With high and continually growing demand for N95 masks, Griswold Manufacturing Inc., a large manufacturing company decides that it needs to keep it operations working 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It has plenty of worker for day and night shifts but needs two managers for the night shift to oversee the operations. It takes out an ad in the local papers, shifts through a pile of resumes and interviews a total of 8 candidates. From those candidates, GMI hires Ellen at $2,000 a month and Clark at $4,000 a month, both as Senior Night Managers.

Jessica and Charlie are both hired on the same day, start on the same day, have the same number of years of experience, similar backgrounds, do the same work, under the same working conditions.

A few weeks later, as they are chatting, heading out after a long night at work, Clark mentions to Ellen that he is surprising his family with a new swimming pool, now that he is making more in this job than his previous job. Ellen is surprised that he can afford a new inground pool on the same salary as hers. She investigates and learns that Clark, indeed, is making twice as she is.

She talks to GMI's HR Manager, Eddie Cousin the morning after her discovery of the discrepancy in pay.Eddie tells her that the company has a practice of paying lateral entrants a salary that was at least as much as they were earning at their old job, plus a 20% raise to attract them to the new job. Ellen argues that the discrepancy in pay violated the Equal Pay Act.Eddie says its practice is an acceptable business reason that is not based solely on sex and therefore it is permissible.

Ellen files a claim stating that the practice is not acceptable business practice and that the discrepancy is based solely on sex because she was already making less in her previous job due to the job market discriminatorily favoring men and, therefore, basing her new income on that old salary continues the discriminatory practice.

Who prevails and why?