X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

A federal appeals court ruled Monday that salary history cannot be used to justify a wage gap between men and women, in a case that employee advocates said highlights a key issue that has institutionalized gender compensation inequities.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which heard the case Rizo v. Fresno County Office of Education en banc last year, found that an employee’s prior salary—either alone or in a combination of factors—cannot be used to justify paying women less than men in comparable jobs.

Related: Analytics tech being used to eliminate pay disparities

Complete your profile to continue reading and get FREE access to BenefitsPRO.com, part of your ALM digital membership.

Your access to unlimited BenefitsPRO.com content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:

  • Critical BenefitsPRO.com information including cutting edge post-reform success strategies, access to educational webcasts and videos, resources from industry leaders, and informative Newsletters.
  • Exclusive discounts on ALM, BenefitsPRO magazine and BenefitsPRO.com events.
  • Access to other award-winning ALM websites including ThinkAdvisor.com and Law.com

Already have an account?

 

BenefitsPRO

Join BenefitsPRO

Don’t miss crucial news and insights you need to navigate the shifting employee benefits industry. Join BenefitsPRO.com now!

  • Unlimited access to BenefitsPRO.com - your roadmap to thriving in a disrupted environment
  • Access to other award-winning ALM websites including ThinkAdvisor.com and Law.com
  • Exclusive discounts on BenefitsPRO.com and ALM events.

Already have an account? Sign In Now
Join BenefitsPRO

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.