| Assembly Actions - Lowercase Senate Actions - UPPERCASE |
|
|---|---|
| Oct 21, 2015 | signed chap.362 |
| Oct 20, 2015 | delivered to governor |
| Apr 27, 2015 | returned to senate passed assembly ordered to third reading cal.209 substituted for a6075 |
| Jan 12, 2015 | referred to labor delivered to assembly passed senate ordered to third reading cal.1 |
| Jan 07, 2015 | referred to rules |
senate Bill S1
Signed By GovernorSponsored By
Diane J. Savino
(D, IP) 23rd Senate District
Archive: Last Bill Status - Signed by Governor
- Introduced
- In Committee
- On Floor Calendar
- Passed Senate
- Passed Assembly
- Delivered to Governor
- Signed by Governor
Your Voice
Actions
Votes
Co-Sponsors
Betty Little
(R, C, IP) 0 Senate District
Martin J. Golden
(R, C, IP) 0 Senate District
Joseph E. Robach
(R, C, IP) 0 Senate District
Kemp Hannon
(R, C, IP) 0 Senate District
S1 (ACTIVE) - Details
S1 (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo
BILL NUMBER:S1 TITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the labor law, in relation to the prohibition of differential pay because of sex SUMMARY OF BILLS: 1) Pay Equity This bill would amend Labor L § 194, which prohibits a differential in rate of pay because of sex, to replace the current "any other factor other than sex" exception with an exception that requires that the differential in rate of pay he based on a bona fide factor other than sex such as education, training or experience. Such a factor could not be based on a sex-based differential, and must be job-related arid consistent with business necessity. This standard would mirror the current defense afforded to employers in disparate impact cases under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The exception would not apply if the employee demonstrated that an employer uses a "particular employment practice that causes a disparate impact on the basis of sex and that there was an alternative employment practice that would accomplish the same-business purpose and the employer has refused to adopt such a practice". "Business necessity" would be defined as a factor that bears a manifest relationship to the employment in question, the definition enunciated by the Supreme Court in Griggs v. Duke Power. Co., 401 U S. 424 (1971) and subsequent cases
S1 (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf
S T A T E O F N E W Y O R K
________________________________________________________________________
1
2015-2016 Regular Sessions
I N S E N A T E
January 9, 2015
___________
Introduced by Sens. SAVINO, LITTLE, GOLDEN, ROBACH, HANNON -- read twice
and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee
on Rules
AN ACT to amend the labor law, in relation to the prohibition of differ-
ential pay because of sex
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM-
BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Subdivision 1 of section 194 of the labor law, as added by
chapter 548 of the laws of 1966, is amended and three new subdivisions
2, 3 and 4 are added to read as follows:
1. No employee shall be paid a wage at a rate less than the rate at
which an employee of the opposite sex in the same establishment is paid
for equal work on a job the performance of which requires equal skill,
effort and responsibility, and which is performed under similar working
conditions, except where payment is made pursuant to a differential
based on:
a. a seniority system;
b. a merit system;
c. a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of
production; or
d. [any other factor other than sex] A BONA FIDE FACTOR OTHER THAN
SEX, SUCH AS EDUCATION, TRAINING, OR EXPERIENCE. SUCH FACTOR: (I) SHALL
NOT BE BASED UPON OR DERIVED FROM A SEX-BASED DIFFERENTIAL IN COMPEN-
SATION AND (II) SHALL BE JOB-RELATED WITH RESPECT TO THE POSITION IN
QUESTION AND SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH BUSINESS NECESSITY. SUCH EXCEPTION
UNDER THIS PARAGRAPH SHALL NOT APPLY WHEN THE EMPLOYEE DEMONSTRATES (A)
THAT AN EMPLOYER USES A PARTICULAR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICE THAT CAUSES A
DISPARATE IMPACT ON THE BASIS OF SEX, (B) THAT AN ALTERNATIVE EMPLOYMENT
PRACTICE EXISTS THAT WOULD SERVE THE SAME BUSINESS PURPOSE AND NOT
PRODUCE SUCH DIFFERENTIAL, AND (C) THAT THE EMPLOYER HAS REFUSED TO
ADOPT SUCH ALTERNATIVE PRACTICE.
EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
[ ] is old law to be omitted.
LBD07113-01-5
Comments
Open Legislation comments facilitate discussion of New York State legislation. All comments are subject to moderation. Comments deemed off-topic, commercial, campaign-related, self-promotional; or that contain profanity or hate speech; or that link to sites outside of the nysenate.gov domain are not permitted, and will not be published. Comment moderation is generally performed Monday through Friday.
By contributing or voting you agree to the Terms of Participation and verify you are over 13.