Cuomo Signs Two Bills Aimed at Curbing Wage Bias
Signing the measures into law, Cuomo praised the World Cup-winning U.S. Women's National Soccer Team, many of whose players sued U.S. soccer officials for allegedly denying them equal pay compared to the men's team.
July 10, 2019 at 10:59 AM
6 minute read
Workers who allege wage discrimination by their employers got a pair of new tools Wednesday after Gov. Andrew Cuomo approved legislation aimed at requiring equal pay, regardless of one's salary history or membership of a protected class in New York.
Cuomo signed the bill in New York City ahead of a parade for members of the U.S. Women's National Soccer Team, players of which are involved in a lawsuit in California against the U.S. Soccer Federation for allegedly denying them equal pay compared to the men's team.
The women's team made headlines last week after winning their fourth Women's World Cup, a global soccer championship, in three decades. The men's team hasn't had the same success, but is allegedly paid more than the female players despite their track record.
“We support the women's legal action. I believe they are right. I believe they should win,” Cuomo said. “But this law will make it clear in the state of New York, there is no option to an employer. You pay the same that you would pay a man you have to pay a woman in the state of New York.”
New York already prohibits different pay based on sex, but the first of two bills signed by Cuomo Wednesday will take that law further.
The legislation will preclude employers from allowing different pay based on a protected class in New York, including age, sexual orientation, gender identity, domestic violence victim status and more. Those groups are already protected against other forms of discrimination under the state Human Rights Law, but compensation was left out until now.
The law also will lower the standard employees have to meet when filing a claim with the state Department of Labor over pay discrimination. Employers were previously only required to provide equal pay for equal work performed under similar conditions.
The new standard requires employers to pay employees the same for “substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite of skill, effort, and responsibility” under similar working conditions. The change is intended to lessen the burden on employees who allege wage discrimination.
Differences in pay will still be allowed for a myriad of unrelated factors, including seniority, merit, geography, the quantity of quality of work, or an employee's education, according to the bill.
That bill was sponsored by Assemblywoman Karen McMahon, D-Erie, and State Sen. Alessandra Biaggi, D-Westchester. Biaggi has been an outspoken proponent of legislation to protect employees from harassment and discrimination since she first took office in January.
“From soccer fields to board rooms, Americans across working sectors are standing up for their right to equal compensation and today New York is answering that call,” Biaggi said. “Every New Yorker deserves equal pay for equal work regardless of race, sexual orientation, disability, or however they choose to identify.”
If an employer is found to have violated any part of the law by the state Department of Labor, they will be subject to a fine of $500 for each violation, which can be recovered by the state either through administrative action or a lawsuit.
The second bill approved by Cuomo Wednesday is designed to prevent employers from asking prospective employees, in any way, about their salary history as a condition of being considered for a job, or even an interview.
Employers will only be allowed to confirm wage or salary history if, when a job offer is made, the prospective worker responds by disclosing what they previously made to negotiate a higher number, according to the bill.
If an employee voluntarily discloses their previous salary, or that number is discovered by a prospective employer, that information can not be used when deciding whether to offer that person the job or determining what rate of pay they should be given. Prospective employers will also be barred from, otherwise, asking a person's previous employer about their salary history.
Prospective employees will be able to sue a prospective employer if they're alleged to have broken any part of the law, according to the bill. The litigation would be allowed to seek compensation for any damages sustained, like if they were asked about salary history and denied an interview or job offer based on that number.
The state Department of Labor will be tasked with receiving complaints of alleged violations of the law, and will also launch a public awareness campaign to tell employers about the change.
The bill was sponsored by Assemblyman Marcos Crespo, D-Bronx, and State Sen. David Carlucci, D-Rockland. Carlucci said the bill is another step forward in the state's efforts to raise the average rate of pay for women in New York to that of men.
“Women should not be making 80 cents or less for every dollar a man is paid for the same work,” Carlucci said. “The first step in closing the gender pay gap is ending the salary history question so low salaries do not follow women throughout their career.”
Neither law takes effect immediately, giving employers time to be informed and change any policies they may have on the books that may violate either statute. The first bill mandating equal pay for protected classes takes effect three months from Wednesday; the bill prohibiting questions on salary history takes effect in six months.
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 AllRetired Judge Susan Cacace Elected Westchester DA in Win for Democrats
In Eric Adams Case and Other Corruption Matters, Prosecutors Seem Bent on Pushing Boundaries of Their Already Awesome Power
5 minute readEric Adams Trial Set for April as Defense Urges Dismissal of Bribery Count
Major Drug Companies Agree to Pay $49.1 Million to 50 States, Territories
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Shareholder Activists Poised to Pounce in 2025. Is Your Board Ready?
- 2The Pennsylvania Superior Court and the Wrong Business
- 3On the Move and After Hours: Cole Schotz; Genova Burns; Sarno da Costa; Scarinci Hollenbeck
- 4IRE Physicians Must Consider All Conditions 'Due to' a Work Injury
- 5Social Media Policy for Judges Provides Guidance in a Changing World
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