Metavid

Video archive of the US Congress

Senate Proceeding 01-21-09 on Jan 21st, 2009 :: 4:13:35 to 4:23:55
Total video length: 4 hours 44 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:143 Duration: 0:10:20 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

Amy Klobuchar

4:13:32 to 4:13:53( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: fruits of their labor without discrimination. and i thank my distinguished colleagufrom minnesota for allowing me to the process at this time. and with that, i yield the floor floor. a senator: thank you? madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. ms. klobuchar: madam president, i'm proud to join with senator including yourself, in calling for the senate to take up and

Amy Klobuchar

4:13:35 to 4:23:55( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Amy Klobuchar

Amy Klobuchar

4:13:54 to 4:14:16( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: pass the lilly ledbetter fair pay restoration act and to do it as soon as possible. many here have told ledbetter's story going to go through it again. but i will tell you, sometimes when you get to know someone, as i've gotten to know lilly ledbetter as a person, it means more for you. it's like sometimes when someone is arguing against the law and then they suddenly

Amy Klobuchar

4:14:17 to 4:14:39( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: find it happens to their own wife or their own daughter, they start to feel a little differently about it. so that's why i think it's very important to do this and to make it as easy as ible to make sure there is not discrimination in the workplace. because it is a sad reality that

Amy Klobuchar

4:14:40 to 4:15:00( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: still 88 years after the 19th amendment gave women equal voting power and 45 years after the passage of the equal pay act that it still takes women 16 months to earn what men can earn in 12 months. so i've been listening to some of the arguments made today, and i was picturing, if in fact that

Amy Klobuchar

4:15:01 to 4:15:21( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: supreme court decision stayed in place, whichasically said that you're supposed to sehow figure out you're being discriminated against, says that it doesn't really matter if you knew or not, if it happens, then you've got to sue right away -- i was thinking of how that would work in reality and how you are supposed to find out and how lilly ledbetter was supposed to find out.

Amy Klobuchar

4:15:22 to 4:15:42( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: it would be as if senator menendez and i -- let's say we worked in the same company and we were doing the same job and both doing it well, and he was paid more than i was. how would you know that if you are an employee at a workplace? are you supposed to start snooping through their paychecks? and opening them up and trying

Amy Klobuchar

4:15:43 to 4:16:03( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: to figure out how much he's paid? i don't think normal person would do that. are you supposed to start getting to know e people that work around him to find out how much money he makes or see if he told anyone and start asking around about your fellow employee? this isn't make sense in the real world of a workplace. -- this doesn't make sense in the real world of a workplace.

Amy Klobuchar

4:16:04 to 4:16:26( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: and this certainly is not consistent with 40 years of law in this area. well today we have before us the hutchison amendment, and i appreciate the work of senator hutchison in so many areas -- how the women of the senate work on a bipartisan basis. but i believe in the end this amendment is just wrong. what this amendment basically says is that you're not going to

Amy Klobuchar

4:16:27 to 4:16:47( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: be able to bring any kind of claim of discrimination, even a valid one, without having to go through a bunch of hoops and dot a bunch of i's and dot cross a punch of t's. if you really want to make sure this discrimination doesn't make

Amy Klobuchar

4:16:48 to 4:17:08( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: place, make it a rule, make it a brightline rule, as we do in so many other cases. under the ruche son amendment, our workers are subject to the supreme court decision unless they can prove that they had no reason to suspect that their employer was discriminating against them. and again inl that this is done for good motives in the spirit of some kind of compromis

Amy Klobuchar

4:17:09 to 4:17:29( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: but i try to look at the real world and tnk, how would you be able to prove this? because maybe things the real world. maybe some -- one of your work colleagues, if senator mendez and i were working in the same factory and maybe someone else, maybe you, the presiding officer, also work there had, and maybe one time at a coffee break you said, you know, i think he's making more money

Amy Klobuchar

4:17:30 to 4:17:50( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: than you are. then this just goes away. no one really talks about if it. would that be enough? would you have to show a suspicion that he was making more money? what if he started t buy a new car, a nice, new car. he's driving around in that nice

Amy Klobuchar

4:17:51 to 4:18:12( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: car and people start to think, i wonder if he got a raise? is that a suspicion that he's making more money? what if you just think he's making more money and you tell a person on the phone but you don't really know for sure. when you start thinking this through, you realize why this standard, this reasonable suspicion standard, doesn't

Amy Klobuchar

4:18:13 to 4:18:33( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: appear in our employment statute statutes because it is simply unworkable as a standard, despite the come up with some i understand of a compromise here. it just doesn't make any sefnlts it is based on rumor that suddenly -- and i personally believe, madam president, there have enough rumors around this place without starting to put them into law.

Amy Klobuchar

4:18:34 to 4:18:54( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: rumors start somewhere. then they change. by the time it comes back to you, it's totally different. i would rather not write rumors and suspicions into the law. i prefer a bright-line rule. and as has also been mentioned by some of my colleagues here, we haven't seen this unfair rush of litigation under the existing law.

Amy Klobuchar

4:18:55 to 4:19:15( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: and in fact this -- if you have suspicions, it would force you to try to rush to file your claim. and i think a good argument could be made -- we don't know for sure, but a good argument could be made that it would actually lead to more claims. this idea that it would force a

Amy Klobuchar

4:19:16 to 4:19:37( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: worker -- put the burden on a trying to meet this standard that doesn't appear anywhere else in the law. and it really deprives employers and employees of a clear, bright-line rule of determining the timiness of rules-- --determing the timeliness of rules people prefer bright-line rules.

Amy Klobuchar

4:19:38 to 4:19:58( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: it makes it easier for everyone. i know one of the arguments here was that somehow this would allow some raving employee some, you know, go back and they would simply hide their case so that no one would know about it until they could keep getting back pay. we well, this argument just

Amy Klobuchar

4:19:59 to 4:20:19( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: defies the actual rules here. it says that you can go back for only two years. look what happened in the lilly ledbetter case. look what happened. she went to the injury awarded her a big ount but then it had to be reduced because the law acknowledged this, the argument made is a dirveghts and said you could only go back for two years. the law also has caps on damages for major employees.

Amy Klobuchar

4:20:20 to 4:20:40( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: i thin it's something like 00,000. there's caps. there's look-back rules that get to the argument that was made here. and you can see it right in the ledbetter case, if you don't believe me. the money was reduced because of those rules that are in play. so why suddenly we would put in a standard that we don't have in

Amy Klobuchar

4:20:41 to 4:21:01( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: the law today when in fact we have that two-year back pay rule to protect against exactly the arguments that were being made and we have caps in place. the lilly ledbetter fair pay act, madam president, is the only bill that gives employees the time to consider how they've been treated and try to work out

Amy Klobuchar

4:21:02 to 4:21:22( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: solutions with their employers. that often hassments we encourage that. we like that to happen. you don't want everyone running into court. it fulfills congress's goal of creating incentives for our employers to voluntarily correct any disparities in pay that they find, and it ensures that employers do not benefit from continued discrimination. that's all it does.

Amy Klobuchar

4:21:23 to 4:21:48( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: it's simple. now, let me tell y a little story from the state of minnesota to end here why i care about this so much. and that is that my grandpa was a miner up in northern minnesota and he woshed hard his whole life, never gradued from high school, saved money in a coffee can to send my dad to college. and he worked hard in those

Amy Klobuchar

4:21:49 to 4:22:09( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: mines, and i tumble world up in the mines of northern minnesota. in the town next-door to the mine where we grandpa lived in, and the women there worked in the mine.

Amy Klobuchar

4:22:10 to 4:22:30( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: the women there were discriminated against. a not sure all the details. maybe some of it was pay. but 108 was just discriminatory treatment. and it went on and on and on. and it was an example, if you saw the movie, of how difficult it was for them to get the gumption to stand up and finally file a suit. they liked these guys. theyorked with them.

Amy Klobuchar

4:22:31 to 4:22:52( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: they were their coworkers. they wanted to fit in and they tried so hampletd so eventually they brought a lawsuit but it took time for them to be able in that hard, rough-and-tumble world of those iron ore world to bring those lawsuits. they eventually won, as

Amy Klobuchar

4:22:53 to 4:23:13( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: documented in the movie "north country." well, things changed as a result of that lawsuit at the mines. it wasn't a popular thing they d and it's not even popular right now. but things changed in those mines. and when i states senate, the first endorsement i got was from the united steelworkers and the guy

Amy Klobuchar

4:23:14 to 4:23:34( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: that gave it to me was the guy that was the union steward, the same guy, stan daniels, at that mine at that time that w subject of the lawsuit. the world changes. and i got elected the first woman senator from minnesota the world changes. and that's why this bill is so

Amy Klobuchar

4:23:35 to 4:23:55( Edit History Discussion )

Amy Klobuchar: important to of the workers. a understand we see -- i know moo my state, lots of discriminatory treatment going on, as people realize and understand the law and employers are educated on the law. but we still need that safety valve in place. we still need those protections in place so that workers can get paid a fair pay for what they do.

Personal tools

MetaVid is a non-profit project of UC Santa Cruz and the Sunlight Foundation. Learn more About MetaVid

The C-SPAN logo and other servicemarks that may be found in video content are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Metavid