Quote from 58 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 201:
"The United States Supreme Court's decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Inc., 550 U.S. 618, 127 S. Ct. 2162, 167 L. Ed. 2d 982, 100 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1025, 89 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) ¶42827 (2007), overturned due to legislative action, in Pub. L. No. 111-2 (Jan. 29, 2009), which narrowly restricted the time period in which employees could challenge and recover for discriminatory compensation decisions, was soon effectively overturned by Congress with the enactment of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (FPA). Under a key FPA provision, codified at 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e-5(e)(3)(A), an unlawful employment practice is deemed to occur when an individual is affected by application of a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice including each time that wages, benefits, or other compensation are paid. One of the many court cases that have examined the meaning and reach of the FPA, Onyiah v. St. Cloud State University, 655 F. Supp. 2d 948, 251 Ed. Law Rep. 298, 58 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 627 (D. Minn. 2009), held that a university professor could not apply the FPA to preserve his untimely filed age discrimination claim arising from the university's alleged refusal to hire him, because the FPA applied only to pay discrimination claims, and the professor had failed to provide the essential nexus between the alleged refusal to hire and his pay discrimination claims. Other cases have dealt with a variety of other issues that have arisen with respect to the construction and application of the FPA as the following annotation illustrates."