Pay Equity: What It Is And Why It’s Important
Posted on September 12, 2018
Pay equity is a method of eliminating gender and race discrimination when establishing and maintaining wages. Still today, many workers are separated into various jobs which are historically underpaid because of the gender and race of those occupying these positions.
Pay equity laws have been in existence for decades, but over the past few years, states and local municipalities have begun to closely examine their laws in an effort to close the gender pay gap. Nearly all states have equal pay laws, but many were enacted some time ago and lack any emphasis on discriminatory pay practices for workers. As a result, states and cities are revising their current practices. California, New York, Maryland and Massachusetts are examples of states that have recently strengthened their laws. But even as momentum picks up at the state and local levels, movement on a federal level lags behind.
Here’s an overview of the changes being made at the state and local level:
- Eliminate salary-history inquiries.
- Offer pay transparency so workers can understand how their wages compare to target ranges.
- Provide specific reasons for pay disparities, e.g. education and tenure.
- California revised its pay equity law, requiring fair pay for men and women who perform “substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite of skill, effort and responsibility.” It was also the first state to take the idea of equal work and expand it to include substantially similar work. And in California, employers must compare employees that are located anywhere in the state, not only the same establishment.
- In New York state, employers must compare workers in the same geographic region, but not an area larger than a county.
What laws govern pay equity?
Numerous laws exist today to protect workers from wage discrimination. Two of the most significant are the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Equal Pay Act of 1963
The Equal Pay Act of 1963 states that men and women must be given equal pay for equal work in the same establishment. According to the EEOC, it is job content, not job titles, that determines if jobs are equal. The Equal Pay Act (EPA) was created as an amendment to the Fair Labor Standards Act, and because the EPA is related to the FLSA’s wage laws, most of the same coverage and exemption rules that apply to the FLSA also apply to the EPA.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits wage discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, religion or national origin. Title VII is broader than the Equal Pay Act (EPA), allowing claims for any type of discrimination, whereas the EPA is limited to unequal pay between men and women for substantially equal work. Additionally, a 1981 Supreme Court ruling established that claims for wage discrimination between men and women that did not quite fit under the EPA could be brought under Title VII. Title VII has “a more relaxed standard of similarity between jobs.” However, unlike the EPA, Title VII requires proof of discriminatory intent.
EEO-1 Wage Reporting
Today, one of the most frequently discussed topics in pay equity policy concerns whether employers should be mandated to provide employee pay data directly to the government. Employers with 100 or more employees have been required to submit information to the EEOC, including the gender, race and ethnic makeup of employees by job category. That data is then used to study trends in compensation for women and minority workforces. In 2016, the EEOC announced that it was amending EEO-1 reporting rules and requiring employers to submit W-2 earnings data and hours worked for each employee, in addition to the previous reporting requirements. Armed with this data, the EEOC would work to enforce gender discrimination laws and investigate any pay discrimination charges.
Scheduled to go in effect in March 2018, the amended EEO-1 rule was halted by the Office of Management and Budget on August 29, 2017. As of August 2018, the rule has not been implemented, but employers should take note of the proposed requirements and take the necessary precautions to ensure they are prepared should it go into effect.
Note: Applicable employers are still required to file the EEO-1 report, but the date has changed. The 2017 report, originally required to be submitted on September 30, 2017, was due on June 1, 2018. While it’s uncertain when the 2018 report is due, it’s critical that you have the right technology to help you efficiently gather and report on the employee data you need. Paycor can help you streamline data collection with unified HR, payroll and time solutions that don’t require duplicate entry or file imports.
In response to the 2016 proposal, Paycor created an EEO-1 Guide to help employers navigate the new reporting requirements. As with any new compliance regulation or update to a current law, we will provide the latest information so you can prepare for what’s required. Subscribe to our Resource Center Digest to receive best practices and insights on compliance along with the latest articles on recruiting, benefits, people management and employee engagement.
More than 30,000 medium-sized and small businesses trust Paycor to help them manage their most valuable asset—their people. Paycor’s personalized support and user-friendly, scalable technology streamlines every aspect of people management, giving our clients the peace of mind to focus on what they know best, their business and their mission.
To speak to our expert team about how we can help you stay ahead of compliance regulations, contact us today.
Subscribe to Our Resource Center Digest
Enter your email below to receive a weekly recap of the latest articles
from Paycor's Resource Center.
Check your inbox
for an email confirming your subscription. Enjoy!