How Companies Are Grappling With Pay-Data Disclosures, Audits
“The lack of a pay gap is defensible. If you are making an announcement that there is virtually no gap, that can be dangerous,” a Littler Mendelson shareholder said.
October 01, 2018 at 01:22 PM
5 minute read
A spotlight on gender equality in the workplace is putting pressure on companies both to present a positive public image of fair compensation practices and to take steps to minimize the possibility of lawsuits.
Big companies ever more are sharing pay data publicly. But by releasing more information, companies also expose themselves to lawsuits, management-side lawyers said. Transparency is important but the risk of a lawsuit won't go away, Denise Visconti, a Littler Mendelson shareholder in San Diego, said last week.
“The lack of a pay gap is defensible. If you are making an announcement that there is virtually no gap, that can be dangerous,” Visconti said. “Plaintiffs counsel will still look at any gap and unless you can explain it, it could violate the law. These laws require equality, not close or virtually close. Virtually no gap is still an opportunity for plaintiffs counsel. They want no gaps.”
Visconti offered guidance on a recent webinar focusing on compliance with the increasing number of state and local laws confronting pay equality.
Pay equity is expected to remain a hot issue for the labor and employment bar in the coming months. Increasingly, pay audits have become a trend.
Plaintiffs attorney Kelly Dermody, partner and chair of the employment practice group at Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, said in an interview this summer that companies are sometimes insincere about pay audits. “Either they uncover pay differences that they don't fix or they slice the data to minimize or conceal the pattern of underpayment,” she said.
Meanwhile, a lawsuit in Washington challenges the Trump administration's moves to scuttle an Obama-era rule that would have required companies with 100 employees or more to report their pay data, along with a racial and gender breakdown. And there's a petition in the U.S. Supreme Court that confronts whether employers can use salary history to justify paying men and women differently for comparable posts.
In January, Citigroup Inc. announced it would provide gender and ethnicity wage data and “commit to closing the gap.” Other companies, such as GoDaddy and Salesforce.com Inc., have voluntarily released information about their gender pay practices. Intel Corp., Apple Inc., Facebook Inc. and Microsoft disclosed gender pay information only in reaction to shareholder demands through proposals brought by activist investors. Still, other big companies have rejected shareholder proposals asking for detailed reports on the pay gap between men and women.
Several financial services companies have followed Citigroup's approach to disclose gender pay data even after rejecting a shareholder proposal, according to an analysis by Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe.
The companies in the United States disclosing voluntarily usually have a good story to tell and can explain why gaps may exist,” said Orrick partner Mike Delikat, who advised Citigroup on its plan to disclose pay data.
“There is always a concern that after making a public disclosure the analysis will be sought in discovery if there is future litigation,” Delikat said. “The benefit from disclosing good data is the positive impact on recruitment and retention and a competitive advantage as being a company striving to achieve pay equity.”
Visconti said the numbers that reveal any pay gap can be misleading. The difference is not necessarily unlawful and companies should only compare similar job posts. Still, there can be certain problem areas for companies.
“Different types of laws exist on the federal level [that] are designed to reduce or eliminate direct intentional discriminatory actions based on pay or potentially differences with no intent,” Visconti said. “States have new laws on the books that are primarily designed and target those that are unintentional. If you have a pay gap or if you have a differential in pay and that appears to be based on a protected category.”
Visconti and Littler shareholder David Goldstein said the combination of new local and state laws and shareholder activists raising pay equity issues have contributed to class actions and large settlements becoming more common.
Visconti said the #MeToo movement, which put attention on sexual harassment, became a call to action on pay equity front. More states, since last year, are looking at ways to confront fair pay.
“It's not a flash in the pan. It will continue to grow,” she said. “Activists or folks are leading this movement into boardrooms and companies are responding.”
Goldstein and Visconti said they advise companies on updating job descriptions and conducting pay analysis to find weak spots.
“Take a good look at what's happening,” Visconti said. “Evaluate where your risks are. See if you can explain the differential or gaps that you are seeing. Then, what are you going to do about it? If you have some high risk, especially in states with lots of litigation, you could be exposed to potential issues.”
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllEmployers Race to File NLRB Petitions to Gain Upper Hand in Union Organizing
5 minute readTractor Supply Co.'s Stock Takes Hit After Activists Bash Its Embrace of DEI
6 minute readCorporate Boards May Be Underestimating the Talent Challenges Ahead
Trending Stories
- 1Big Law Expected To Follow Milbank's Lead With Associate Year-End Bonuses
- 2Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-58
- 3Sweet James Clinches $17.4M Personal Injury Jury Verdict in California's Kings County
- 4In Lame-Duck Session, US Senate Confirms Illinois Federal Judge on Bipartisan Vote
- 5Gordon Rees Opens 80th Office, ‘Collaboration Hub’ in Palo Alto
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250