for equal work? Honest question - has anyone (a person that can be named, not a message board hypothetical) ever won a lawsuit like that? Did the victory involve anything more than a court ordering that they be awarded a "fancier title?"
- TylerE 3y ago
  Titles don’t have to be a zero sum game. No reason can’t have 2 ‘Senior/Executive” Whatevers
  - hansvm 3y ago
    They do if you're trying to use a crude metric like proportion of a given title held by each gender to (dis)prove discrimination claims.
    - TylerE 3y ago
      Don’t put words in my mouth. I made absolutely no such assertion. At no point in my comment did I mention gender at all, or proportion at all. I literally can’t understand how you can take that from what I wrote.
      - hansvm 3y ago
        You're responding in a (transitive) sub-thread describing gender discrimination applied to men and asked why you can't have 2 "Senior/Executive" Whatevers. I answered that the titles being zero-sum is often precisely the point; if you hand out more titles you throw off the gender ratio you're looking for. At no point did I put any words in your mouth, and I literally can't understand how you can take that from what I wrote.
- anon373839 3y ago
  > And not even he claims that he is not receiving equal pay for equal work? You’re confusing two different things: equal pay and discrimination. These are separate issues with (in California) separate code sections governing them. So, this hypothetical person would bring a discrimination claim, not a pay claim. The relevant elements he has to prove are that he experienced an “adverse employment action” (denial of a promotion is textbook for this), that his gender was a “substantial motivating reason” for the adverse action, and that he was harmed in some way by the loss of the promotion. The fact that his pay was advanced might be evidence to undercut the causal element (“why no, we would never discriminate against a man - look at his paycheck”). But it’s not conclusive. Suppose there was a documented policy that men cannot qualify for VP roles. Then, pay becomes almost irrelevant - we have discriminatory animus on paper. Anyway, yes, this is purely hypothetical. You need real facts to breathe life into a case and know if it has legs. Especially when it presents an uncommon application of the law. You need 3 things: facts that tick the right legal boxes; evidence that establishes those facts; and a compelling narrative that presents a real injustice that someone experienced. > Honest question - has anyone (a person that can be named, not a message board hypothetical) ever won a lawsuit like that? I can’t think of an example for this specific pattern, but employees do win (or settle favorably) in cases you might not expect. Many companies have implemented diversity policies in ways that actually do break the law, and I expect to see an uptick in claims challenging this.