> Well if the facts in the article are correct and there are no other circumstances that would legitimately warrant a reduced salary. I would say Ms Wong
Nowhere in the article did it state that she ever asked (or demanded) a payrise, apart from the single one that she asked about and was let go over.
If 10 people start at the same time on $30k, but 9 of those people ask for (or 'demand' - "i'll quit if you don't give me a payrise") payrises over the next 10 years, and new people being hired after that point ask for more than $30k as their starting salary, why would you expect, being the 10th person who has never asked for a payrise, to be on the same pay as those who have? You could have salaries for the same team, doing the same job, ranging from the "I've been here 10 years and never asked for a payrise" $30k person up to the "was hired yesterday and we really want them and they'd only take the job for $100k" person, and all values in between as per their individual pay negotiations.
A business will pay the smallest salaries it can get away with, so if someone doesn't ask for a payrise, they likely won't get one even tho others have asked and have received them.
They may not be discriminating for any of the following reason (although they might be as well, we don't have enough info and that's why their is a suit!):
4) sex preferences/lifestyle;
It could be down to being discriminated against being a non-assertive, non-self-confident person who is too timid to assert herself to get a wage increase. And that is not a protected class.