Opinion ID: 701378
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Title VII and The Equal Pay Act

Text: 8 At the outset, we must determine whether the Supreme Court's decision in McKennon applies to actions brought pursuant to Title VII and the Equal Pay Act. The Supreme Court noted in McKennon that the ADEA, Title VII, and the Equal Pay Act all are part of a wider statutory scheme to protect employees in the workplace nationwide. Id. at ----, 115 S.Ct. at 884. All three statutes share a common purpose: 'the elimination of discrimination in the work place.'  McKennon, --- U.S. at ----, 115 S.Ct. at 884 (referring to Title VII and the ADEA) (quoting Oscar Mayer & Co. v. Evans, 441 U.S. 750, 756, 99 S.Ct. 2066, 2071, 60 L.Ed.2d 609 (1979)); see also Miranda v. B & B Cash Grocery Store, Inc., 975 F.2d 1518, 1527 (11th Cir.1992) (Title VII and the Equal Pay Act exist side by side in an effort to rid the workforce of gender-based discrimination.). Additionally, the ADEA and Title VII share common substantive features, and the ADEA and the Equal Pay Act share common remedial provisions. McKennon, --- U.S. at ----, 115 S.Ct. at 884. 9 Based upon the similarities among the statutes, we conclude that the holding of McKennon is applicable to claims brought under Title VII and the Equal Pay Act. See O'Driscoll v. Hercules Inc., 52 F.3d 294 (10th Cir.1995) (remanding ADEA, Title VII and Fair Labor Standards Act claims to district court for reconsideration in light of McKennon ); Wehr v. Ryan's Family Steak Houses, Inc., 49 F.3d 1150, 1153 (6th Cir.1995) (While McKennon involved an ADEA claim, we are persuaded by its language that it applies equally to a Title VII claim.); Manard v. Fort Howard Corp., 47 F.3d 1067, 1067 (10th Cir.1995) (applying McKennon, without discussion, to Title VII case).