256 F. Supp. 786 - Wirtz v. Basic Incorporated’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 1981 · most notably Corning Glass Works v. Brennan (1974), 9 Fair Emplpraccas 502 9 Fair Emplpraccas 508 19 Wage & Hour Cas
10 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 206 (Equal Pay Act of 1963)
Relies on Arnold v. Ben Kanowsky, Inc. · Mitchell v. Kentucky Finance Co. · Albert S. Craig v. Far West Engineering Company, Inc., a Corporation, Far West Engineering Company, Inc., a Corporation v. Albert S. Craig
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““No employer having employees subject to any provisions of this section shall discriminate, within any establishment in which such employees are employed, between employees on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees in such establishment at a rate less than the rate at which he pays wages to employees of the opposite sex in such establishment for equal work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions, except where such payment is made pursuant to (i) a seniority system; (ii) a merit system; (iii) a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; or (iv) a differential based on any other factor other than sex: Provided, That an employer who is paying a wage rate differential in violation of this subsection shall not, in order to comply with the provisions of this subsection, reduce the wage rate of any employee.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The discretion vested in the employer to establish disparate wage scales on the basis of a seniority system, a merit system or some differential based on a factor other than sex is not transferred to the courts.” Wirtz v. Basic, Incorporated, supra. 256 F.Supp. at 792 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * Equal does not mean identical, and insubstantial differences in the skill, effort and responsibility requirements of particular jobs should be ignored * * *. The job requirements should be viewed as a whole.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.