• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

HRMorning

  • FREE RESOURCES
  • PREMIUM CONTENT
  • HR DEEP DIVES
  • PODCASTS
    • VOICES OF HR
    • WOMEN’S LEADERSHIP TODAY
  • LOGIN
  • GET STARTED
  • Employment Law
  • Benefits
  • Recruiting
  • HR Technology
  • Payroll
  • Management
  • Women’s Leadership
  • More
    • Talent Management
    • Performance Management
    • Leadership & Strategy
    • Compensation
    • Policy & Procedures
    • Wellness
    • Staff Departure
    • HR Career & Self-Care
    • Health Care
    • Retirement Plans
  • Employment Law

Pay discrimination? 2 key reasons court rejects employee’s lawsuit

Carol Warner
By: Carol Warner
Read it on Beacon
  • Share on

About the Author

For nearly two decades, Carol Warner has analyzed the legal and financial realities behind workplace decisions, covering employment law, benefits, payroll and HR technology. She translates complex legal updates, regulatory shifts and vendor claims into plain language that HR teams can act on. Her focus is simple: What does this mean for employers, and what should they do next? Connect with her on LinkedIn.

Show Less
Last Updated: November 11, 2024
3 minute engagement
It Wasn't Pay Discrimination Court Finds
You read HRMorning's newsletter. Beacon's Daily Brief is the version tuned to you: it skips what you've already read and leads with what you've asked Beacon about. Get your Daily Brief →

A veteran employee filed Title VII race and pay discrimination claims after he noticed a newer colleague quickly climbing the ranks and earning substantial raises.

In 2010, Paul Palmer Jr. II, who is Black, was hired as a lecturer in an Illinois university’s Business Marketing Department. Alongside his role as lecturer, Palmer served as a program’s Diversity Coach – a position that paid an additional $25,000 annual stipend.

During his third year of employment, Palmer reached out to his department chair about the possibility for early promotion to senior lecturer. The chair told Palmer it was rare for lecturers to apply for senior lecturer prior to their sixth year. As such, he didn’t apply early.

In 2016, the university promoted Palmer to senior lecturer pursuant to the typical six-year timeline.

About that same time, the university hired a new lecturer, Josh Gildea, who is white. In addition to his role as lecturer, Gildea served as Director of the Business Marketing Academy – a position that paid an additional $30,000 stipend per year.

At some point, the previous department chair left, and a new chair came in.

Discrepancies crept in over time: Was it pay discrimination?

In 2018, Palmer emailed the chair to complain about pay discrepancies that “look[ed] very biased.” Specifically, he complained that “Gildea’s base salary had risen to nearly match” his own base salary.

At the time, Palmer earned $98,750 and Gildea earned $94,000. Importantly, they both earned more than their base salaries, in variable amounts through a variety of methods, like the annual stipends for specific roles and teaching “overload classes, which are classes taught beyond the required teaching load for a lecturer and for which lecturers are paid per additional class taught.” Palmer and Gildea were the two highest paid lecturers in the department.

After Palmer complained, he found out Gildea was being considered for an early promotion to senior lecturer. The news didn’t sit well with Palmer, who said he’d been discouraged from seeking an early promotion. He emailed a dean about his concern that race discrimination “negatively impacted” his salary and promotion to senior lecturer.

He filed a charge with the EEOC, alleging race and pay discrimination in violation of Title VII.  He said that even though he earned a higher base salary, Gildea still earned more than he did in aggregate between 2017 and 2019. After the EEOC issued a right-to-sue letter, Palmer filed a lawsuit, and his case reached the Seventh Circuit.

Why court backs employer: 2 key reasons

Palmer alleged two forms of race discrimination: 1) the school’s failure to promote him to senior lecturer after three years, and 2) pay discrimination based on his race. To support his claims, Palmer presented Gildea as the only comparator.

1. He waited too long to file a claim

First, Palmer didn’t file a claim with the EEOC until more than six years after previous chair allegedly discouraged him from seeking the early promotion, which was the basis of his failure to promote claim. That was well over the 300 days allotted to file, so the court held that claim was untimely.

2. He didn’t prove the work was equal

Next, the court turned to Palmer’s pay discrimination claim, examining his and Gildea’s total compensation over the mentioned three-year period. During that time frame, Gildea out-earned Palmer by $171,731, a significant portion of which came from teaching “overload” classes.

The annual stipends and income from overload courses Gildea earned didn’t support Palmer’s pay discrimination claim, the court held, because the “very heart of an unequal pay claim is the plaintiff’s burden to show unequal pay for equal work.” Here, Gildea performed “duties similar to the plaintiff’s position plus additional duties in a different position.”

Bottom line: Palmer failed to state valid claims in a timely manner, so the Seventh Circuit affirmed the ruling in the university’s favor.

Palmer v. Indiana Univ., 31 F.4th 583 (7th Cir. 2022).

Read it on Beacon
Open this article in Beacon, from HRMorning, and ask how it applies to your company. Every answer names its source.
Read it on Beacon
Get HRMorning's newsletter tuned to you every morning: your Daily Brief on Beacon →
Filed under
  • Employment Law
  • Share on

Get the HRMorning Newsletter

With HRMorning arriving in your inbox, you will never miss critical stories on labor laws, benefits, retention and onboarding strategies.

Get it free with a Beacon account. Beacon keeps your company's HR context at hand, and every answer names its source.
Create my free account

Free Training & Resources

White Papers

How Gwinnett County Strengthens Employee Wellbeing with Maven

Provided by Maven Clinic

White Papers

The Hidden Cost of Untreated Menopause: Keep Your Most Experienced Talent at Their Best

Provided by Maven Clinic

White Papers

Monthly Employee Engagement Ideas

Provided by Inspirus

White Papers

Building an Incident Management Program? Start With These Four Fundamentals

Provided by Navex

SPONSORED CONTENT

Compensation

Recruiting

sponsored content
Salary Benchmarking: 6 Choices That Decide Whether Your Pay Data Holds Up

Courtesy of MARSH

Employment Law

Policy & Procedures

sponsored content
Policy Rollout: 4 Checkpoints That Show Employees Got the Message

Courtesy of NAVEX

Benefits

Staff Administration

sponsored content
PEO ROI: 3 Numbers to Know Before You Leave Patchwork HR

Courtesy of TRINET

Further Reading

  • Employment Law
Can You Fire an Employee on FMLA Leave? 5 Times Courts Said Yes

What Courts Focus On When Employees Are Fired While on FMLA Leave Whether the termination reason was documented before the FMLA request...

  • Employment Law
Employer to pay $384K in back wages, penalties for H-2B violations

An employer in Pennsylvania will pay more than $384,000 in back wages and civil penalties to resolve H-2B violations. As an FYI, the fed...

  • Employment Law
Transgender Worker Wins Health Care Fight – But Is Not Done Yet

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a lower court’s ruling that an employer cannot exclude gender-affirming coverage for a transgender plan par...

  • Employment Law
  • Work Location
New RTO lawsuit: Company cut bonus in half because employee worked from home

As the RTO wars continue, employers are pushing hard to get workers back into their cubicles, with some going so far as to “incentivizeâ€...

  • Employment Law
New Race Discrimination Lawsuit – Why Court Backed Employer

HR pros can learn a lot about how to deal with alleged race discrimination at work from a new federal appeals court decision. The appeal...

  • Employment Law
How a Tip Dispute Turned Into a $62K FLSA Payout

A Denver-area restaurant is paying nearly $62,000 after a DOL investigation uncovered tip retention and recordkeeping violations under the ...

Get the latest from HRMorning in your inbox PLUS Beacon, free. Check it before you say it.

GET STARTED FREE
HR Morning Logo
  • Facebook
  • Linked In
  • ABOUT HRMORNING
  • ADVERTISE WITH US
  • WRITE FOR US
  • CONTACT
  • Employment Law
  • Benefits
  • Recruiting
  • Talent Management
  • Performance Management
  • HR Technology
  • Leadership & Strategy
  • Compensation
  • Policy & Procedures
  • Wellness
  • Staff Departure
  • HR Career & Self-Care
  • Health Care
  • Retirement Plans
  • DEI

HRMorning, part of the Rover Insights Network, provides the latest HR and employment law news for HR professionals in the trenches of small-to-medium-sized businesses. Rather than simply regurgitating the day's headlines, HRMorning delivers actionable insights, helping HR execs understand what HR trends mean to their business.

Powered By Rover Insights
Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | HRMorning Insider? Manage your subscription
Copyright© 2026 Rover Insights
HRMorning Logo

WELCOME BACK!

Enter your username and password below to log in

Forget Your Username or Password?

Reset Password

Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.

Log In

Why do we need your credit card for a free trial?

We ask for your credit card to allow your subscription to continue should you decide to keep your membership beyond the free trial period.  This prevents any interruption of content access.

Your card will not be charged at any point during your 21 day free trial
and you may cancel at any time during your free trial.

During your free trial, you can cancel at any time with a single click on your “Account” page.  It’s that easy.