> And not even he claims that he is not receiving equal pay for equal work?
You’re confusing two different things: equal pay and discrimination. These are separate issues with (in California) separate code sections governing them. So, this hypothetical person would bring a discrimination claim, not a pay claim. The relevant elements he has to prove are that he experienced an “adverse employment action” (denial of a promotion is textbook for this), that his gender was a “substantial motivating reason” for the adverse action, and that he was harmed in some way by the loss of the promotion.
The fact that his pay was advanced might be evidence to undercut the causal element (“why no, we would never discriminate against a man - look at his paycheck”). But it’s not conclusive. Suppose there was a documented policy that men cannot qualify for VP roles. Then, pay becomes almost irrelevant - we have discriminatory animus on paper.
Anyway, yes, this is purely hypothetical. You need real facts to breathe life into a case and know if it has legs. Especially when it presents an uncommon application of the law. You need 3 things: facts that tick the right legal boxes; evidence that establishes those facts; and a compelling narrative that presents a real injustice that someone experienced.
> Honest question - has anyone (a person that can be named, not a message board hypothetical) ever won a lawsuit like that?
I can’t think of an example for this specific pattern, but employees do win (or settle favorably) in cases you might not expect. Many companies have implemented diversity policies in ways that actually do break the law, and I expect to see an uptick in claims challenging this.