7th Circuit sends sex-based salary comments back to the 1950s

As any high schooler with a smartphone will tell you, your words can haunt you long after you utter them. One high school recently learned the same is true for its employees, thanks to the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Read on to see why the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals (whose decisions apply to Illinois employers) recently refused to let an employer off the hook for alleged discriminatory comments made in 2006.

D.I.N.K.: double income, no kidding

Cheryl Kellogg was hired as a teacher at the Indiana Academy for Science, Mathematics, and Humanities in 2006. She negotiated her starting salary with Dr. David Williams, the director, when she was hired. According to her, Williams told her during those negotiations she “didn’t need any more [starting salary] because he knew [her] husband worked at Ball State, so they would have a fine salary.” She claimed that throughout her 12-year tenure, she suffered the effects of this outdated and improper approach to her starting pay.

In 2017, Kellogg complained to the school that she received less pay than her similarly situated male colleagues. The school let her know her salary was lower than her male colleagues because of “salary compression.” It said those hired after her began at a higher salary and had different qualifications.

Kellogg wasn't satisfied with the answer and filed a lawsuit against the school for violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Pay Act (EPA).

Marriage of convenience