Skip to content
S1Senate2015-2016 SessionSame asA6075

Prohibits differential pay because of sex

Sponsor Diane J. SavinoSD-23+15 co-sponsorsAffects Economy
Status
Signed by Governor
Impact
Pending
Outcome
Signed into law

Bill progress

Signed into law

What's happening

Writing a plain-English summary… Track this bill to get it by email.

Why it matters

The daily · weekday mornings

Albany, before your first meeting.

Every bill that moved yesterday, summarized in a sentence and ranked by impact. The Albany Scorecard follows on Sundays.

Free. Unsubscribe in one click. Want alerts on specific bills? Create an account.

Who cares

Headline styles

Sponsors

History

  1. Signed chap.362
  2. Delivered to governor
  3. Returned to senate
  4. Passed assembly
  5. Ordered to third reading cal.209
  6. Substituted for A6075
  7. Referred to labor
  8. Delivered to assembly
  9. Passed senateVote 62–0
  10. Ordered to third reading cal.1
  11. Referred to rules

Companion bill

The same bill in the other chamber. A bill becomes law when one version passes both houses and the governor signs it, so either number can carry it.

A6075Assembly

Prohibits differential pay because of sex

Assembly Floor Calendar · Sponsor Michele Titus

Full text

The text isn't available here yet. Check nysenate.gov.

Sponsor's memo

BILL NUMBER:S1

Title of bill

An act to amend the labor law, in relation to the prohibition of differential pay because of sex

Summary of bills

1) Pay Equity

Read the full memo (664 words)

This bill would amend Labor L § 194, which prohibits a differential in rate of pay because of sex, to replace the current "any other factor other than sex" exception with an exception that requires that the differential in rate of pay he based on a bona fide factor other than sex such as education, training or experience. Such a factor could not be based on a sex-based differential, and must be job-related arid consistent with business necessity. This standard would mirror the current defense afforded to employers in disparate impact cases under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The exception would not apply if the employee demonstrated that an employer uses a "particular employment practice that causes a disparate impact on the basis of sex and that there was an alternative employment practice that would accomplish the same-business purpose and the employer has refused to adopt such a practice". "Business necessity" would be defined as a factor that bears a manifest relationship to the employment in question, the definition enunciated by the Supreme Court in Griggs v. Duke Power. Co., 401 U S. 424 (1971) and subsequent cases Additionally, § 194 would be amended to clarify that a differential in pay may not exist even if the two employees whose rate of pay is being compared work in different physical locations, provided that those locations were in the same geographic region Section 194 would also be amended to forbid employers from prohibiting employees from sharing wage information This protection helps guarantee the individual state right of equal pay, without interfering with current federal provisions regarding collective protected activity aimed at "mutual aid and protection".

This bill would also:

*amend Labor L § 198 to increase the willful violations of § 194 to up to and

*require the Department of Labor and make training available to employers discrimination and harassment in the liquidated damages allowed for 300% of the wages found to be due; the Division of Human Rights to to assist them in preventing workplace.

Existing law

This bill would impact existing protections that are available under the Labor Law.

Statement in support

* Achieving Pay Equity

Wage disparities have a detrimental effect on Society Individuals are put at an economic disadvantage because of characteristics that bear no relationship to their job performance. Such disparities prevent maximum utilization of labor in the state economy. Additionally, policies adopted by employers that discourage or prohibit employees from sharing information about their earnings can contribute to unjust wage disparities going undetected. Despite existing protections under the law, women in New York earn 84 percent of what men earn and jobs traditionally held by women pay significantly less than jobs predominately employing men. In New York, on average, a woman working full time is paid $42,113 per year, while a man working full time is paid $50,388 per year. This creates a wage gap of $8,275 between full-time working men and women in the state.

This bill would amend existing law to ensure that women receive the wages they were always entitled to, as well as provide for increased liquidated damages. Individuals who were paid unequal wages would be entitled to liquidated damages of up to 300% of the amount of unpaid wages Existing exemptions in the law would be tightened so that pay differentials are excused where the employer can show that the differential is truly caused by something other than sex and is related to job performance and consistent with business necessity Employers would also be prohibited from forbidding employees from sharing wage information that would otherwise deny women workers the ability to discover whether their wages are unequal to their male counterparts.

Budget implications

This bill has no budget implications for the State.

Effective date

This bill would take effect 90 days after enactment.

Summaries, headlines and scores are AI-generated from the official bill text. How we score bills. Source: NYS Open Legislation.