In New Connecticut Pay Discrimination Law, Equal Pay For Equal Work Is Now Equal Pay For Comparable Work

Stephen Singer
Hartford Courant

WWR Article Summary (tl;dr) As Stephen Singer reports, “Establishing comparable work as a different standard is an attempt to remedy pay imbalances between men who have benefited from more opportunities for higher-paid skilled jobs and women who face career obstacles based on their gender.”


Pay discrimination that labor advocates say cheats women is targeted in a new Connecticut law that advances equal pay for comparable work rather than the decades-old standard of equal pay for equal work.

Legislation Gov. Ned Lamont signed into law Monday requires employees who claim pay discrimination to demonstrate that their boss pays employees of one gender, specifically women, less for comparable work than for men.

Previous law required a woman to demonstrate she is paid less than a man for equal work.

Establishing comparable work as a different standard is an attempt to remedy pay imbalances between men who have benefited from more opportunities for higher-paid skilled jobs and women who face career obstacles based on their gender.

The provision was a flashpoint between the legislation’s supporters, who included unions and worker advocates, and opponents who represent businesses.

“The change from ‘equal work’ to ‘comparable work’ is significant because often times there are jobs that … require similar work with a similar level of skill, effort and responsibility but not necessarily identical work and for which women ended up underpaid compared to their male peers,” the Connecticut Employment Lawyers Association told lawmakers at a public hearing in February.

The state Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities said replacing the “equal pay for equal work” standard with “comparable work” is a “crucial part of dealing with the economy’s long history of sex-segregated occupations and unequal pay scales for jobs traditionally considered ‘for women.”

Businesses criticized the legislation. Eric Gjede, vice president of government affairs at the Connecticut Business & Industry Association, told lawmakers that a shift to “comparable” work” from “equal” work ignores labor markets that define jobs and determine their compensation.

“This bill appears to dilute, if not prevent, an employer from paying more to employees (who) are exceptionally skilled or who demonstrate more effort than others,” he told lawmakers.

Small businesses in particular would have difficult keeping top talent from being recruited by larger competitors, a practice already cited by small Connecticut manufacturers, Gjede said.

The National Federation of Independent Business, which advocates for small businesses, said “comparable” is broader and more subjective than “equal” and could expose small businesses to lawsuits challenging decisions on how much a job pays.

The law also requires employers to provide job applicants and employees with information about a job’s pay range.

Advocates say the law will improve transparency and help job candidates negotiate higher pay. Labor advocates criticize employers who refuse to provide pay information while asking job applicants about their salary expectations.

“When job applicants have full access to information about a position, they are better able to negotiate salary, increasing women’s earnings and narrowing the wage gap,” the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities said.

Sal Luciano, president of the Connecticut AFL-CIO, a federation of labor unions, told lawmakers in February that some employers use salary history to screen out job applicants. Hiring managers may assume a job applicant whose salary is “too high” would refuse a lower-paying job and that another whose salary is “too low” does not have the skills, knowledge or experience for the job, he said.

“Using salary history to evaluate and compare applicants’ job responsibilities and achievements assumes that prior salaries are an accurate measure of an applicant’s experience and achievements, and not the product of discrimination or gender bias,” Luciano said.

Daniel Schwartz, a lawyer at Shipman and Goodwin, wrote in his Connecticut Employment Law Blog that the law “will no doubt make hiring more complex.”

“Employers will have to consider when to provide salary ranges and in what level of detail, even when it may not know exactly what it wants to do,” he said.

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Most Popular

To Top