Problem
Plaintiff Pam filed an action in Federal District Court located in the State of Columbia alleging that her employer, Defendant MarCorp, violated the Federal Equal Pay Act. To prevail, Pam must show that MarCorp paid different wages to employees of opposite sexes for equal work on jobs the performance of which require equal skill, effort and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions. Pam also alleged a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress.
MarCorp moved for summary judgment regarding Pam's Equal Pay Act claim, alleging that summary judgment should be granted on that claim because Pam cannot prove she performed comparable work but was paid less than her male counterparts. MarCorp submitted Pam's deposition in support of the motion.
In opposition, Pam submitted an affidavit of Wally, a MarCorp plant manager for the last seven years. Wally's affidavit states:
1. As a manager, he is aware of the rates of pay for each employee at MarCorp, as well as their job responsibilities.
2. Pam was paid less than male employees who performed work that required the same training, skill, effort and responsibility as the work done by Pam.
3. The following male employees were paid more than Pam for performing comparable work: Greg, Todd, Dave, Adam, Roger, Dennis and Jim.
MarCorp replied to Pam's opposition by submitting an affidavit from Marcus, the owner of MarCorp. Marcus stated that only the wages of Greg and Jim should be compared to Pam's wages, and that the tasks of the other male employees referenced are not comparable to Pam's work duties.
Explain how the court should rule on MarCorp's motion.