Congresswoman Susan Collins recently said that the current laws protecting women from gender discrimination in their salaries are "adequate." Well, I guess that's an appropriate word choice. After all, in 2012 women still earn only 77% of what men earn for equal work. So, I wouldn't call these laws to protect women "excellent." If I were assessing their performance, I wouldn't give these laws an "exceeds expectations." In fact, giving them a "meets expectations" seems appropriately fitting, since my expectations are that greed, patriarchal misogyny, and racism will be played out in the majority our congress' legislative agenda for social issues.
Not a single republican voted for the Paycheck Fairness Act, which sought to require employers to demonstrate that any discrepancy in salary between women and men was not based on gender. It would have also protected employees from employer retaliation if they share salary information with their co-workers.
Some Republicans cited an undue burden on small businesses as their reason for opposing the bill. Well, sure, if you fire your employee because they talked about their paycheck over the water-cooler, and then you're sued for it, that would be a burden. But maybe don't do that. And sure, if you pay women unequal salaries and are then asked to prove your decision wasn't gender-based, that would also be a burden. But maybe don't do that, either.