Problem:
Sheila Weathers started as a bank teller, and over time was promoted to various positions. It was peculiar to her that her co-worker, Jake Sentry, was paid a higher salary for doing virtually the same work. It was time to meet with their boss, Gordon Demway, to discuss the matter.
In the meeting, Weathers rattled off her job duties: completing and submitting reports to government agencies; conducting internal audits; interpreting banking regulations; closing the facility and setting the alarms; supervising employees; and representing the bank at external functions.
Demway admitted those duties were on par with Sentry's duties. Sentry worked on the bank's information system, reviewed loans, and also interpreted banking regulations, conducted internal audits, and represented the bank at functions. Demway also knew that he sent them both to the same training throughout their employment and that he had given them high performance ratings across the board.
But he believed there were differences between the two that justified the pay difference. Sentry had a college degree; Weathers did not. Sentry also worked after hours and on weekends and stayed actively involved in the community. What really made a difference to Demway was that competitors had tried to recruit Sentry, but no other banks came knocking on Weathers' door, as far as he knew.
Since Demway wouldn't close the $7,000 gap between her and Sentry, Weathers handed the bank an EPA (equal pay act) lawsuit.
Do you feel Weather's has a case? What would you have recommended Demway to have done in this situation?