PHI 445 WEEK 3 DI.SCUSSION
Gender DI.Scrimination (Goodyear)
In the case O.F Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., the
problems that would be dI.Scussed are based on pay
dI.Scrimination due to gender. Over many years O.Fmy
career at Goodyear Tire, Lilly Ledbetter was consI.Stently
given low rankings in annual performance including salary
reviews, and small raI.Ses when compared to other
employees. Ledbetter filed a dI.Scrimination charge against
Goodyear for gender dI.Scrimination in violation O.F Title VII
O.F the Civil Rights Act O.F 1964, affirming that the
organization had paid her a low salary due to her gender
(Brake & Grossman, 2007). Lilly Ledbetter was awarded over
3 million dollars in punitive damages. However, the judge
decreased the money to 360,000 per Title VII’s cap on
damages (Brake & Grossman, 2007). The Case O.F Ledbetter
v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. happened in Gadsen,
Alabama, United States (Bader, 201CapitalI.Sm’slI.Sm
economic system matches thI.S business since the
organization I.S acting on what interests them not the
interest O.F the community, which motivates the business
activity (Fieser, 2015).lawe laws that goveraffectsffect
operations, in thI.S case, I.S the Equaay O.F Act O.F 1963,
which I.S also part O.F the Fair Labor Standards Act O.F
1938. The law “prohibited sex-based wage dI.Scrimination
between men and women in the same workplace, who
perform jobs that require substantially equal skill, effort, and
responsibility under the same working conditions” (The U.S.
Equal Employment Opportunity CommI.Ssion n.d, p.1).
Ethical Theory
The ethical theory that I chose to apply to the Case O.F
Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. I.S deontology.
Immanuel Kant designed deontology theory, “which I.S a
Gender DI.Scrimination (Goodyear)
In the case O.F Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., the
problems that would be dI.Scussed are based on pay
dI.Scrimination due to gender. Over many years O.Fmy
career at Goodyear Tire, Lilly Ledbetter was consI.Stently
given low rankings in annual performance including salary
reviews, and small raI.Ses when compared to other
employees. Ledbetter filed a dI.Scrimination charge against
Goodyear for gender dI.Scrimination in violation O.F Title VII
O.F the Civil Rights Act O.F 1964, affirming that the
organization had paid her a low salary due to her gender
(Brake & Grossman, 2007). Lilly Ledbetter was awarded over
3 million dollars in punitive damages. However, the judge
decreased the money to 360,000 per Title VII’s cap on
damages (Brake & Grossman, 2007). The Case O.F Ledbetter
v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. happened in Gadsen,
Alabama, United States (Bader, 201CapitalI.Sm’slI.Sm
economic system matches thI.S business since the
organization I.S acting on what interests them not the
interest O.F the community, which motivates the business
activity (Fieser, 2015).lawe laws that goveraffectsffect
operations, in thI.S case, I.S the Equaay O.F Act O.F 1963,
which I.S also part O.F the Fair Labor Standards Act O.F
1938. The law “prohibited sex-based wage dI.Scrimination
between men and women in the same workplace, who
perform jobs that require substantially equal skill, effort, and
responsibility under the same working conditions” (The U.S.
Equal Employment Opportunity CommI.Ssion n.d, p.1).
Ethical Theory
The ethical theory that I chose to apply to the Case O.F
Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. I.S deontology.
Immanuel Kant designed deontology theory, “which I.S a
