(B) The bona fide factor defense described in subparagraph (A)(iv) shall apply only
if the employer demonstrates that such factor (i) is not based upon or derived
from a sex-based differential in compensation; (ii) is job-related with respect
to the position in question; and (iii) is consistent with business necessity.
Such defense shall not apply where the employee demonstrates that an alternative
employment practice exists that would serve the same business purpose without
producing such differential and that the employer has refused to adopt such
What are the repercussions? We've all seen people who used their "victimhood" to avoid repercussions of their poor work ethics. The Unions in particular protect this behavior.
According to current legislation, an employee had to prove there existed discrimination before the employer could be prosecuted and punished for it. The above clause changes proof of guilt to proof of innocence.
If the H.R. 12 is passed, an employer is considered guilty of sexual discrimination unless he proves himself innocent. The burden of proof is now on the defendent, the employer, given this legislation supported by Rep. Gordon, in accordance with Speaker Pelosi's dictates.
It is sad that The Party, including our Representative, has been whipped into line by the politically correct Idealists from California.
TNTaylor©2009, TennesseeTaylor, all rights reserved.