As the dust settles from the 2016 election, predictions abound regarding what a Trump presidency will mean for employers. Predicting what policy changes an administration will make is difficult after a typical election year . . . and Donald Trump’s successful campaign was anything but typical. One issue employers may be concerned about is what is going to happen to the new EEO-1 reporting rule that requires employers with 100 or more employees to annually submit detailed pay data and work hours—in addition to race and gender data—for all employees beginning in 2018.
Unfortunately, it’s not clear. President-elect Trump campaigned on a promise to (among other things) relieve businesses of unduly burdensome regulations enacted during President Obama’s Administration. Therefore, the EEO-1 pay data reporting requirements may be one of the rules on the chopping block. Continue reading →
In January 2016, New York became one of many recent states to enact pay equity legislation (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, Vermont) The purpose of the state-driven legislation is to clarify factors of the federal Equal Pay Act (EPA). The EPA requires employers to provide equal pay to men and women in the same establishment for the same work, defined as work requiring equal skill, effort and responsibility and that which is performed under similar working conditions. Then why are these state laws necessary?
The Equal Pay Act was signed on June 10, 1963, and amended the Fair Labor Standards Act, with a purpose of abolishing wage disparities amongst men and women. The EPA prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees at a rate less than the rate paid to employees of the opposite sex for equal work on jobs requiring equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions. For an employee to establish a prima facie case under the EPA, she must show that: