As we previously reported, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) now requires employers to disclose equal pay data on its Employer Information Report (EEO-1). The equal pay data, otherwise known as “Component 2” of the EEO-1, has been the subject of ongoing litigation. Most recently, the EEOC requested court approval to extend the deadline for employers to report Component 2 data until September 30, 2019—later than the deadline for other EEO-1 data, which is due May 31, 2019. Several organizations supporting equal pay initiatives had argued that the agency should collect the data by May 31, but the agency told the court that the May 31 deadline was not feasible.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) revised Employer Information Report (EEO-1) is now open via the EEOC’s online portal. As we previously reported, the revised EEO-1 now requires employers to aggregate W-2 wages and hours worked by job category, race, sex, and ethnicity. The new requirements were stayed in 2017, but a federal judge lifted that stay on March 4, 2019.
In a new filing on April 3, 2019, the EEOC requested court approval to extend the deadline for reporting pay data until September 30, 2019—later than the current EEO-1 deadline of May 31, 2019. In making its request, the EEOC noted that it needs additional time “in order to accommodate the significant practical challenges” related to collecting the pay information. The agency support the request with an affidavit from its recently appointed Chief Data Officer, Samuel Christopher Haffer.
Judge Tanya S. Chutkan is expected to rule on the agency’s request in the coming weeks. Subscribe to LaborSphere for updates.
In April, New York governor Andrew Cuomo signed a sweeping budget bill, which included several major amendments to the New York Human Rights Law (NYHRL). One of the most significant aspects of the bill was the mandate that New York employers adopt robust sexual harassment policies as well as provide mandatory anti-sexual harassment training to all employees, not just managers. Specifically, the law requires employers with four (4) or more employees to adopt sexual harassment policies and training consistent with a model policy and model training prepared jointly by the Commissioner of Labor and the New York State Human Rights Division.
That law became effective on October 9, 2018, and New York state has finally released the model materials, an online “Toolkit for Employers”, including a model sexual harassment policy, a model complaint form, and a model interactive training program. All of the state’s model materials are accessible to employers via a website set up by the government.
Delaware is the latest state to mandate that employers provide anti-harassment training to employees. Delaware joins New York, California, Connecticut, and Maine as states that require employers to provide such training. The new law amends the Delaware Discrimination in Employment Act (“DDEA”), and takes effect on January 1, 2019.
While the DDEA already prohibited discrimination based on sex, the recent amendments are devoted to prevention of sexual harassment in the workplace. The new law amends the DDEA to define sexual harassment and provides the same process used for Title VII violations with regard to exhaustion of administrative remedies prior to filing a private lawsuit.
New Jersey’s comprehensive new equal pay law, the Diane B. Allen Equal Pay Act (the “Act”), took effect last month. The law amends the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“NJLAD”) by making it a prohibited employment practice for an employer to compensate an employee who is a member of a “protected class” less than the amount paid to employees who are not members of that protected class for “substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite of skill, effort, and responsibility.” Employers can prove a compensation differential is lawful by showing it is due to a seniority system, merit system, or by satisfying several factors including that the differential is based on legitimate, bona fide factors other than the employee’s membership in a protected class, and that the factors supporting the differential are job-related and based on a legitimate business necessity. The Act extends the NJLAD’s two-year statute of limitations to a six-year statute of limitations for wage discrimination claims.
Massachusetts recently joined a growing list of states amending their equal pay legislation. On July 1, 2018, the Act to Establish Pay Equity, originally passed in 2016, took effect, amending Massachusetts’ existing Equal Pay Act.
The law bans pay differentials on the basis of sex where two people perform comparable work, adopting the more liberal “equal pay for comparable work” standard, as opposed to the federal law’s “equal pay for equal work” standard. Comparable work is defined as work that requires substantially similar skill, effort, and responsibility that is performed under similar working conditions. Like other equal pay laws, employers can plead certain affirmative defenses in response to an employee’s claim of pay discrimination, if the employer can show the pay differential is due to: