1 Jan 1974 Jahr - Corning Glass works v. Brennan

Beschreibung:

Overview: Male inspectors previously performed night shift inspections and were paid more than females who performed the day shift inspection. In 1963 Congress passed the Equal pay act then in 1969 Corning Signed a contract that began paying day and night shift inspectors the same with one exception. The people who were hired before January 1969 most whom were men received higher pay compared to the day shift inspectors. The U.S Secretary then filed two lawsuits against Corning, one in the federal court of New York and one in Pennsylvania.
History: Male inspectors previously performed night shift inspections and were paid more than females who performed the day shift inspection. In 1963 Congress passed the Equal pay act then in 1969 Corning Signed a contract that began paying day and night shift inspectors the same with one exception. The people who were hired before January 1969 most whom were men received higher pay compared to the day shift inspectors. The U.S Secretary then filed two lawsuits against Corning, one in the federal court of New York and one in Pennsylvania. The secretary charged corning with violating the Equal Pay Act by paying male night shift inspectors more than female dayshift inspectors. The Secretary wanted Corning to give raises to the dayshift inspectors to make the pay equal. Corning fought this lawsuit with his argument being that The Equal pay act said companies could pay different wages for people working under different working conditions. After trials and appeals the federal courts of appeals in New York ruled in favor of New York, while the one in Pennsylvania ruled in favor of Corning. With a 5-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Secretary of Labor. Justice Thurgood Marshall delivered the court's opinion Marshall said the reason Congress passed the Equal Pay Act was to end the notion in Society that men should get paid more because of their role in Society. “Equal Work should be rewarded by Equal wages”. The only problem was of course figuring out whether or not nighttime and day shift inspectors should get paid same and was the same amount of work. The Supreme court said it was, Marshall then emphasized to Corning that he was free to pay the Night time inspectors more money if working at night had added more physical and psychological demands. Corning was unable to provide any evidence that working as a night time inspector was more demanding than working as a day time inspector so Corning was then forced to finally pay the equal amount.
Biography: Corning Glass was a US labor case concerning the rights of Women and equal pay that happened in 1963 when the Equal PAy act was passed by Congress making pay equal for everybody from women to men.
FIRAC:
Corning Glass Works v. Brennan,(1974)
No. 73-29
Argued:March 25, 1974 Decided: June 3, 1974
Rule: The ruling of the case of Corning Glass Works v. Brennan was Corning Glass had to pay all of their workers equal pay regardless if they were working the day shift or night shift and if they were male or female.

Facts: Brennan and many other women who were employed at the Corning Glass works, claimed discrimination towards them because their gender and were not receiving the same opportunities as the men were. The reason being was because at the time Corning glass works was not allowing women to work in the night because they were discriminating towards giving the higher pay and night time shifts to the men instead violating the Equal Pay Act.

Issue: Was Corning Glass works discriminating against women by not letting them work the night time shift?

Answer: YES

Conclusion: The Court ruled in Brennan favor making sure that Corning glass was not only paying everybody equally, but giving everybody the same opportunity no matter what the gender was in working the night shift.

Related Cases:
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479
ACLU files an amicus brief in which the Court holds that the Constitution guarantees a “right to privacy” that encompasses the right of an individual that has the private decision to bear a child. The court invalidates the state law prohibiting the prescription, sale or use of contraceptives.

Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71
The United States Supreme Court rules that a law that discriminates against women with the 14th amendment, holding unanimously that a state statute that the administrators of estates cannot be named in a way that discriminates between sexes.
Stanton v. Stanton
The Court rules that a law setting majority for women is 18 while with men it is 21, based on the assumption that women need less education and preparation for adulthood compared to men. However, the Courts upheld Alabama's exclusion of women working jobs from being a prison guard in an all male maximum security prisons.

Articles:
https://www.aclu.org/other/timeline-major-supreme-court-decisions-womens-rights
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/417/188/
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/417/188.html

Zugefügt zum Band der Zeit:

Datum:

Abbildungen: