Until death do you rule, and not a single day after.

In Rizo v. Yovino, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated a ruling interpreting the Equal Pay Act by the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals because the Ninth Circuit improperly counted the vote of Judge Stephen Reinhardt, who died 11 days before the ruling was announced.

Continue Reading From Here (But Not) To Eternity – Supreme Court Vacates Ninth Circuit Equal Pay Decision Issued By Deceased Judge

(Many thanks to George Avraam and Susan MacMillan for sharing this insight with us.)

Despite the longstanding nature of equal pay and pay equity legislation in Canada, on average, women still earn less than men. The Ontario Government and the Federal Government recently took steps aimed at improving women’s equality in the workforce and addressing the gender pay gap in these jurisdictions.

Click  here to download the full report, which includes helpful information on how employers can prepare for Ontario’s upcoming Pay Transparency Act.

As efforts to narrow the gender pay gap intensify across the globe, we launch the first article in our new series. Click the photo below to read the article, which provides an overview of the international picture.

The International Response to the Gender Pay Gap

Stay tuned over the coming months for weekly insights highlighting what multinational employers need to know about the gender pay gap.

On April 9, 2018, the Ninth Circuit issued its decision in Rizo v. Yovino and affirmed that prior salary, alone or in combination with other factors, cannot justify a wage differential between male and female employees. Judge Stephen Reinhardt, who died unexpectedly in late March, authored the  ruling. Known as the “Liberal Lion” of the federal judiciary in California, Judge Reinhardt also overturned bans on same-sex marriage and physician-assisted suicide and declared prison overcrowding unconstitutional.

Continue Reading The “Liberal Lion’s” Last Opinion Says Salary History Can’t Justify Wage Differentials

Baker McKenzie partner Susan Eandi introduces Chris Burkett from Toronto to talk about employment laws in Canada and give an overview of what’s changed in 2017 as well as what we can expect in 2018.

Key Takeaways:

  1. Employers must review their workplace health and safety policies to ensure that anti-harassment polices are up to date and that training is in place, particularly around sexual harassment.
  2. Review termination clauses in employment agreements to ensure compliance with ESA and clarity of language and intent.
  3. Implement the minimum wage and equal pay obligations that are now in force.
  4. Be proactive in managing the use of cannabis in the workplace, particularly where accommodation requests come into play.
  5. Prepare for expanding supply chain + ESG transparency and global corporate human rights obligations. If operating globally, ensure you have a policy and due diligence program in place to mitigate adverse human rights impacts and lower risk of exposure to human rights lawsuits and reputational damage.

Download now on iTunes | Android | Stitcher | TuneIn | Google Play.

On October 12, 2017, California Governor Jerry Brown signed a landmark new law barring California employers — and their agents — from inquiring about applicants’ previous salaries and benefits.

The law goes into effect on Jan. 1, 2018.

Here are 3 steps to take now to prepare:

  1. Remove all salary questions from hiring forms (including job applications, candidate questionnaires and background check forms)
  2. Update interviewing and negotiating policies and procedures
  3. Train recruiting, hiring managers and interviewers on the new law to include instructions regarding the importance of ensuring that candidates are not pressured (even indirectly) to disclose salary history and how to respond to requests for pay scale information

Read more here and reach out to your Baker McKenzie lawyer for more details.

The TLDR on the new UK pay gap reporting regs:

New Requirements

  • From April 2017, employers with at least 250 employees (which may include some contractors) in the UK will need to publish details of their gender pay gap on an annual basis.
  • The gender pay gap reflects the difference between what women are paid, on average, compared to what men are paid, looking across the company as a whole.
  • Employers must publish six different metrics, including the differences in hourly pay and bonuses between men and women and the proportion of women in each pay quartile.
  • The information will be publicly available and is likely to be considered by employees, potential job applicants, the media and in some cases by clients / customers.
  • Employers will have until April 4, 2018 to publish their first set of data, but it must be based on a “snapshot” of pay data as at April 5, 2017.

New Challenges

  • CALCULATION – The rules are complex and not always clear. Being compliant may require employers to make judgment calls on tricky issues such as whether particular payments or employees are in scope. Employers need to find practical solutions but also want to ensure their calculation approach and their pay gap figures are in line with their peers.
  • PRESENTATION – The government is encouraging employers to explain the causes of their gender pay gap and what they are doing about it. Employers will need to consider carefully what to include in this narrative to best manage multiple stakeholders.
  • CLOSING THE GAP – The Regulations shine a light on the challenges for employers seeking to close the gender pay gap. Considering existing diversity and inclusion initiatives, and considering how to achieve further progress, is a good first step.
  • CLAIMS & AUDITS – The new requirements may prompt more equal pay claims, either because employees misinterpret the figures or because they expose areas of potential discrimination. Some employers are therefore taking a more in-depth look at the discrimination and equal pay risks within their business.

Multinationals Take Note!

  • Outside of the US, legislation either mandating or encouraging gender pay gap reporting is on an uptick (see e.g. Germany and Switzerland)
  • Unfortunately, a one-size-fits-all approach is not a solution. The legal requirements, types of data involved and comparator groups all vary by jurisdiction which means you may end up with very favorable numbers in one country, and something substantially different in another.

Contact your Baker McKenzie lawyer to prepare an action plan to address key potential risks and meet your compliance obligations globally.

The days of the “one size fits all” job application may soon be coming to an end. As federal, state, and local governments increasingly heighten employer hiring process requirements, national employers must be diligent to avoid getting tripped up by the varying rules across different locations. This post will discuss three hiring requirements that are increasingly leaving companies exposed to risk.

Continue Reading Does Your Job Application Need a Check-Up? Three Costly Compliance Blunders to Avoid

While no one knows exactly how Donald Trump’s election as President will impact labor and employment laws in the country, it is a safe bet that there will be changes. Because Trump was virtually silent on the campaign trail regarding the specifics of any employment law policies, we are left to speculate on any upcoming changes.  We provide a brief overview of our best educated guesses on what changes could be in store given the election results.  Given Trump’s position on government enforcement and his pro-business stance, there is an expectation of changes to several employment-related laws. Continue Reading What Trump’s Election Means for Employment Laws

Internal pay audits are rarely enjoyable. Depending on the scope, these audits can be complex and require detailed analysis.  However, in the current legal climate, an internal audit can be extremely valuable and greatly reduce, or even eliminate, potential liability for wage and hour claims as well as pay equity claims.  As previously reported on this blog, increased scrutiny into pay equity discrimination, changes in EEO-1 reporting requirements, the Department of Labor’s joint employment efforts, and the updated FLSA exemption rules continue to place companies at greater risk of government audits, fines, and lawsuits.

Many employers may have already reviewed and updated their policies in anticipation of the changes to the “white collar” FLSA exemptions, which go into effect on December 1, 2016. But if your company has not yet done so, or to the extent you have not conducted a more comprehensive internal audit, your company should strongly consider doing so as soon as possible for several reasons. Continue Reading Don’t Wait! Now Is the Time to Conduct an Internal Wage & Hour Audit