In the case of Pickett et al. v. Brown et al., 1982, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a dispute concerning gender discrimination in pension plans under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Equal Pay Act (EPA). The plaintiffs were female employees who claimed that their employer's pension plan discriminated against women by requiring them to make larger contributions than men for equal benefits due to their longer average lifespan. The court held that while such differential treatment based on actuarial tables was not inherently discriminatory, it could be considered so if it resulted in lower monthly benefits for women compared to men who had made similar contributions and worked for an equivalent period. However, this particular plan did not violate either Title VII or EPA because both male and female employees received same monthly benefits after retirement regardless of any disparity in contribution amounts during employment tenure.

In the dissenting opinion for Pickett et al. v. Brown et al., Justice Thurgood Marshall, joined by Justice Brennan and Justice Blackmun, argued that the majority's decision failed to adequately protect workers' rights under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA). They contended that a union member should not be required to exhaust internal union remedies before filing suit against their employer for breach of contract if they believe their union has breached its duty of fair representation. The dissenters believed this requirement imposed an unnecessary burden on employees and could potentially delay or deny justice in cases where unions acted unfairly or negligently in representing their members' interests. They also disagreed with the majority's view that allowing immediate lawsuits would undermine labor relations stability, arguing instead it would promote greater accountability among unions.