Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Stopped At The Starting Gate: The Overuse Of Summary Judgment In Equal Pay Cases, Deborah Thompson Eisenberg
Stopped At The Starting Gate: The Overuse Of Summary Judgment In Equal Pay Cases, Deborah Thompson Eisenberg
Deborah Thompson Eisenberg
Prepared for a symposium about the overuse of summary judgment in employment discrimination cases, this Article provides a grassroots empirical analysis of what is happening in equal pay cases on the front lines of the district courts. Analyzing a database of 500 federal district court decisions—both published and unpublished—that considered whether to grant summary judgment on an equal pay claim from 2000 to 2011, the review shows that dismissing equal pay claims at the summary judgment stage has become the modus operandi for most federal courts. Courts granted 68% of summary judgment motions in equal pay cases—meaning that only about …
Wal-Mart Stores V. Dukes: Lessons For The Legal Quest For Equal Pay, Deborah Thompson Eisenberg
Wal-Mart Stores V. Dukes: Lessons For The Legal Quest For Equal Pay, Deborah Thompson Eisenberg
Deborah Thompson Eisenberg
The Supreme Court’s decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes provides a unique opportunity to reflect on whether and how the legal system should address unjustified pay disparities between men and women who perform similar jobs. This Article describes the Court’s decision and analyzes the insights it offers about the legal quest for equal pay. First, Wal-Mart demonstrates the tension between Title VII’s focus on the employer’s intent and the economic realities of how pay discrimination happens in the modern workplace. As the women at Wal-Mart experienced and research confirms, pay disparities tend to be the greatest when employers delegate …