Search form

Massachusetts Prepares to Toughen Pay Equity Requirements

By Brian E. Lewis
  • July 29, 2016

The Massachusetts legislature has passed a bill to amend the state’s Equal Pay Act that would impose more rigorous equal pay obligations on employers by prohibiting certain conduct. Both house of the legislature (Senate and House of Representatives) passed the bill unanimously in July. The bill now waits for the Governor’s signature.

Under the Equal Pay Act, employers are prohibited from discriminating against employees on the basis of gender in the payment of wages or salary for comparable work. The new law defines “comparable work” as work that is “substantially similar in that it requires substantially similar skill, effort and responsibility and is performed under similar working conditions.” A job title or job description alone, however, does not determine comparability.

The law also would prohibit employers from engaging in the following conduct:

  • Screening job applicants based on wage or salary history, including:
    • requiring an applicant’s prior wage or salary to satisfy the employer’s criteria, or
    • requiring an applicant to disclose prior wage or salary history as part of the application process.
  • Seeking the salary history of an applicant from a current or former employer, unless the prospective employer made an offer of employment to the applicant, and the applicant provided written authorization to the employer to confirm wage or salary history.
  • Prohibiting employees from discussing their compensation with coworkers or colleagues (although the National Labor Relations Act already prohibits such conduct, the proposal creates a private right of action under state law for employees to enforce their rights).

In addition, the law enhances the enforcement scheme of the Equal Pay Act and extends the statute of limitations for claims under the Equal Pay Act from one year to three years. It also states that employees need not file a complaint with the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination or the Attorney General’s Office before filing a private civil action in court. Should an individual prevail in court, the award of damages automatically would triple and include attorneys’ fees.

To promote compliance, the law creates an affirmative defense for employers that have completed a good faith “self-evaluation” of their pay practices within the past three years. Employers may design their own “self-evaluation,” so long as it is reasonable in detail and scope in light of the employer’s size. Alternatively, the law provides that employers may utilize templates, forms, and guidance that will be issued by the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office, the agency charged with administering the statute.

If the Governor signs the bill, the law would become effective on January 1, 2018, which provides employers with a period in which to engage in “self-audits.”

The initiatives in Massachusetts reflect the broader, nationwide emphasis on pay equity. In addition to the California and New York laws, on February 1, 2016, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs issued a proposal to expand EEO-1 reporting obligations to require employers with at least 100 employees to report wage data as part of the EEO-1. (For details, see our article, EEOC Proposes to Collect Pay Data from Employers.)

Given the imminent enactment of this law, as well as the nationwide push on pay equity issues, employers should consider conducting privileged internal audits of their compensation practices.

Jackson Lewis will continue to monitor and report on the proposed legislation and related regulatory endeavors. For assistance, please contact Jackson Lewis. Our Pay Equity Resource Group can assist with conducting privileged proactive pay audits and provide guidance to respond on all aspects of pay equity compliance.

©2016 Jackson Lewis P.C. This material is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor does it create a client-lawyer relationship between Jackson Lewis and any recipient. Recipients should consult with counsel before taking any actions based on the information contained within this material. This material may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Reproduction of this material in whole or in part is prohibited without the express prior written consent of Jackson Lewis P.C., a law firm that built its reputation on providing workplace law representation to management. Founded in 1958, the firm has grown to more than 900 attorneys in major cities nationwide serving clients across a wide range of practices and industries including government relations, healthcare and sports law. More information about Jackson Lewis can be found at www.jacksonlewis.com.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

October 18, 2019

Pay the Piper – California Employers Pressed to Pay Arbitration Fees or Risk Harsh Consequences

October 18, 2019

California employers may face harsh consequences for failing to pay arbitration fees on time under a bill (Senate Bill 707) signed by Governor Gavin Newsom on October 13, 2019. The new law goes into effect on January 1, 2020. Under the new law, if an employer fails to pay fees required for the commencement or continuation of an... Read More

October 15, 2019

New California Law Attacks Mandatory Arbitration Again … But Is It More Bark Than Bite?

October 15, 2019

California has joined a number of states in passing legislation purporting to prohibit mandatory arbitration agreements for sexual harassment and other claims. Such laws have gained popularity in the wake of the #MeToo movement, but are subject to challenge under Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preemption principles. (See our articles... Read More

October 15, 2019

Third-Party Harassment and Discrimination: The Customer Isn’t Always Right

October 15, 2019

As fiscal year 2019 ends for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), it has announced it is pursuing several new discrimination suits, including one alleging a casino failed to protect female staffers from sexual harassment by patrons. Sexual misconduct and harassment have been in the national spotlight more than ever and... Read More