• 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
  • SIGN UP FREE
  • 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
  • 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

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).

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.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form

Free Training & Resources

Webinars

Effectively Hire and Train Your Employees in a Hybrid Workplace

White Papers

ROI of Automated Workforce Management

Provided by WorkEasy

Webinars

Top HR Trends and Priorities for 2026

Provided by Paycom

Webinars

AON – Talent Assessment 2020: Impactful Business Responses in the Context of Current Events

SPONSORED CONTENT

HR Technology

sponsored content
The Best AI Software for HR Automation

Courtesy of G-P

Talent Management

sponsored content
Powerful Employee Retention Strategies for 2025: How to Keep Your Best People

Courtesy of PEOPLEGURU

Benefits

Health Care

Wellness

sponsored content
Proven Results: 5 Ways Teladoc Health Chronic Condition Management Transforms HR Outcomes

Courtesy of TELADOC HEALTH

Further Reading

  • Employment Law
Disability Discrimination: Manager’s ‘ADD Brain’ Comments Keep Claim Alive

Some manager mistakes begin with an attempt to help — and then land companies in court. In this case, a supervisor supported an...

  • Employment Law
Should you use arbitration agreements? 3 key points to know

Using arbitration agreements instead of going to court can provide big benefits for employers. Arbitration is generally faster and cheaper ...

  • Employment Law
OSHA Seeks $1M in Penalties for Air Safety Violations

OSHA has proposed more than $1 million in penalties against a Chicago countertop manufacturer that allegedly did not do enough to protect i...

  • Employment Law
DOL Opinion Letter FLSA2026-10 Addresses Phone Calls During Commutes

Field-based roles raise unique FLSA compliance questions, including whether an employer must pay for work tasks performed before or during ...

  • Employment Law
Not again! Employer will pay $42K for all-too-common accommodation mistake

When it comes to accommodation of employee disabilities, you would think employers would learn from others’ mistakes. But it just does...

  • Compensation
  • Employment Law
Equal Pay Day Meets AI Reality: Here’s What HR Leaders Need to Know

Equal Pay Day on March 26 carries new weight for employers this year. It’s a day to bring awareness and legitimacy to the ongoing issue o...

Get the latest from HRMorning in your inbox PLUS immediately access 10 FREE HR guides.

I WANT MY FREE GUIDES
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
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.