Search form

NYC Issues Guidance on Upcoming Salary Inquiry Prohibitions

By Jonathan L. Bing, Richard I. Greenberg and Daniel J. Jacobs
  • September 29, 2017

Effective October 31, 2017, New York City employers generally may not inquire about or rely upon a job applicant’s salary history in making employment decisions. The New York City Commission on Human Rights has released an Employer Fact Sheet and a Job Applicant Fact Sheet to assist employers and employees with understanding the law.

(See our article, NYC Enacts New Law Limiting Prospective Employers’ Ability to Obtain and Use Salary History, for details of the law.)

The following are some key highlights from the fact sheet for employers:

  • The law applies to all employers in New York City, regardless of size. Employers with as few as one employee must comply with the law.
  • The law also is broad in regards to protection. That is, most applicants for new employment in New York City will be covered (e.g., full-time, part-time, internship, and independent contractors without employees).
  • However, the law does not apply to job applicants for internal transfer or promotion with their current employer and applicants for positions with public employers for which compensation is set pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement.
  • In addition to prohibiting employers from inquiring about salary history on job applications or through prior employers, the law prohibits employers from searching public records for such information.
  • Furthermore, employers may not rely on any earnings or benefits information uncovered accidentally (e.g., while verifying non-salary information, such as work history, responsibilities, or achievements).
  • Employers are still free to make statements about the anticipated or job applicants’ expected salary, salary range, bonus, and benefits for a position.

If the job applicant makes a voluntary and unprompted disclosure of his or her salary history to the prospective employer, the employer may consider salary history in determining the prospective employee’s salary, benefits, and other compensation, and verify the applicant’s salary history. Further, employers are not prohibited from asking job applicants about objective indicators of work productivity, such as revenue, sales, production reports, profits generated, or books of business.

The Commission will investigate complaints and employers may be required to pay damages or a fine, and/or be subject to mandated training or posting requirements.

Prior to the effective date, New York City employers should review and modify their employment applications, interview protocols, and verification policies to exclude inquiries that relate to a job applicant’s salary history.

Please contact Jackson Lewis with any questions regarding these developments, compliance, or government relations.

©2017 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

September 13, 2019

California Supreme Court Rejects Claim for Unpaid Wages under PAGA

September 13, 2019

Putting an end to employees’ backdoor attempts to recover unpaid wages in Private Attorneys General Act-only actions under California Labor Code Section 558, the California Supreme Court has ruled against allowing such claims. ZB, N.A., et al. v. Superior Court, No. S246711 (Sept. 12, 2019). This is surprising, as the Court provided... Read More

September 13, 2019

California Worker Misclassification Bill Closer to Enactment

September 13, 2019

The California Assembly has passed a bill that would require workers to be classified as employees if the employer exerts control over how the workers perform their tasks or if their work is part of the employer’s regular business. Assembly Bill 5 (AB 5) passed by a vote of 61-16 in the Assembly. Governor Gavin Newsom has stated his... Read More

September 9, 2019

Non-Agricultural Employers May Use Workweek Averaging to Satisfy State Minimum Wage Obligations in Washington

September 9, 2019

The Washington Supreme Court has confirmed that non-agricultural employers may use a workweek averaging methodology to satisfy the Washington Minimum Wage Act. Sampson et al. v. Knight Transportation Inc. et al., No. 96264-2 (Sept. 5, 2019). In other words, non-agricultural employers can satisfy their state minimum wage... Read More