Barbara Lavin-Mceleney, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Marist College, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that statistical evidence of a gender-based pay disparity could be used to establish liability in an EPA claim if offered along with a specifical comparator
• holding that plaintiff, who identified a specific male comparator, can also compare herself to a statistical composite of comparable male employees in order to establish EPA liability as well as to calculate damages
• noting that “a Title VII disparate treatment claim requires a showing of discriminatory intent, while an Equal Pay Act claim does not”
• finding that an employee’s rank, years of service, and degrees earned can be used to isolate comparable positions because they accurately capture equality of skill, effort, and responsibility
• noting that a plaintiff “need not demonstrate that her job is identical to a higher paid position, but only must show that the two positions are ‘substantially equal’ in skill, effort, and responsibility.”
• identifying a single male comparator whose salary was known, and otherwise allowing a statistical composite of male faculty members to support the plaintiff's prima facie case

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).