Photo of Robert P. Lewis

Two recent events in the US vividly illustrate the growing centrality of gender pay equity issues. On one side of the ledger, in early April 2018, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in Rizo v. Fresno County Office of Education, held that an employee’s prior salary—either alone or in a combination of factors—cannot be used to justify paying women less than men in comparable jobs. On the other side of the ledger, the US Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, on April 20, 2018, announced that it is upending standards implemented during President Obama’s administration designed to promote gender pay equity among federal contractors. Under this new policy, employers will be able to decide for themselves how their employees should be categorized and analyzed for purposes of fair pay investigations by the government.

These two US events are merely the latest examples of increased activity around the globe with regard to the issue of pay equity.  Click here to read more.

With the current focus on US multinational operations around the world and the pressure to meet globally acceptable and locally effective compliance, companies regularly turn to global employment policies as a tool to manage their local employment-related risks. Often the desire is to house these policies in a single “global” employment handbook. As efficient as it may seem to have a single employment handbook, a truly one-size-fits-all single, global handbook most often is not a realistic option. This paper discusses the potential problem with a single “global” handbook and outlines three approaches to get US multinationals to the same result while fully complying with local laws.

Click here to read the entire article, originally published in Bloomberg BNA.