Benefits & Compensation

Congratulations and special thanks to Lisa Brogan (Chair), Editor, and Contributors James Baker, Jordan Faykus, and Jenna Neumann for their contributions to the 2019 Edition of The ABA Business Law Section, Recent Developments In Business and Corporate Litigation; Chapter 20: ERISA.

Covered topics include:

  • US Supreme Court on church plan exemptions;
  • The standard of review

[With special thanks to our summer associate Whitney Chukwurah for her contribution to this post.]

All private employers with 100 or more employees in the US and certain federal contractors with 50 or more employees in the US must report data on race/ethnicity and gender across job categories in their annual EEO-1 filings. As previously reported (HERE), in 2016, under the Obama Administration, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission revised the EEO-1 form to require certain employers to report W-2 wage information and total hours worked (referred to as Component 2 Data) for all employees by race, ethnicity and sex within 12 EEOC created pay bands.

The implementation of the revised EEO-1 form has been subject to litigation; however, covered employers now have until September 30, 2019 to provide EEOC with pay data.


Continue Reading

All employers with 100 or more workers in the US have until September 30 to provide the EEOC with pay data as part of the annual workforce data report known as the EEO-1.

On April 25, US District Judge Tanya Chutkan accepted the EEOC’s proposal (more here) to make employers submit their 2018 pay data this fall. She also ordered the EEOC to collect a second year of pay data, giving it a choice between collecting employers’ 2017 data or making it collect 2019 data down the road. Her ruling is expected to impact more than 60,000 employers.


Continue Reading

Originally published in Benefits Law Journal.

Champagne and a steak dinner have traditionally marked celebrations at the close of a corporate deal. Celebrations these days are being marred by a party pooper—Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) pension plan successor liability.

Increasingly, courts are delivering a “pay up now” notice to the buyer of financially

Last month, we reported that a federal court in Washington D.C. lifted the government’s stay of the revised EEO-1 form that requires companies to submit summary wage data by race/ethnicity and gender. Following the court’s order, uncertainty loomed concerning whether employers would need to include the additional data by the current EEO-1 Report deadline

Today is Equal Pay Day in the US. It marks the date women need to work into 2019 to earn what men were paid in the previous year. (And, in fact, this particular date does not take into account that women of color are often paid less than white women.)

Collecting, sharing, maintaining (and possibly publishing) diversity data (of any type but including gender pay) remains a significant undertaking for employers. And the complexity compounds for multinationals.

While we are still waiting to see if the EEOC will begin collecting aggregate pay data by gender (READ MORE HERE), many countries outside the US already do (e.g. the UK and Australia).

The global trend towards requiring transparency is not slowing. Just recently, France, Spain and soon Ireland have jumped aboard.


Continue Reading

Employers may be required to disclose aggregate pay data in their annual EEO-1 filings as early as May 31, 2019.

On March 4, 2019, a federal court in Washington D.C. lifted the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) stay of the revised EEO-1 form that requires companies to submit summary wage data by race/ethnicity and gender. While we expect there may be further challenges and/or delays to the implementation of the revised EEO-1 form, taking a conservative approach means that companies should plan as though they need to report pay data by the current May 31, 2019 deadline.


Continue Reading

Today is International Women’s Day. The day marks a call to action for accelerating gender parity.

In our global gender pay gap thought leadership series, we’ve highlighted the numerous ways governments around the world are taking actions aimed at closing the gap. In the US, the movement to prohibit the practice of inquiring about an applicant’s salary history continues to gain steam. Cities and states across the country have enacted legislation making it unlawful to inquire about prospective employees’ salary history. Proponents of salary history bans argue that using past compensation in future employment decisions perpetuates existing pay disparities among women and minorities.


Continue Reading

The recent attention to the gender pay gap has exposed the extent to which women are underrepresented in senior and highly paid roles, but there is similar cause for concern in many parts of the globe in relation to underrepresentation of certain ethnic groups. While this issue is more complex in many regards, there is

To help multi-state employers determine the minimum amount they must pay non-exempt employees, our chart below summarizes state and local increases this year. (Unless otherwise indicated, the following increases are effective January 1, 2019.)

This chart is intended to discuss rate changes that affect employers generally, and may not necessarily cover all industry-specific rate changes.


Continue Reading