California Labor &
Employment Law Blog
Jul. 14 2016

EEOC Issues Revised Equal Pay Data Rule

Topics: New Laws & Legislation

Earlier this year, the EEOC announced a proposed rule to expand employer EEO-1 reporting requirements to include pay range data and hours worked data.  In response to pubilc comments on the proposed rule, the EEOC this week issued a slightly revised proposed rule, which triggers a new 30-day public comment period (open until August 15, 2016).  The revised proposed rule and additional information concerning the rule are available here.

Under the revised proposed rule, covered employers would not have to file their first EEO-1 pay data report until March 31, 2018 (extended from September 30, 2017).  The stated purpose of the new deadline is to allow employers to use W-2 pay information from the previous calendar year.  The new reporting rule will apply to private employers with 100 or more employees.  These employers will be required to report on a revised form EEO-1 the numbers of employees by race, gender, and ethnicity that are paid within each of 12 designated pay bands.  Employers will also be required to provide hours worked data (based on the FLSA definition of “hours worked”).   The EEOC and other federal agencies intend to use the collected information “to assess complaints of discrimination, focus agency investigations, and identify existing pay disparities that may warrant further examination.”

Until the proposed rule is implemented, covered employers still must comply with existing EEO-1 reporting requirements using the current EEO-1 form and filing reports by the normal September 30, 2016 deadline. 

The revised proposed rule is not all that materially different than the original rule, despite comments submitted by the public citing concerns over the use of W-2 pay data and the cost/burden of gathering and reporting hours worked and pay data required by the new rule.  The EEOC rejected the vast majority of these concerns and opted to stick with the same basic requirements proposed in their earlier rule. 

We will keep you posted with further developments. 

Carothers DiSante & Freudenberger LLP © 2019

About CDFWhat We DoContact UsAttorney AdvertisingDisclaimer