The foundation for the court's judgement that the Plaintiff and her two male comparators participated in duties that were equal in the scope of their employment was that contrasting several Equal Pay Act cases, the Court chose not to involve a wide-ranging inquiry of this topic. Nonetheless, it quantified that "the evidence sustains the deduction that Vehar, Crosley, and Leipold performed substantively equivalent duties. All three workers were employed as programmers in Cole's Retail Systems Group and had the same supervisor. All three employees were assigned to the PRO/Pearle Support subgroup and delivered added assistance to the RIS Support subgroup, which all three accomplished with no dissimilarity among tasks or responsibilities. The programmers remained accountable moreover for creating code and authoring development deviations to the system. Vehar, Crosley, and Leipold were also responsible for accomplishing an assortment of tasks, for which they occasionally worked together (Justia.com, 2015). The programmers were asked to complete both programming and management responsibilities on these assignments. For one such project, a Perpetual Inventory Project and RGIS Inventory Project, Vehar undertook a leadership position, managing and WEEK 6 ASSIGNMENT3allocating work to Crosley. Vehar has presented adequate substantiation that she performed tasks considerably equal to that of Crosley and Leipold