A federal appeals court has reinstated Equal Pay Act and sex discrimination charges against a community college in a case where a male job applicant was permitted to negotiate his salary but a female applicant was not.

Margaret D. Thibodeaux-Woody, who had been working as a part-time, adjunct faculty member for Houston Community College since 1998, applied for one of two open program manager positions at the college in 2008, according to Friday's ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans in Margaret D. Thibodeaux-Woody v. Houston Community College.

She was informed by Joseph Little, who would be her supervisor, that the position paid $41,615 per year and that there could be no negotiations for a higher salary, according the ruling. She accepted the position without any salary negotiations.

About the same time, the college's director of employment services, Don Washington, offered the other program manager position to Alan Corder at the same salary. But when Mr. Corder made a counteroffer for $60,000, Mr. Washington forwarded the request to the proper authorities in the human resources department and offered him $52,000, which Mr. Corder accepted. He was not told at any point he could not negotiate, according to the ruling.

When Ms. Woody eventually learned of the discrepancy in salary, she contacted human resources but was told there was nothing that could be done. She then filed a charge with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

After receiving a right to sue notice, she filed suit against the college in November 2011, charging it with violating the Equal Pay Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and with retaliation, in part because her salary was not adjusted after she complained about it.

The U.S. District Court in Houston dismissed all the charges, accepting the college's defense that the differences in Ms. Woody's and Mr. Corder's salaries were because of their different approaches to salary negotiation, and therefore a “factor other than sex.”

But a three-judge panel of the appeals court reinstated the Equal Pay Act and Title VII charges. “If negotiation is not available to persons of both sexes, it cannot be a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for a pay differential,” said the panel.

It did uphold dismissal of Ms. Wood's retaliation claim, agreeing with the District Court that she had failed to present summary judgment evidence supporting a prima facie case of retaliation.

The case was remanded for further proceedings.

In September, an appeals court upheld dismissal of a lawsuit filed by the EEOC against the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey in which the agency claimed male and female attorneys were paid unequally. The appeals court said the agency had failed to analyze their different job duties.