What's happening
This bill prohibits employers from asking about salary history and expands pay equity protections to all protected classes, not just sex.
Why it matters
Eliminates the use of salary history in hiring decisions. , which directly targets perpetuating wage gaps that can follow workers—especially women, people of color, and other marginalized groups—throughout their careers.
Expands pay equity protections beyond gender to all protected classes. (including, but not limited to, race, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, and more), addressing a wider range of discrimination in compensation practices.
Shifts the legal standard from “equal work” to “substantially similar work”. (considering skill, effort, and responsibility), making it easier for employees to challenge unfair pay disparities that might previously have been overlooked due to narrow job definitions.
Applies these protections to both public and private sector employers and employment agencies. , meaning the law’s reach extends to nearly all workplaces in the state, increasing the likelihood of systemic change in compensation practices.
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
Job applicants
The bill would bar employers and employment agencies from asking about or relying on salary history in hiring and salary offers, while allowing employers to consider information volunteered without prompting.
Private employers and government employers
The bill would restrict salary-history inquiries while permitting discussions about applicants’ expectations for salary, benefits and other compensation.
Employment agencies and recruiters
The bill would expressly cover entities that connect prospective employees with employers under its salary-history restrictions.
Employees in protected classes
The bill would expand pay protections beyond sex to protected class status and replace the equal-work standard with a substantially similar-work standard.
Headline styles
Ban Salary History Questions
Plain English, a few words. Used as the page title.
Sponsors
No co-sponsors yet.
History
- Recommit, enacting clause stricken
- Referred to investigations and government operations
Full text
2 pagesUnderlined is new[Struck] is removedOfficial text on nysenate.gov ↗
STATE OF NEW YORK
5173
2019-2020 Regular Sessions
IN SENATE
April 12, 2019
Introduced by Sen. BIAGGI -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Investigations and Government Operations
AN ACT to amend the executive law, in relation to prohibiting wage or salary history inquiries; and to amend the labor law, in relation to the prohibition of a differential rate of pay on the basis of protected class status
The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows:
Section 1. Subdivision 1 of section 296 of the executive law is amended by adding a new paragraph (h) to read as follows:
(h) (i) For an employer or employment agency in writing or otherwise, to rely on, or inquire about, the salary history information of an applicant for employment as a factor in determining whether to offer employment to an applicant or what salary to offer an applicant. Nothing in this subdivision shall prevent an applicant from voluntarily and without prompting disclosing salary history information to a prospective employer. If an applicant volunteers salary history information, nothing shall prohibit that employer from considering or relying on that information. Nothing in this subdivision shall prohibit an employer, without inquiring about salary history, from engaging in discussion with the applicant about their expectations with respect to salary, benefits, and other compensation.
(ii) For the purposes of this paragraph, "employer" shall include but not be limited to any person, corporation, limited liability company, association, labor organization, or entity employing any individual in any occupation, industry, trade, business or service. For the purposes of this paragraph, the term "employer" shall include the state, any political subdivision thereof, any public authority or any other governmental entity or instrumentality thereof, and any person, corporation, limited liability company, association or entity acting as an employment
EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
[ ] is old law to be omitted.
LBD10298-03-9
S. 5173 2
agent, recruiter, or otherwise connecting prospective employees with employers.
§ 2. The section heading and subdivision 1 of section 194 of the labor law, the section heading as added by chapter 548 of the laws of 1966 and subdivision 1 as amended by chapter 362 of the laws of 2015, are amended to read as follows:
Differential in rate of pay because of [sex] protected class status prohibited. 1. "Protected class" includes the list of categories protected from discrimination pursuant to paragraph (a) of subdivision one of section two hundred ninety-six of the executive law.
1-a. No employee who is a member of a protected class shall be paid a wage at a rate less than the rate at which an employee [of the opposite sex] who is not a member of the protected class in the same establishment is paid for [equal work on a job the performance of which requires equal skill, effort and responsibility, and which is performed under similar working conditions] substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite of skill, effort, and responsibility, and performed under similar working conditions, except where payment is made pursuant to a differential based on:
a. a seniority system;
b. a merit system;
c. a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; or
d. a bona fide factor other than [sex] the protected class status, such as education, training, or experience. Such factor: (i) shall not be based upon [or derived from] a [sex-based] differential in compensation that was originally derived from a protected class status and (ii) shall be job-related with respect to the position in question and shall be consistent with business necessity. Such exception under this paragraph shall not apply when the employee demonstrates (A) that an employer uses a particular employment practice that causes a disparate impact on the basis of [sex] protected class status, (B) that an alternative employment practice exists that would serve the same business purpose and not produce such differential, and (C) that the employer has refused to adopt such alternative practice.
§ 3. This act shall take effect on the one hundred eightieth day after it shall have become a law.
Reflowed for reading: line numbers and page breaks removed. Cite the official text.
Sponsor's memo
Title of bill
An act to amend the executive law, in relation to prohibiting wage or salary history inquiries; and to amend the labor law, in relation to the prohibition of a differential rate of pay on the basis of protected class status
Purpose or general idea of bill
To prohibit salary inquiries in the hiring process and to prohibit differentials in rate of pay for similar work performed because of protected class status
Summary of specific provisions
Section one amends section 296 of the executive law to state that that an employer shall not inquire about the salary history of an applicant as a factor in determining whether to offer employment or what salary to offer an applicant.
Section two amends subdivision 1 of section 194 of the labor law, the section heading as added by chapter 548 of the laws of 1966 and subdivi- sion 1 as amended by chapter 362 of the laws of 2015 to state that a member from a protected class who performs substantially similar work shall not be paid a wage at a rate less than the rate of an employee who is not a member of the protected class.
Section three sets forth the effective date.
Justification
Codifying language into the Human Rights Law to prohibit employers from inquiring about an applicant's salary history broadens and strengthens protections for individuals most susceptible to wage discrimination. The common, but damaging practice of inquiring about one's salary history perpetuates the inequalities disenfranchised groups endure by continuing the trend of pay disparities.
Additionally, extending the prohibition of differential rates in pay to members of a protected class for substantially similar work performed lays the groundwork at the state-level to close the pay gap currently plaguing women, people of color, and individuals with disabilities. Substantially similar work takes into consideration a composite of skill, effort and responsibility, as well as working conditions.
As it stands currently, Latina women make 564, Black women make 664 and Asian women make 80 of every dollar earned by non-Hispanic White men. Further, those with disabilities earn 68% of what those without disabil- ities are earning. Such disparities lead to detrimental long-term effects including lower retirement benefits and, thus, financial insta- bility among certain elderly populations.
Prior legislative history
None.
Fiscal implications
None.
Effective date
This act shall take effect on the one hundred eightieth day after it shall have become a law.
Summaries, headlines and scores are AI-generated from the official bill text. How we score bills. Source: NYS Open Legislation.