Last month, Massachusetts State Representatives Josh S. Cutler and Brandy Fluker Oakley filed a bill entitled “An Act Relative to Salary Range Transparency.” The bill, if passed by the Massachusetts Legislature, would do several things: it would require employers with 15 or more employees to share estimated salary ranges on job postings and advertisements; it would similarly mandate disclosure of pay ranges when offering promotions and transfers to current employees; and it would require providing the pay range of any particular position to an employee that holds such position if requested. The bill would also provide protection to individuals that experience retaliation in relation to the bill’s protections.
The intended purpose of the bill is to narrow the gender and race wage gaps. According to the federal government’s Government Accountability Office, in the United States, Black women earn .63 cents for every dollar men earn, and Latinas earn .58 cents. Overall, women earn about .82 cents for every dollar men earn. The bill would assist applicants and employees in understanding what their work is worth and then negotiating the pay they deserve.
The bill would provide additional protections against discriminatory wage practices, in addition to the state’s long-standing Fair Employment Practices Act, M.G.L. Ch. 151B, and the more recent Equal Pay Act, Ch. 149 s. 105A, which, along with requiring employers to provide equal pay for equal work, also prohibits employers from asking job applicants their salary history or forbidding discussion of compensation. It also would require the Attorney General’s Office to provide education to the public on the bill’s requirements.
Failure to comply with the bill as currently written would allow for fines levied by the AG’s Office for second offenses of between $300 and 600 per violation, and would allow for more severe penalties for subsequent violations. The bill would not allow for a private right of action, meaning an individual employee could not sue for damages caused by a violation.
Massachusetts is following a nationwide trend. Other states, such as Colorado, California, Washington, Rhode Island, and soon New York, have similar protections. Some employers have expressed frustration with the various legislation, pointing out that the small differences in requirements from state to state make it challenging for companies with employees in multiple states to create workplace policies that allow for compliance across the board. Further complications arise when remote work job postings are published that could be performed anywhere in the country; not only do statutory requirements vary, but salary ranges can also vary from state to state, due to the cost of living.
