next case is gordon versus us seventeen dash eight hundred forty five paid at same rate as their male counterparts in the emergency department that is clear and they cannot come up with a logical reason foreign or other the was because he was a man the employer enormous i yes i want to give this learning this race to this man cause he's a man you don't see that  was due to the executive order installing a pay freeze and so if the denial of opportunity for a pay raise and twenty ten was not due to gender and the government put forward a strong basis for the denial of those pay raises in twenty ten because it was due to a gender neutral a free pass across the board then as i understand your case your case would from disparity in pay and and turns it into a disparity in pay plus and in turn to discriminate nurses and groups of a physician assistants were just dealing with physicians in one department and it's easier to compare those you're not mixing was started this case is when they compared her paychecks and the husbands making the hype about fourteen thousand dollars more here than she was now they've got a daughter how can they explain to their period and then in addition there in iraq a tour is directed no specific erotic stories towards any of the doctors and then in addition when it came to the summary judgment briefing never actually identified and compare and so court and maxwell because they were all hired in two thousand and eight the same salary and that for whatever reason in two thousand and nine dr allawi but not doctors maxwell gorton received and then for whatever reason the women doctors had to wait till two thousand and ten to get in front of a pay pal and then i agree the pay freeze prevented the bump from happening in two thousand and ten but why was it that  i think even with corning glassworks this case is devoid of any historical discrimination occurring between the two plaintiffs and the rest of the doctors in the emergency room and again the doctor that i guess but just between men and women let's just say for sake of argument that's what cornell says i know you feel differently and that's fine what i guess the question here would be under that the ten world yes and what he was hired as part of his hiring he actually moved from houston and so part of his pay was actually built in for moving and travel expenses and so that's another factor of that where he was different than the other two doctors because they came from other hospitals with the little right with that go maybe into the step to where the government has the burden to come up with a rebuttal case for why dr ali ultimately  nation and then the resume requirement was important because the pay penalty area from year to year as an educator magine at a v a large hospital a doctor may not know everyone else expression in different departments that they're reviewing and when it came to the resume requirement evidence presented that he did not know there was a now and again when it came to when it came to that pay for it still was evidence then would you say that there was some judgment was not literally maybe it would not have been appropriate but here we don't have evidence either way and then in addition when it into the resumes i think the trial court really focused on the resumes for some reason but the resume importantly the required requirement was not applied on evenly and it did not therefore have potential for gender discrimination and so and again the reason why is these pay penalties for every act three every single year that the all of the doctors were different and so i mean they just didn't know everybody at the hospital but then again once that pay freeze happens no emergency room doctors received any market pay increases and that's actually it  opinion based on sex so i guess could you explain to me why yeah that is consistent with corning as opposed to putting in order itself gave them the authority to award a raise especially in a case where you're going to take care of some litigation it's going on but they understand it the hospital didn't i think that the agency did is that they hadn't noticed that the pay freeze was coming and they implemented it before it was actually went into effect at least for my clients the resumes i was confused by the claims court decision i couldn't couldn't really follow it up it was you know not don't don't be disrespectful but it's almost like it was constructed on the  resume in front of it when it's trying to determine and pay rates but it's absolutely reasonable for pay panels to make requests for resumes in order to have all that information available to it to make the most informed decision possible that we have a disputed fact over dr gordon she says you turn today and they said they didn't get it so so summary judgment by you would supervisors i think the history of that term around but these doctors were for except maybe a doctor frankly that you mentioned earlier were not supervisors