In the recent case of Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Inc., the United States Supreme Court strictly applied the statutory requirement that a charge of discrimination must be filed within 180 days of the discriminatory conduct when continuous discriminatory acts are alleged.
Lilly Ledbetter (“Ledbetter”) was employed by Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Inc. (“Goodyear”) for 19 years. Shortly before she retired, Ledbetter filed a charge of discrimination against Goodyear in which she claimed she had been discriminated against because of her sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Ledbetter asserted that she received several poor evaluations during her 19 years of employment because she was female, which resulted in Ledbetter being denied salary increases. Accordingly, she was earning significantly less than her male colleagues upon retirement.
Since Ledbetter’s last review was several years prior to her retirement, in order to comply with the 180 day filing requirement, Ledbetter asked the Supreme Court to recognize a rule Ledbetter entitled the “paycheck accrual rule.” Ledbetter argued that such a rule would provide that each paycheck was a discriminatory act because the paycheck would have been larger if Ledbetter’s evaluations had not been discriminatory and she had received raises similar to her male colleagues. Thus, she claimed, her charge was timely filed because it was filed within 180 days of her last paycheck.
Goodyear responded by arguing Ledbetter did not timely file her charge because the discriminatory evaluations occurred more than 180 days prior to the date the charge was filed. In ruling for Goodyear, the Supreme Court held “the EEOC charging period is triggered when a discrete unlawful practice takes place. A new violation does not occur, and a new charging period does not commence upon the occurrence of subsequent non-discriminatory acts that entail adverse effects resulting from past discrimination.” Thus, since the evaluations and not the subsequent paychecks were the discriminatory acts, the Court rejected the paycheck accrual rule and found Ledbetter had not timely filed her charge.
The Supreme Court’s decision is helpful because it provides a clear explanation of how to apply the 180 day filing requirement in cases where continuous discriminatory acts are alleged.
* * * * *