Can Women Ever Be Paid Less Than Men? US Appeals Court Will Take New Look
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will revisit a pay-equality ruling that federal officials and advocacy groups argued would widen…
August 30, 2017 at 02:25 PM
3 minute read
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will revisit a pay-equality ruling that federal officials and advocacy groups argued would widen and institutionalize practices that allow women to be paid less than men based on past salaries.
The en banc court is set to hear the case in December. A three-judge panel in April said pay discrepancies exclusively based on previous salary are not discriminatory under the Equal Pay Act, which forbids employers from paying women less than men. The court said an employer could base a salary on previous pay if it shows its use was “reasonable and effectuated a business policy.”
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission called for the Ninth Circuit to rehear the case. The agency noted a split among earlier appeals court rulings and said there would be wide and harmful effects in closing the gender pay gap in the United States, where research shows women make 80 cents on the dollar compared to male counterparts.
“If, as the panel holds, employers may base starting pay on what employees earn in their previous jobs, women on average will continue to earn less than men for substantially equal work,” the EEOC argued in court papers. Rather than eliminating an existing gap, such a policy, the agency said, would perpetuate it.
In 2012, Aileen Rizo, who worked for a Fresno County, California, public school, sued her employer after she discovered her male co-workers were making higher salaries despite comparable or equal experience. Rizo complained to human resources, according to court papers, but her lawyers said officials “refused to take any action to rectify the pay disparity.” The Oakland law firm Siegel & Yee represents Rizo.
The county's standard policy for hiring added 5 percent to previous pay and then bumped her up to the minimum for her position at $63,000. Male colleagues with similar experience made as much as $10,000 or more than she earned, according to her complaint.
Fresno's lawyers at the firm McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth told the California trial judge in court papers: “A man in the exact same circumstances as plaintiff would have started at the same initial salary as plaintiff.”
The Equal Pay Act creates exceptions when pay is based on seniority, merit, quantity or quality of work or “any other factor other than sex.”
Erin Mulvaney, based in Washington, covers labor and employment. Contact her at [email protected]. On Twitter: @erinmulvaney
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
© 2025 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 AllTrending Stories
- 1Arguing Class Actions: With Friends Like These...
- 2How Some Elite Law Firms Are Growing Equity Partner Ranks Faster Than Others
- 3Fried Frank Partner Leaves for Paul Hastings to Start Tech Transactions Practice
- 4Stradley Ronon Welcomes Insurance Team From Mintz
- 5Weil Adds Acting Director of SEC Enforcement, Continuing Government Hiring Streak
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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