Eeoc vs. Higher Education: Recent Laws and Interpretations Impacting Faculty Discrimination
Wallace, Dawn, King, Phyllis, Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues
The purpose of this paper is to present recent cases and settlements related to pay discrimination in higher education. Laws regarding workplace inequity have helped resolve and decrease many unfair practices in higher education environments. Still, employers continue to engage in practices that are prohibited by law. Some incidents of inequality are engaged in unknowingly through lack of knowledge of laws that are being reinterpreted, modified, and changed through litigation or mediation and through long-standing accepted practices that perpetuate discrimination. Through education and understanding of the law, institutions of higher education can work toward a more equitable workplace for all individuals.
Throughout the past forty years, institutions of higher education have become well acquainted with Title VII, the Equal Pay Act, and other laws that prohibit discrimination of protected classes. As incidents of discrimination have been played out in the courts, administrators have learned that sovereignty laws do not protect institutions from lawsuits based discrimination (Anderson v. State University of New York at New Paltz, 2000); Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, 2005; & Nanda v. Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois, et.al., 2002), that hiring, salary determinations, and promotions must occur through welldocumented and fair practices (EEOC v. Georgia Southwestern, et.al, 1985), and that the Equal Employment Opportunity Council (EEOC) will seek remedies and sanctions against universities and colleges that violate the law.
Yet, women and other protected classes continue to lag behind white males. For example, Dey and Hill (2007) found that, "controlling for hours, occupation, parenthood, and other factors normally associated with pay, college-educated women still earn less than their male peers earn." Also, the National Women's Legal Counsel (NWLC), citing U.S. census information, states that "women today are paid, on average, only 77 cents for every dollar paid to men, and women of color are paid even less" (NLWC, 2011). More specifically related to higher education, the American Association of University Women (AAUW) has published studies illustrating the condition of women in the academe. Their research has found that "on average, compared to men, women earn less, hold lower-ranking positions, and are less likely to have tenure" (AAUW, 2004). Further, they assert that sex discrimination in higher education persists because "universities and colleges have been powerful cultural institutions in western culture since medieval times" (West, 2012). Given the disparity that still exists in higher education institutions, continued examination and evaluation of current issues are important. As such, the purpose of this paper is to present legal issues, remedies, and settlements that impact college and university pay discrimination.
Equal Pay, Title VII, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA)
Pay disputes in higher education usually start with a charge of discrimination filed through the Equal Employment Opportunity Center (EEOC). Plaintiffs typically file a complaint based on Title VII, the Equal Pay Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, or a combination. The EEOC's enforcement of pay discrimination laws in the higher education arena has often proven to be a slow and arduous process. One of the most difficult hurdles to overcome has been decoding the subjective, unclear ways that universities award salaries and/or salary increases. Also, past law that set timeliness deadlines for reporting discrimination has barred many individuals from arguing their discrimination cases in a court of law. However, there have been successes in pay disparities through litigation and/or settlements. In recent years, the Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has successfully won lawsuits and settlements against universities on behalf of employees who have been victims of discrimination. …