• Dean Royer

Equal pay act strengthened

California’s Equal Pay Act strengthened.

California employees now have stronger protections against pay discrimination based on sex. Effective January 1, 2016, California’s equal pay law (Labor Code section 1197.5) was changed in several significant respects.

First, the standard for comparison changes from looking at the pay of women and men “in the same establishment for equal work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility” to “substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite of skill, effort, and responsibility.” While courts had interpreted the old standard of “equal” work to mean substantially equal, the new standard will likely allow for a broader comparison of jobs.

Second, an exception to the rule—a bona fide factor other than sex—has been limited. In order for the exception to apply, the employer must show that the factor is job related with respect to the position and is consistent with a business necessity. Also, this exception will not apply if the employee demonstrates that an alternative business practice that serves the same purpose would not produce a difference in pay.

Third, employers must now maintain pay records for three years instead of only two under the old law.

Fourth, the law now includes an anti-retaliation section. Employers may not retaliate against employees who (1) participate in the enforcement of the law, (2) discuss their pay or the pay of co-workers, or (3) help or encourage co-workers to exercise their rights under the law. Remedies include reinstatement, reimbursement for lost wages and benefits, and interest, but not attorney fees. An employee may file a retaliation claim with the Labor Commissioner or in court. The time to file a court action is one year from when the retaliation occurred.


Recent Posts

See All

September 2020 employment law decisions

Case alleging employer’s confidentiality agreement violates employees’ speech may proceed. September 21, 2020, First District Court of Appeal, John Doe v. Google, Inc.: current and former employees of

August 2020 employment law decisions

Wrongful termination verdict upheld but punitive damages reduced. August 24, 2020, Third District Court of Appeal, Timothy King v. U.S. Bank National Association: A jury found in favor of Mr. King for

June and July 2020 employment law decisions

Receipt of government funds conditioned on compliance with the law does not make a private employer a state actor for purposes of constitutional claims. July 20, 2020, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals,

©2020 by Law Office of Dean Royer.