EEOC is moving quickly toward implementing the data collection for Component 2 of the EEO-1 report. The agency submitted one of the required periodic updates to Judge Tanya Chutkan on May 24, 2019. The report details their progress with their outsource vendor, NORC, for Component 2 of the EEO-1 report—since awarding the contract on May 1, 2019. The University of Chicago’s National Opinion Research Center, or NORC, is an independent research institution that delivers reliable data and rigorous analysis according to their website. NORC has been working in the field of social science and public opinion research since 1941.
The EEOC announced that it intends to collect pay data and hours worked (Component 2) for 2017 and 2018. This news settles the question that has been looming for weeks about what year(s) of pay data would be collected.
Pay data refers to the amount paid on an employee’s W2 form in Box 1. Hours worked are the actual hours worked for employees reported in the data. Remember the EEO-1 is filed using a snapshot of the employee population for one pay period between October 1 and December 31 of the EEO-1 year-to-be-filed. Using employees from the snapshot, the pay and hours worked should be filed for the entire year, through December 31 of 2017 and 2018.
On Thursday April 25, 2019, a federal judge ordered that the EEOC begin collecting employee pay data by race, ethnicity, and sex. Also referred to as Component 2 of the EEO-1 report, employers will need to submit their 2018 pay and hours worked data by September 30, 2019. The judge also ordered the agency to collect a second year of pay data, giving it a choice between collecting employers’ 2017 or 2019 pay data. By April 29, the EEOC will post a statement on its website informing employers of the 2018 data submission requirement, and by May 3 it will inform the judge and employers if the 2017 or 2019 pay data will be collected.
All 28 members of the women’s national soccer team have filed a complaint against the USSF (United States Soccer Federation) due to the federation’s refusal to alter their pay practice. The suit was filed on International Women’s Day and was a follow-up to the action filed by Hope Solo last summer. For more information on that lawsuit, please refer to our previous blog here.
The EEOC opened the reporting site on March 18 as planned—without the Part 2 compensation component—and on March 19 the parties that filed the lawsuit challenging the stay of collection of compensation data were in court asking EEOC to explain why the compensation section was not included in the 2018 report.
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court instructed the Ninth Circuit to reconsider its en banc ruling making it harder for businesses to justify paying women less than men. An en banc ruling is a session in which a case is heard before all judges of a court rather than a single judge or panel. The Supreme Court noted that because one of the judges, Stephen Reinhardt, who had passed away by the time the decision was filed, the circuit erred in counting him as a member of the majority. The ruling was handed down per curiam, which is a decision made by a judge or a court in unanimous agreement. The ruling vacated a precedent-shifting decision that revived a California math specialist’s sex discrimination suit. The ruling blocked employers from using women’s salary histories as a basis for paying less
A final rule implementing Executive Order (EO) 13838 was issued this week by the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor. EO 13838 provides exemptions for some federal contracts that were established under EO 13658 “Establishing a Minimum Wage for Contractors.”
According to a final ruling announced by the Department of Labor in September 2017, the hourly minimum wage for employees performing work on or in connection with federal contracts will be raised as of January 1, 2019. For organizations covered by Executive Order 13658, the new rates will be $10.60/hour (from $10.35/hour) and $7.40/hour (from $7.25/hour) for tipped employees.