Thread by @MaxKennerly

A thread about this opinion yesterday, and the way that big corporations try to bend the law to serve their purposes—in this case, trying to preserve their "right" to benefit from sexist and racist wage discrimination.

And how you can help.

/1

https://twitter.com/WomensLawProj/status/1225473867478683648

Women still make less than men for performing similar work (in PA, $0.79 to the dollar). The gap is exacerbated by race: it's $0.68 for Black women, $0.56 for Latina women. The gap is present when women first start working and gets *worse* with more experience.

/2

Many employers believe that the ideal salary is the lowest number an employee will accept (nevermind the effect that has on morale and productivity), so they base their offer on what the candidate earned in a prior job. This perpetuates pay discrimination.

/3

In 2016, Massachusetts passed the first law in the country prohibiting employers from asking applicants about pay history. The business community had some tweaks here and there, but they supported it.

Other states and cities considered doing the same. /4
qz.com/749476/massach…

When Philadelphia's City Council looked at it, they heard expert testimony from @AAUW, @WomensLawProj, @PathWaysPA, and @PhillyPCHR, all discussing the evidence showing the pay gap and how wage history factors into it.

Philadelphia's Chamber of Commerce took a different route./5

.@ChamberPHL didn't want to be questioned in testimony, but they sent a letter which bizarrely said, yes, businesses considered wage history to see if they could pay below market value. Then they said they don't look at wage history.🤷‍♂️

(They later admitted in court they do.)

/6

Once the resolution passed City Council unanimously, @comcast hired Miguel Estrada to secretly threaten @PhillyMayor with a lawsuit. They claimed they had a free speech right to use wage history to pay women and minorities less.

It didn't work. Mayor Kenney signed it. /7

So @ChamberPHL sued, while trying to conceal which businesses were suing to preserve sexist and racist wage disparities.

It didn't work.

They begrudgingly named 13 pro-discrimination businesses, including @comcast, @ChildrensPhila, and @DrexelUniv. /8 inquirer.com/philly/news/po…

The City called a labor economist to testify about how wage history perpetuates the pay gap.

The employers claimed they have no idea what to pay people. They didn't challenge the evidence of pervasive gender and race disparities in wages—not even in their own businesses. 🧐 /9

In the district court, the employers won a partial victory, based on the rather dubious proposition that businesses have more free speech rights than individuals, to the extent that the government must prove a policy will succeed before it can regulate commercial speech. /10

Which brings us to yesterday: the Third Circuit reversed the District Court. Philadelphia’s equal pay ordinance is restored in its entirety—three years after it was passed, because it was jammed up in litigation by a handful of pro-discrimination big companies like @comcast. /11

What can you do about this? Several things:

1) Vote in local elections. It matters who is on city counsel and who is mayor.

2) Vote in state elections. Michigan and Wisconsin have banned municipalities from passing wage history ordinances like this.

/12 hrdive.com/news/salary-hi…

3) Vote in federal elections. The lawyer Comcast hired? GW Bush tried to make him a judge. Dems filibustered it through 7 cloture votes.

4) Support orgs like @WomensLawProj, which shepherded this law, testifying in support and defending it in court.

/end womenslawproject.org/donate/