Bill to Prohibit Employers From Asking About Past Salary Becomes Law
Sponsors said the new law seeks to close the significant wage gap between women and men and would prohibit employers from requiring job applicants to disclose their past salary, benefits and other compensation in the application process.
July 26, 2019 at 03:22 PM
6 minute read
A bill aimed at strengthening equal pay protections for state workers by prohibiting discrimination based on past salary was signed into law by acting Gov. Sheila Oliver.
Sponsors said the new law, signed on July 25, seeks to close the significant wage gap between women and men and would prohibit employers from requiring job applicants to disclose their past salary, benefits and other compensation in the application process.
The former bill, A-1094, complements the Diane B. Allen Equal Pay Act, which became effective earlier this year, to ensure equal pay to all employees for equal, or “substantially similar,” work.
The EPA amended the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, N.J.S.A. 10:5-12. It broadens the prohibition against pay discrimination because, or on the basis, of an employee's inclusion in any protected class.
The more recent A-1094 legislation was first introduced in January 2018, and passed the labor committees of both houses this year. It passed the full Assembly in March by a 53-24 vote, and the Senate by a 26-9 vote last month.
In Gov. Phil Murphy's first official act after being sworn in to office in January 2018, he signed an executive order combating gender inequality and promoting equal pay for women in New Jersey by banning this discriminatory practice in state government of screening applicants based on their past salaries and benefits.
Under the new law:
- An employer may still consider salary history in determining salary, benefits and other compensation for the applicant, and may verify the applicant's salary history, if an applicant voluntarily, without coercion, provides the employer with that history.
- An applicant's refusal to volunteer compensation information will not be considered in any employment decisions, according to the bill.
- An employer who violates the law's provisions would be liable for a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $1,000 for the first violation, $5,000 for the second, and $10,000 for each subsequent violation.
Punitive damages, a standard remedy for violations under the LAD, would not be available for violations falling under the new law.
“I am proud to sign this bill today for our women, children and families, which will institute this policy as state law, and put an end to this discriminatory workplace practice once and for all,” Oliver said in a statement.
She said the new law is designed to ensure that employees in the state receive salaries that are commensurate with their skills, qualifications and experience.
“The Equal Pay law is another major victory for women, minorities and working families seeking economic security,” said Dena Mottola-Jaborska, associate director of New Jersey Citizen Action, a statewide grassroots organization based in Newark. “Last year's landmark Diane B. Allen Act sent a strong message to New Jersey employers that there would be dire consequences for discriminatory behavior against people of color and women.
“But wage discrimination is a pervasive enough problem that it will require multiple solutions to eliminate it,” Mottola-Jaborska said. “The bill signed today could have an even greater impact as it gives each and every person the ability to escape past wage discrimination and ensures it doesn't follow them throughout their careers. It will allow experienced workers to reset their careers and ensures fairness for those just entering the workforce.”
According labor studies, the wage gap between Latina women and white men in New Jersey is the largest in the nation. Based on research from the National Partnership for Women and Families, wage inequality leads to a combined loss of $32.5 billion in the state every year.
“In an ideal world, your gender would not influence how much you earn at work, but that's not the world we live in,” said Joann Downey, D-Monmouth, a prime sponsor. “Pay equity might be the law of the land in New Jersey, but we need a tool to properly enforce it.
“By banning questions about salary history, we can wipe away a history of bias and implicit discrimination, allowing women to start fresh with the compensation that they truly deserve,” added Downey.
Assemblywoman Pamela Lampitt, D-Camden, also a sponsor, said the new law would help level the playing field.
“Though equal pay was made law in New Jersey earlier this year, this law will take further steps towards leveling what was an unacceptably skewed playing field,” Lampitt said.
Under the NJLAD, an employee is entitled to an award of compensatory damages, punitive damages if the conduct is willful, attorney fees and costs. Under the Diane B. Allen Equal Pay Act, a prevailing employee will be awarded treble damages in addition to the damages available under the NJLAD.
Furthermore, the EPA extends the statute of limitations for a discriminatory pay practice from two years to six years, thus expanding the reach of either the federal EPA or NJLAD.
In addition to prohibiting employers from screening a job applicant based on his or her salary history, the new law also makes it unlawful for an employer to require an applicant's past wages and benefits to satisfy any minimum or maximum criteria.
“This is about equity and fairness,” said bill sponsor Gary Schaer, D-Bergen. “Under the protections imposed by this law, employers will have to make their salary decisions based on what an applicant's worth is to the company, rather than on what he or she made in a previous position.”
Assemblyman Dan Benson, D-Mercer, said a woman working full time, year-round, earns $10,800 less per year than a man, based on median annual earnings.
“This disparity can add up to nearly a half million dollars over a career, and have immediate, as well as lasting, effects,” Benson said.
“We've made great strides to ensure pay equity in New Jersey,” said Paul Moriarty, D-Camden. “With the passage of this law, we are another step closer to securing workers' rights to equal pay for equal work for generations to come.”
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 AllJudge Approves $667K Settlement Against Independence Blue Cross for Unpaid, Pre-Shift Computer Work
4 minute readEssex County Jury Returns $1.8 Million Verdict for Construction Site Fall
3 minute readLowenstein Hires Ex-FTX US General Counsel Ryne Miller to Lead Its Commodities, Derivatives Practice
3 minute readDrugmaker Wins $70.5M After Fed Judge Says Generic Sales Were Blocked
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-61
- 2Decision of the Day: School District's Probe Was a 'Sham'; Title IX Administrator Showed Sex-Based Bias
- 3US Magistrate Judge Embry Kidd Confirmed to 11th Circuit
- 4Shaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
- 5McCormick Consolidates Two Tesla Chancery Cases
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