Publications

California to Enact Strongest Equal Pay Law in Nation

9/9/2015 Articles

On August 31, 2015, the California Legislature overwhelmingly passed SB 358, the “Fair Pay Act,” in an effort to close the wage gap that exists between men and women. According to the legislative findings, in 2014 women in California earned an average of 84 cents to every dollar a man earned, a number that decreases significantly for women of color. Supporters are hailing the bill as the toughest equal pay measure in the nation. Governor Jerry Brown’s office has already indicated that he will sign the bill, which will amend Labor Code § 1197.5.

Equal Pay for “Substantially Similar” Work

Under existing law, men and women are already entitled to equal pay for equal work. The Fair Pay Act will expand and clarify the law to make it easier for employees to bring claims for equal pay violations. First, the Act eases the proof standard by requiring that employees of the opposite sex be given equal pay for “substantially similar” work. This allows for comparisons between employees with different job titles who perform similar tasks. Second, the Act clarifies that such equal pay comparisons may be made across different sections of the same company. As an example, the pay for a female hotel room housekeeper might be compared to a male janitor cleaning the lobby.

SB 358 allows employers to differentiate rates of pay among employees performing “substantially similar” work in only four circumstances. Pay may differ pursuant to: (1) a seniority system, (2) a merit system, (3) a system that measures earnings by quantity or quality of production, or (4) a bona fide factor other than sex. The employer has the burden of demonstrating that the bona fide factor is not sex-based, is job related, and is a business necessity. A bona fide factor cannot be shown if the employee demonstrates that an alternative business practice exists to serve the same purpose without creating a difference in wages. The Act also requires that each factor be applied reasonably and that these factors account for the entire wage differential.

This provision is enforceable in actions brought by the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) or by private plaintiffs. Employers may be subject to damages in the form of the wage differential (including interest) and an additional equal amount in liquidated damages, as well as litigation costs and reasonable attorney’s fees. Claims under the Act are subject to a two-year statute of limitations, but willful violations extend the limitations period to three years.

Disclosure of Wages

The Legislature found that the lack of transparency regarding wages and salary payments contributes to the gender wage gap:  women often do not realize that they are being paid less than their male counterparts. To combat this, the Act also strengthens existing law protecting the rights of employees to discuss their wages with coworkers. The Act makes it illegal to discharge, discriminate, or retaliate against an employee for “disclosing the employee’s own wages, discussing the wages of others, inquiring about another employee’s wages, or aiding or encouraging any other employee to exercise his or her rights” under that section. However, the Act does not create any affirmative obligation for employers to disclose employee wages.

The wage disclosure provision may also be enforced by either the DLSE or in a private civil action, but is limited to a one-year statute of limitations. Remedies available under the wage disclosure provision include reinstatement and reimbursement for lost wages and work benefits.

Record Retention

While employers are already obligated to maintain records of employees’ wages, job classifications, and terms of employment, the Act extends the time that the employer must maintain these records from two years to three years.

Employer Action Items

Although it is not yet known when the Fair Pay Act will go into effect, it is recommended that employers take action now to ensure that they are in compliance with these changes. In particular, employers should audit the pay differentials between male and female employees by the type of work they perform. If a difference exists, employers should ensure that it falls into one of the exceptions listed above. If an exception applies, generate and retain proof of the exception and preserve it for three years. Employers should also make appropriate changes to their policies and provide updated training to managers regarding employees’ ability to discuss and inquire into wages. Finally, employers should consult with records and IT to lengthen the retention time of employee documents to three years.

Firm Highlights

Publication

Court Reinstates CPPA Enforcement Authority and Confirms No Delay Necessary for Enforcement of Future CCPA Regulations

A recent appellate decision has made clear that the regulations promulgated under California’s groundbreaking consumer privacy law, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA)), are ripe...

Read More
Publication

Copyright Law for Influencers and Brands: How Content Creators and Companies Hiring Them Can Navigate Copyright Law for a Successful Partnership

In recent years, the advent of the social media “influencer” has revolutionized advertising. Companies often partner with influencers to market their products, hoping to tap into the influencer’s devoted audience. Likewise, influencers create certain content...

Read More
News

Farella Braun + Martel Earns San Francisco Green Business Recertification

Read More
Publication

New PFAS Federal Drinking Water Standards Create Major Liability and Litigation Risk

The United States Environmental Protection Agency has released a final regulation setting individual drinking water maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for five per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). These MCLs are incredibly stringent due to EPA’s stated concerns...

Read More
News

Burdened by Debt, Savvy SF Office Owners Get Creative

Restructuring, insolvency, and creditors rights partner Gary Kaplan provided expert commentary in The San Francisco Standard article, "Burdened by Debt, Savvy SF Office Owners Get Creative." In the article, Gary explained that in most cases...

Read More
Publication

California Regulation of Charitable Fundraising Platforms: Part I - Definitions

Welcome to  EO Radio Show - Your Nonprofit Legal Resource . In episode 76, I introduce the provisions of California's Charitable Fundraising Platforms law (Gov. Code, § 12599.9). These rules are relevant to all...

Read More
News

JPMorgan Chase Accuses TransUnion of Stealing 'Trade Secrets'

Intellectual property practice chair Eugene Mar provided expert commentary to American Banker for the article "JPMorgan Chase Accuses TransUnion of Stealing 'Trade Secrets'." In the article, he said: "By filing this as a trade...

Read More
News

Farella Awards 2024 Diversity Scholarships to Bay Area Law Students

Farella Braun + Martel’s Diversity, Equity, Inclusion + Belonging Committee is pleased to announce the recipients of our 2024 Diversity Scholarship grants totaling $45,000 to Bay Area first-year law students Marcus Albino, Saamia Haqiq...

Read More
Event

Unplugged: The Renewable Energy Speaker Series - The IRA's Environmental Justice Incentive Programs

Join Farella Braun + Martel and the Environmental Law Institute for the relaunch Unplugged: The Renewable Energy Speaker Series with Farella’s John Ugai and guest speakers Miana Campbell with U.S. Department of Energy, Maria Castillo with...

Read More
Publication

Where Are We Now, Following Maui County, Sackett, and the Latest EPA Guidance?

The last few years have seen significant developments in our understanding of the reach of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA). (Indeed, “reach” here can be interpreted literally and figuratively.) The two issues plaguing...

Read More