It has been over a year since the implementation of New York City's pay transparency law, delineated under Section 8-107(32) of the Administrative Code of the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL). We are now witnessing the initial stages of enforcement by the New York City Commission on Human Rights (NYCCHR or the Commission), shedding light on how the law will be applied. Recent actions by the Commission offer employers based in New York City a much-awaited glimpse into forthcoming enforcement practices, serving as a clear indicator of the Commission's focus on compliance.
Section 8-107(32) mandates that covered employment agencies and employers who advertise a job opening, promotion, or transfer opportunity for a position that can or will be carried out within New York City must include a bona fide salary range for the position in their postings.
An examination of the initial batch of complaints filed by the New York City Commission on Human Rights (NYCCHR), as published by the NYCCHR, offers valuable insights for employers navigating the complexities of compliance with the city's pay transparency law. A notable observation from my analysis of these complaints is the Commission's proactive stance towards ensuring adherence to the law, displaying a readiness to pursue enforcement actions even for instances of partial noncompliance. Notably, the Commission has demonstrated its willingness to initiate complaints based on a single instance of a noncompliant job posting.
It is noteworthy that under the Commission's enforcement framework, first-time violators have the opportunity to avoid civil penalties by promptly submitting evidence of remedy to the Commission within 30 days of receiving notice of an alleged violation. However, such action is considered an acknowledgment of liability, potentially resulting in civil penalties of up to $250,000 for any subsequent violations.
The NYCCHR's official website serves as a repository for recently initiated complaints by the Commission, focusing on alleged discriminatory practices in contravention of the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL). As of January 24, 2024, the webpage displays a total of 33 complaints, with half still pending resolution, and nearly all relating to alleged violations of Section 8-107(32) concerning salary transparency.
Notably absent from the Commission's enforcement approach is a specific targeting of any particular industry. The breadth of companies cited in the complaints demonstrates the inclusive nature of the Commission's scrutiny, ranging from fashion brands and consulting firms to HVAC businesses.
As emphasized earlier, Section 8-107(32) mandates that employers provide a genuine salary range for each job posting. The majority of Commission-initiated complaints stemmed from the absence of any salary range in the job postings. It is crucial to highlight that some cited companies were found to be compliant with the law for the majority of their postings, yet were still issued citations for those that fell short of compliance. For instance, one employer faced scrutiny for two postings lacking salary ranges out of a total of 64 listings as of August 9th, while a separate complaint centered on another employer's single noncompliant posting out of 42 examined.
This comprehensive overview of the Commission's enforcement activities underscores the critical importance for employers to meticulously adhere to the requirements of Section 8-107(32) of the NYCHRL. As the Commission demonstrates its commitment to vigilantly enforce pay transparency regulations, employers are urged to review and amend their job posting practices to ensure full compliance with the law.
In light of these developments, it is advisable for employers to seek legal counsel to navigate the evolving landscape of pay transparency laws in New York City, thereby safeguarding against potential liabilities and penalties.
IN CONCLUSION
The recent enforcement actions by the Commission serve as a clear message to employers in New York City that strict adherence to the mandates of Section 8-107(32) is non-negotiable. The Commission's stance indicates that there will be no leniency even for employers who are mostly compliant with the posting stipulations if any individual posting is found to be inadequate. Moreover, these complaints underscore the Commission's commitment to meticulously scrutinize the provided salary ranges in postings, ensuring they are genuinely offered in good faith.
Comments