Iowa's Women Coaches Are the Best in the Country. They Deserve Equal Pay for Equal Work

The Iowa Women’s basketball team has the entire country captivated with their talent, grit and skillful play. What could possibly be disappointing about this season? Only one thing. The coaching staff—the masterminds behind it all—are grossly underpaid compared to the coaching staff for the men’s basketball team.

Lisa Bluder’s contract provides for a guaranteed $1.4 million annually, while Fran McCaffrey, the men’s coach, is guaranteed $3.3 million a year. Jan Jensen, the associate head women’s coach who, by all accounts, is one of the best assistant coaches in the country, earns $255,000 annually and assistant coach Raina Harmon earns $165,000. Meanwhile, men’s assistant coach Sherman Dillard earns $298,619 annually, Matt Gatens earns $277,500 and Courtney Eldridge earns $267,200. U of I salaries.

Lisa Bluder has been at the University of Iowa for 24 years and has gotten her team into the NCAA tournament an astonishing 17 times! She is a three-time Big Ten coach of the year, a Naismith Award winner and has coached the Hawkeyes to back-to-back Final Fours.

The gender pay gap is widespread across the entire workforce, but it is highlighted in the continuing disparities between male and female coaches. This pay discrimination has been challenged in court on multiple occasions. In 1994, Marianne Stanley, the women’s basketball coach at USC, sued the college under the Equal Pay Act because she was paid substantially less than the coach of the men’s team despite the success of her program. At the time, the court concluded she did not perform equal work to the men’s coach, because men’s basketball was simply more popular and, therefore, the men’s coach had more responsibilities. Ignoring the fact that I completely disagree with the court’s reasoning, that certainly can’t justify the pay difference for the coaching staff at Iowa now. The Iowa women sold far more tickets this year than the men’s team and for a higher average price. Women’s basketball on Fox is averaging more viewers than men’s basketball, and it’s reasonable to assume that holds true for other networks.

But times are changing. Even if it is at a glacial pace. In 2017, Jane Meyer, a senior associate athletic director sued the University of Iowa alleging gender discrimination within the athletics department, including that she was paid less than a male athletic director with the same job. A jury agreed with Meyer and awarded her $1.43 million in damages.

Women in the US still earn about 83 cents for every dollar earned by men for performing EQUAL WORK. The pay gap for black women is even worse at 70 cents on the dollar. This is 61 years after the enactment of the Equal Pay Act. Equal pay is important for all women, not just coaches. The gender pay gap persists among women of all educational and achievement levels.

The University of Iowa, with the national audience they now enjoy because of women’s basketball, should be a leader in closing the gender pay gap. Other universities have done just that. Kim Mulkey at LSU earns $3.26 million per year compared to the men’s basketball coach who earns $2.7 million. South Carolina Coach Dawn Mulkey earns $3.1 million annually, which is much closer to the $3.7 million paid annually to the men’s coach.

It is well past time for men’s and women’s basketball coaches to be paid equally. Not just the head coaches, but the assistants too. They are doing Equal Work. They deserve Equal Pay.

Veteran's Workplace Rights

Veteran’s Day is this week! One way to celebrate is by knowing the rights of veterans at work after returning home. Veterans who have been disabled during service are entitled to certain protections under federal law: most notably through the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA.) While some veterans may find it difficult to request extra accommodations and support, we all have a right to a workplace that is safe and comfortable. Below is a quick introduction to your rights as a disabled veteran and employee.

Rights during the application and hiring process:

An employer may ask about your disability status, but you are not required to disclose this information (especially if you don’t require any special accommodations). If you are qualified for a position, they cannot discriminate against you on the basis of your disability. This means employers are not allowed to screen or disqualify candidates based on assumptions about the disability, but must assess you based on your experience and ability. The employer is not allowed to ask you questions about the details or circumstance surrounding your disability, even if your disability is immediately physically visible (amputations/wheelchairs etc.) They may, however, ask questions about your capability to handle certain tasks on the job, and whether you would need assistance in order to complete those tasks. 

Rights during employment:  You can ask for accommodations and support from your employer at any time, whether it be verbally or in writing. The ADA lists common examples of accommodation like changing the configuration of a work space (adding ramps or lowering shelving and desks), hiring interpreters or composing Braille training materials for the deaf or blind, and arranging special schedules or time off to attend treatment or therapy. If harassment occurs at the workplace (offhand remarks or teasing, being denied promotions, etc.) you could pursue a legal claim against your employer. If you don’t know if you’re being treated unfairly, read our blog post here about workplace harassment and discrimination.

While discrimination based on disability is illegal, it still happens far too often. For more detailed information about your employment rights as a disabled veteran, you can check out the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission. The Department of Justice’s American Disabilities Act also has in-depth resources to help you navigate your workplace and advocate for yourself. If you are an employer and want to know how to approach hiring practices ethically, you can also check out these resources. 

If you have questions about your employment rights or need a discrimination lawyer,

please call us at (319) 826-2250 for a free initial consultation. 

The above information is meant to be helpful, but is not meant to replace the legal advice of an attorney with whom you have an attorney-client relationship.

Iowa Supreme Court Clears Up Standards for Employment Discrimination Under Iowa Civil Rights Act

On June 9, 2019, the Iowa Supreme Court issued an anticipated ruling in the case of Hawkins v. Grinnell Regional Medical Center. For you legal junkies, you can read the opinion here. Gregory Hawkins, who was represented by my friend and fierce advocate for employees, Brooke Timmer, sued his former employer, Grinnell Regional Medical Center, after he was fired following years of dedicated service. Hawkins claimed he was a victim of disability discrimination and retaliation and a jury agreed, awarding Hawkins over $4 million in damages.

Many issues were presented on appeal, but the Iowa Supreme Court focused on just two. Unfortunately, the Court overturned the verdict and sent the case back for a new trial because of certain evidence that was admitted at trial. But in addition to that, the Court addressed the standards of proof that apply in most cases of employment discrimination.

The Court confirmed its long standing, but often challenged, holding that an employee can prove an employer violated the Iowa Civil Rights Act by showing that a discriminatory or retaliatory motive was a motivating factor or played a part in the employer’s action taken against the employee. Discrimination does not need to be the only reason for the employer’s action for it to violate the ICRA, it just needs to be one of the reasons. This reasoning has always made perfect sense to me because I think it is pretty clear that the legislature intended to prohibit racism, sexism, retaliation, etc. in its entirety and did not intend to allow employers to be just a little racist or a little sexist.

The Court also eliminated the application of the federal rules for proving that an employer discriminated against an employee, which were often confusing for juries . . . and judges and attorneys. Finally, the Court announced that employers are entitled to a “same decision” defense. This means that if an employee proves that discrimination or retaliation was a motivating factor or played a part in the employer’s decision, the employer is liable under the ICRA unless the employer proves that it would have made the same decision even without the discriminatory or retaliatory motive.

As an employment discrimination lawyer, I am looking forward to advocating for my clients under these clearer standards.

Iowa at the forefront of LGBTQ civil rights? How this little state in the middle of the country has led the way towards equality.

June is LGBTQ Pride Month!

Most Iowans know that Iowa was one of the earliest states to legalize gay marriage. 2019 marks the 10-year anniversary of the Iowa Supreme Court’s Varnum v. Brien decision in which the Court ruled that Iowa’s law prohibiting same sex couples from getting a marriage license violated the Iowa Constitution. This ruling made Iowa only the 3rd state in the nation to establish marriage equality and was six years before the US Supreme Court reached the same conclusion.

But a lesser known fact is that Iowa was also at the forefront of protecting the LGBTQ community from other types of discrimination. In 2007, the Iowa legislature amended the Iowa Civil Rights Act to extend its prohibition against discrimination to include discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. The Iowa Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination in employment, public accommodations, credit, housing and education. Iowa was the 19th state to include civil rights protections for gay people and only the 10th state to include protections for transgender people.

At Ann Brown Legal we are proud of Iowa’s history in standing up for the rights of LGBTQ individuals. All people deserve the right to work and support themselves and their families free from discrimination.

If you believe your employer (or a potential employer) has discriminated against you because of your sexual orientation or gender identity, please call us to discuss your rights at (319) 826-2250.

Happy Pride Month to all!

Equal Pay for Equal Work: How our clients' fight to be paid what they were owed helped all women in the battle to close the gender pay gap

It was 2011 when I first met the three women who I would end up representing for nearly six years. These women came to me after they learned that they were being paid substantially less than the men who were performing the same job at a large furniture manufacturer in Muscatine, Iowa. All three women were managers working in a male dominated workplace. They were like a lot of women I know—smart, hard-working and dedicated employees. Still, they were being paid less than men for doing the same work. 

We brought claims under the Iowa Civil Rights Act, the Equal Pay Act and Title VII. In 2015, before the trial, the case went to the Iowa Supreme Court to answer a certified question about the time period for recovering damages under the Iowa Civil Rights Act. 

We held a jury trial in Davenport, Iowa, in the summer of 2015. The jury was made up of both men and women, and the jury found in favor of our clients for all of the equal pay claims. The jury also found that the employer's conduct was willful and awarded punitive damages. Throughout discovery in the case, we learned that all of the women managers at the manufacturing plant were being paid less than men performing the same work and we were able to present that evidence to the jury. 

The employer then appealed the case to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals. On April 3, 2017, the 8th Circuit ruled in favor of our clients. The ruling can be found here. The Court held that the employer had failed to show that economic conditions were the reason for the pay difference. The Court also held that evidence of the other women managers who were being paid less was admissible. As discussed by Bloomberg in an article discussing the ruling, the Court also held that Department of Labor audit results were not admissible. We believe these victories will help women employees in future cases to successfully prove their claims of wage discrimination.

Throughout the six years that we worked on this case, my clients stood strong in their belief that they and all women should be paid equally. They brought the same level of dedication to this case that had allowed them to advance to management in a male-dominated field. This case proves that we really can change the workplace for the better—one case at a time. 

UBER Sexual Harassment Allegations are a Wake-Up Call for the Tech Industry

The assertion by a former Uber employee that she was sexually harassed by her supervisor and then ignored by the human resources department has brought much-needed attention to a continuing problem in the tech industry - sexual harassment and sexual discrimination.

On February 19, Susan Fowler, a former engineer at Uber published a blog recounting her experience at Uber, including being sexually propositioned by her boss. While this is certainly a disturbing set  of facts, perhaps more troubling is Ms. Fowler's description of what happened when she took her complaint to the human resources department. Ms. Fowler was advised that, while she clearly had been the victim of sexual harassment, her boss would only be given a warning despite multiple complaints from different women, because he was "a high performer." She was also advised that she (and not the harasser) could change jobs or alternatively that she would need to learn to deal with the harassment and the likelihood that she would be retaliated against for complaining.  

Ms. Fowler's now widely read post has resulted in numerous women working in the tech community sharing their own similar experiences. The LA Times reported that a 2015 survey had found that 60% of women in the tech industry have experienced unwanted sexual advances from a colleague and that a 2008 study found that 50% of women working in the tech industry will leave an employer at some point in their career because of a hostile work environment. 

Many tech companies hold themselves out to be very employee focused and so it is particularly disappointing that sexual harassment and sexual discrimination are pervasive among tech-based employers. Equally as disappointing is the practice of human resources departments turning a blind eye to complaints about employees if they are high performing. 

Ms. Fowler's blog has raised awareness at Uber, including prompting an independent investigation that will be conducted by former US Attorney General Eric Holder. Ms. Fowler's story also highlights why so many victims of sexual harassment remain silent. While sexual harassment is clearly illegal, some HR departments punish the victim instead of the perpetrator.

It is important for women to know that Title VII and most state civil rights acts, including the Iowa Civil Rights Act, prohibit conduct like Uber's. Complaints of sexual harassment must be adequately investigated when reported and retaliation against an employee who makes a complaint is explicitly prohibited.  Women who are being sexually harassed or who have suffered retaliation as a result of making a complaint about sexual harassment and are concerned about making a complaint should contact an employment lawyer to discuss their options. 

Follow my blog with Bloglovin