BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó






           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                        SB 358|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520    Fax: (916)      |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


                                   THIRD READING 


          Bill No:  SB 358
          Author:   Jackson (D), et al.
          Amended:  5/12/15  
          Vote:     21  

           SENATE LABOR & IND. REL. COMMITTEE:  4-0, 4/22/15
           AYES:  Mendoza, Jackson, Leno, Mitchell
           NO VOTE RECORDED:  Stone

           SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE:  5-1, 4/28/15
           AYES:  Jackson, Hertzberg, Leno, Monning, Wieckowski
           NOES:  Anderson
           NO VOTE RECORDED:  Moorlach

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE:  5-0, 5/18/15
           AYES:  Lara, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza
           NO VOTE RECORDED:  Bates, Nielsen

           SUBJECT:   Conditions of employment:  gender wage differential


          SOURCE:    Author


          DIGEST:  This bill revises the California Equal Pay Act to  
          prohibit an employer from paying any of its employees at wage  
          rates less than rates paid to employees of the opposite sex for  
          substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite of skill,  
          effort, and responsibility, and performed under similar working  
          conditions.  This bill also revises the "bona fide factor"  
          exception in existing law to require the employer to prove:  (1)  
          the factor is not based on or derived from a sex-based  
          differential in compensation and is consistent with a business  








                                                                     SB 358  
                                                                    Page  2


          necessity, as specified; such as difference in education,  
          training, or experience that is job related with respect to the  
          position in question; (2) each factor relied upon is applied  
          reasonably; and (3) the factors relied upon account for the  
          entire pay differential.  This bill defines "business necessity"  
          as an overriding legitimate business purpose such that the  
          factor relied upon effectively fulfills the business purpose it  
          is supposed to serve.  This bill also prohibits discrimination  
          or retaliation against an employee who inquires about the wages  
          paid to other employees.


          ANALYSIS:   


          Existing law, under the California Equal Pay Act (Act): 

          1)Prohibits an employer from paying any employee at wage rates  
            less than the rates paid to employees of the opposite sex in  
            the same establishment for equal work on jobs the performance  
            of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and  
            which are performed under similar working conditions, except  
            where the payment is made pursuant to a seniority system, a  
            merit system, a system which measures earnings by quantity or  
            quality of production, or a differential based on any bona  
            fide factor other than sex.  (Labor Code §1197.5(a).)

          2)States that any employer who violates the above section is  
            liable to the amount of the employee's wages and interest that  
            the employee is deprived in addition to liquidated damages,  
            administered and enforced by the Division of Labor Standards  
            Enforcement (DLSE) which may supervise the payment of wages  
            and interest found to be due.  (Labor Code §1197.5)

          3)Requires every employer to maintain records of the wages and  
            wage rates, job classifications, and other terms and  
            conditions of employment of the persons employed by the  
            employer, which must be kept on file for two years.  (Labor  
            Code §1197.5(d).)

          4)Authorizes any employee to file a complaint with the DLSE that  
            the wages paid are less than the wages to which the employee  
            is entitled under the Act, and the DLSE is required to  
            investigate these complaints, as specified.  (Labor Code  







                                                                     SB 358  
                                                                    Page  3


            §1197.5(e).)
          
          5)Authorizes the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) or the  
            DLSE to commence and prosecute, unless otherwise requested by  
            the employee or affected group of employees, a civil action on  
            behalf of the employee and on behalf of a similarly affected  
            group of employees to recover unpaid wages and liquidated  
            damages for violations of the Act, and are entitled to recover  
            costs of suit.  (Labor Code §1197.5(f).)

          6)Provides that any employee receiving less than the wage to  
            which the employee is entitled may recover in a civil action  
            the balance of the wages, including interest thereon, and an  
            equal amount as liquidated damages, together with the costs of  
            the suit and reasonable attorney's fees, notwithstanding any  
            agreement to work for a lesser wage.  (Labor Code §1197.5(g).)

          7)Provides that a civil action to recover wages under the Act  
            may be commenced no later than two years after the cause of  
            action occurs, except that a cause of action arising out of a  
            willful violation may be commenced no later than three years  
            after the cause of action occurs.  (Labor Code §1197.5(h).)

          8)Bars an employer from requiring an employee to refrain from  
            disclosing the amount of his or her wages, requiring an  
            employee to sign a waiver or other document that denies the  
            employee the right to disclose the amount of his or her wages  
            or discharge, or formally disciplining, or otherwise  
            discriminating against an employee who discloses the amount of  
            his or her wages.  (Labor Code §232) 

          This bill:

          1)Prohibits an employer from paying any of its employees at wage  
            rates less than the rates paid to employees of the opposite  
            sex for substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite  
            of skill, effort, and responsibility, and performed under  
            similar working conditions, except where the employer  
            demonstrates:

             a)   The pay differential is based upon one or more of the  
               following factors:

               i)     A seniority system;







                                                                     SB 358  
                                                                    Page  4



               ii)    A merit system;

               iii)   A system that measures earnings by quantity or  
                 quality of production; or

               iv)    A bona fide factor that is not based on or derived  
                 from a sex-based differential in compensation and is  
                 consistent with a business necessity, as defined, such  
                 as a difference in education, training, or experience  
                 that is job related with respect to the position in  
                 question;

             b)   Each factor relied upon is applied reasonably; and

             c)   The one or more factors relied upon account for the  
               entire pay differential.

          2)Extends the employer's record retention requirement from two  
            to three years.

          3)Prohibits an employer from discharging, or in any manner  
            discriminating or retaliating against, any employee by reason  
            of any action taken by the employee to invoke or assist in any  
            manner the enforcement of the Act.

          4)Makes it unlawful for an employer to prohibit an employee from  
            disclosing the employee's own wages, discussing the wages of  
            others, or inquiring about another employee's wages if the  
            purpose of the disclosure, discussion, or inquiry is to invoke  
            or enforce the rights granted by this bill.

          5)Extends the existing enforcement mechanisms, as specified, for  
            wage discrimination under the Act to claims for retaliation,  
            and provides a one-year statute of limitations for retaliation  
            claims.

          6)Authorizes any employee who has been discharged, discriminated  
            or retaliated against, in the terms and conditions of his or  
            her employment because the employee engaged in any conduct  
            delineated in the Act to recover in a civil action  
            reinstatement and reimbursement for lost wages and work  
            benefits, caused by the acts of the employer, including  
            interest thereon, as well as appropriate equitable relief.   







                                                                     SB 358  
                                                                    Page  5


            Also requires a civil action to recover wages for retaliation  
            to be commenced no later than one-year after the cause of  
            action occurs.

          7)Makes various related legislative findings and declarations  
            and makes several technical, non-substantive changes.

          Background
          
          Research on gender pay disparity .  According to the American  
          Association of University Women (AAUW) for full-time year-round  
          work today that number stands at 78% for women compared to their  
          male counterparts.  AAUW also ranked the wage gap for individual  
          states in the U.S., California ranking 5th with a gap of 84%.   
          AAUW also noted that the pay gap is worse for women of color,  
          with Hispanic and African American women making 54% and 64% of  
          white men's earnings respectively. 

          This gap has narrowed due to various factors, including women's  
          progress in education as well as workforce participation.  A  
          study from Francine D. Blau and Lawrence M. Khan, "The Gender  
          Pay Gap: Have Women Gone as Far as They Can?" discuss that while  
          factors such as educational attainment, experience, demographic  
          characteristics, job type, industry, or union status explain  
          about 49% of the wage gap, 41% of the gap is not explained by  
          such factors.  Meaning if women had the same education,  
          experience, demographic characteristics, industrial and  
          occupational distribution, and union coverage as men, the wage  
          ratio would rise to about 91% of men's wages - an 8% unexplained  
          difference that researchers suggest could be influenced by  
          discrimination.  A 2013 Congressional Research Service report  
          "Pay Equity: Legislative and Legal Developments" referenced a  
          study commissioned by the U.S. Department of Labor that used a  
          different data source than Blau and Kahn from 2007 and a  
          slightly different set of personal and human capital  
          characteristic controls.  The study found an unexplained  
          earnings differential between 5% and 7%. 
           
           Legislative efforts for pay equity.  On a federal level, the  
          Equal Pay Act of 1963 prohibits covered employers from paying  
          lower wages to female employees than male employees for "equal  
          work" on jobs requiring "equal skill, effort, and  
          responsibility" and performed under similar working conditions  
          at the same location.  The most recent piece of pay equity  







                                                                     SB 358  
                                                                    Page  6


          legislation signed into law by President Obama was the Lilly  
          Ledbetter Act of 2009 which extends the time period in which an  
          employee can file a claim to recover lost wages due to  
          discrimination.  Other pay equity bills that are under  
          consideration at the federal level include the Paycheck Fairness  
          Act which would provide greater wage transparency as well as the  
          Fair Pay Act which would substitute "equivalent jobs" for the  
          "equal" work standard.  

          California enacted the California Equal Pay Act in 1949 with  
          "equal pay for equal work" language, similar to the federal  
          Equal Pay Act of 1963.  States such as Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho,  
          Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, North Dakota,  
          Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, West Virginia, have  
          state Equal Pay Acts with standards of equal pay for work of a  
          substantially similar or comparable character. 

          FISCAL EFFECT:   Appropriation:    No          Fiscal  
          Com.:YesLocal:   Yes

          According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, the DIR  
          indicates that it will incur costs of $127,000 in 2015-16 and  
          $120,000 ongoing (special funds) to implement the provisions of  
          this bill.


          SUPPORT:   (Verified5/20/15)


          9to5 California, National Association of Working Women
          9to5, National Association of Working Women
          Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment
          American Association of University Women
          American Association of University Women - California
          Bet Tzedek Legal Services
          Business & Professional Women of Nevada County
          California Child Care Resource and Referral Network
          California Employer Law Center
          California Federation of Teachers, AFT, AFL-CIO
          California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO
          California Nurses Association
          California Partnership
          California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation, Inc.
          California School Employees Association, AFL-CIO







                                                                     SB 358  
                                                                    Page  7


          California Women Lawyers
          California Women's Law Center
          California Work and Family Coalition
          Career Ladders Project
          Center for Popular Democracy
          Centro Legal de la Raza
          Child Care Law Center
          Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO, CLC Local 9003
          Communications Workers of America, ALF-CIO, District 9
          Community Action Fund of Planned Parenthood of Orange and San  
           Bernardino Counties
          Consumer Attorneys of California
          Council on American-Islamic Relations, California Chapter
          County of Santa Cruz, Board of Supervisors
          Courage Campaign
          Glendale City Employees Association
          La Raza Centro Legal
          Maintenance Cooperation Trust Fund
          Monterrey County Board of Supervisors
          Mujeres Unidas y Activas
          National Council of Jewish Women-CA
          National Domestic Workers Alliance
          National Partnership for Women & Families
          National Women's Law Center
          Organization of SMUD Employees
          Parent Voices
          Planned Parenthood Action Fund of Santa Barbara, Ventura & San  
            Luis Obispo Counties
          Planned Parenthood Action Fund of the Pacific Southwest
          Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California
          Planned Parenthood Northern California Action Fund
          Raising California Together
          Redlands Area Democratic Club
          Restaurant Opportunities Centers United
          San Bernardino Public Employees Association
          San Diego County Court Employees Association
          San Francisco Unified School District
          San Luis Obispo County Employees Association
          TradesWomen Inc.
          Ultra Violet
          Western Center on Law and Poverty
          Women in Non Traditional Employment Roles
          Women's Foundation of California
          Women's Law Project







                                                                     SB 358  
                                                                    Page  8




          OPPOSITION:   (Verified5/20/15)


          None received 

          ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:  Proponents note that ending the gender  
          wage gap would cut the poverty rate for working single mothers  
          by nearly half, from 28.7% to 15%.  They note that as a group  
          working women in California lose over $33 billion each year,  
          with the problem even worse for women of color. Proponents argue  
          that existing laws have been ineffective in closing the  
          gender-based pay gap, noting that the California Equal Pay Act  
          has been in effect for over 65 years, with the last revision in  
          1985.  Proponents contend that its protections sorely need to be  
          strengthened and updated.  Proponents argue that SB 358 will  
          strengthen California's existing Equal Pay Act by eliminating  
          loopholes that prevent effective enforcement and powering  
          employees to discuss pay without fear of retaliation.   
          Proponents specifically argue that SB 358 will ensure employees  
          performing substantially equivalent work are paid fairly by  
          requiring equal pay for work of a comparable character,  
          eliminating the outdated same establishment requirement, by  
          replacing the any bona fide factor other than sex catch-all  
          defense with more specific affirmative defenses and strengthen  
          protections for workers who inquire about or discuss their wages  
          or those of their coworkers. 


          Prepared by:Deanna Ping / L. & I.R. / (916) 651-1556
          5/20/15 16:50:31


                                   ****  END  ****