Comments on: Should you self-audit to protect against ‘Ledbetter’ complaints?

By: Miki Dudevszky

Miki Dudevszky — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 17:29:32 +0000

Why does everyone jump to the conclusion Larry is a discriminating fool. He stated he hires and promotes on merit. He doesn’t like government interference. Is that inherently bad, that is, not wanting more government in our business. I’m a small business partner, he have a well represented demographic staff, not by design but by talent and merit. And, I don’t wish to pay more taxes; more BWC; more rules from governmental bureaucrats that we support – who may in fact be exempt from SS taxes – who may have never studied business nor tried to run one – who may squander what is given to them; and I don’t wish to incurr payroll & policy burdens the lowly business owner is forced to live with.

By: Abby

Abby — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 14:09:17 +0000

This is all about due diligence…Larry, dude what world do you live in? I truly feel sorry for the females that work for or with you.

By: Robin

Robin — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 07:54:27 +0000

The Ledbetter Act looks at compensating for 2 years of back pay, so I don’t see the big hullabaloo over this new law. It is only trying to implement what should have been implemented a long time ago. Women and other covered individuals aren’t trying to take businesses to their knees; women are just trying to get a fair deal–for their families, for their own self worth and for their retirement.

And let’s talk motivation. What is more demotivating than getting paid less than someone who is less productive or less experienced or less skilled? Or not getting hired at all? If this law had been passed years ago, we might not be in such poor shape economically right now.

By: Gary MacHR

Gary MacHR — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:47:26 +0000

Lady McB makes excellent points. As an HR Director in the state of California, every nuance is implicitly dangerous! We have two annual audits by independent firms; quarterly audits by our contracted CPA; and monthly HR audits of each department payroll. As a non-profit, we have chosen not to include merit increases in our pay structure and can only provide pay increases when our state and federal economies are stable, since every increase must be sustainable. We pay at or above minimum wage and are keen on compliance across the board. Granted, we (HR) may miss an OT half hour on rare ocasions, but the employee is quickly notified and pay is rectified. My Executive Director is ‘hands on’ and helps HR ensure we don’t make the mistakes that the Ledbetter Decision would pin point. Since this state is ’sue happy’ it is critical to check and double check…the employees appreciate the due diligence also.

Off my soap box and on to other 2009 legal stuff!

By: Tom

Tom — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:34:21 +0000

If an employer does a self audit and finds that there was a problem with the pay scales that may have been discriminatory to an employee or employees who have been under that pay scale for twenty years, it will be difficult in this time of economic trouble for an HR mgr to go to the CEO and say, ” The company owes these employees more money.” It may be the right thing to do, but before I do it, I’ll polish up my resume.

We will be doing a self audit and I sincerely hope that we have not done anything that even gives the appearance of pay discrimination.

By: CSS

CSS — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:08:59 +0000

Well Larry if you are all about ______ on merit, then why the harshness on women??? I would like to believe that you would want your wife/daughter to make what they deserved if they were working the same job as a MAN doing the job equally if not better. Or maybe your able to provide for your family with one income? So good luck to all those who do work under your ruling.

But we could even take this one step further… So men can sit around and watch a woman do what they should have been in the first place? and STILL get paid for it?

Or we can take a very hard working black person, who gets paid less then the average white man, but he wants to prove to himself, and his employer (by taking the job) to be just as good if not better then the average white man to make what he deserved in the first place?

I think the point of this ruling is to keep people as honest as possible. And I do believe in merit, but that doesn’t mean I look at a certain group of people with rose colored glasses.

By: Lady McB

Lady McB — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 21:52:45 +0000

Last I knew, ignorance was no excuse for law breaking. So, if you don’t self audit, then there is no excuse. If you do self-audit, you can correct an error. But, I think most business people take out insurance to cover errors and accidents of all kinds, including employment practices, but otherwise most gamble that the odds are in their favor that they are not likely to get audited or sued. And HR mngrs try to hold the line, that their employers might step over by informing them of the law. But I bet no one’s boss would be very happy with them for bringing an audit that revealed they owed somebody for years of back pay. If someone does sue, the HR mngr might get the shaft for not finding and correting the error. Middle management — between a rock & a hard place.

By: Mary

Mary — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 21:50:24 +0000

So Larry how many women do you have working for you?

By: Lady McB

Lady McB — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 21:42:47 +0000

Larry makes me laugh! If “not hiring women in areas which may get scrutinized such as areas which have multiple positions of the same type, ” is not a form of gender discrimination, what is? I guess he is saying it is okay to discriminate, just don’t get caught at it…if that is hs intention, I don’t understand his defense of hiring on merit, but it certainly is amusing how people can self-justify & rationalize.

By: Larry

Larry — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 21:18:09 +0000

I have a better solution – don’t hire women in areas which may get scrutinized – such as areas which have multiple positions of the same type. As long as the gov’t. keeps its hands in my business, I’m going to do my best to keep it out. There are ways to bring up issues – through the company or otherwise – but keep the gov’t. and more regulation out.
And for those whiners out there who want to comment about my practices, save your typing. I hire on merit, promote on merit, and discharge on lack of merit. I don’t care what you are (sexually) or color or religion – if you do the job, there’s no concern over pay.