State activity around equal pay and pay transparency continues to accelerate, and many employers are now managing requirements across multiple jurisdictions.
In our April 2026 webinar, Brian Marentette and Thomas Carnahan discussed the evolving state landscape, common compliance pitfalls, and practical ways HR, compensation, and legal can align to reduce risk and improve readiness for both compliance and employee inquiries. Here are some key takeaways for employers seeking to manage the growing labyrinth of state pay transparency and reporting requirements.
Key Takeaway # 1: Understand state pay discrimination laws
Many state equal pay laws follow an Equal Pay Act-style framework. Remember that a claim may be initiated by a single employee, not necessarily driven by group-level differences. Comparisons can involve roles that are not identical but considered “substantially similar work.”
Employers should be prepared to explain pay differences using job-related factors (examples discussed include seniority, merit/performance systems, production/commission metrics, and skill/effort/responsibility), and the explanation typically needs to account for the entire differential—not just part of it. Relying on prior salary as a defense is increasingly restricted and is not a recommended approach.
Key Takeaway #2: Know the difference between pay transparency and pay reporting
As states move towards advancing pay equity through pay transparency and reporting requirements, employers need to develop systems for tracking these emerging requirements. As part of this process, it is important to distinguish pay transparency from pay data reporting, since the two are often conflated.
Key Takeaway # 3: Remote work creates “which law applies?” complexity
Remote roles create a practical implementation challenge for employers, with states taking different positions on when their state pay transparency or reporting requirements apply. Two broad operational approaches can reduce the chance of errors:
Adopt the strictest model across the enterprise (simpler and reduces slip-through risk but may disclose more than required in some places).
Use a core policy plus jurisdiction-specific exceptions, ideally supported by technology and automated checks rather than relying solely on manual review.
Key Takeaway # 4: Ensure disclosures include “reasonable ranges”
State pay transparency requirements vary widely so it’s important for employers to track the specific disclosure requirements of each state law. As a rule of thumb, reported pay ranges must be credible, not artificially broad. Some jurisdictions also require disclosures for other compensation elements (e.g., bonuses, commissions, benefits), and some require additional transparency related to opportunities (an example is Colorado’s internal promotional announcement requirement).
Key Takeaway # 5: Aligning key stakeholders
Compliance is cross-functional, and clearer ownership reduces execution risk:
Key Takeaway # 6: Implement practical controls that scale
Repeatable controls help drive consistent compliance with state pay transparency requirements. Some common examples include:
Penalties in some jurisdictions can be assessed per applicant, not per posting. Treat posting compliance as a high-volume risk area rather than a minor administrative task.
Key Takeaway # 7: Build defensible pay ranges: structure first, then market alignment
Pay transparency laws don’t just require disclosure, they require accurate, defensible disclosure. Employers can’t meet that standard without doing some foundational work first. A defensible approach to pay ranges starts with structure:
Review structures more frequently than older norms. A rolling refresh approach, where 1/3 of all jobs are reviewed each year, is a good rule of thumb as it allows for all jobs to be evaluated against the market at least once every three years. Employers can also consider making pay grades accessible internally to simplify internal transparency and employee understanding.
Key Takeaway # 8: Wage history restrictions and better alternatives
Many states now prohibit employers from asking applicants about their salary history, but that information can still creep into the hiring process in unexpected ways. It often shows up in application forms, recruiter screening questions, background checks, or even third-party vendor templates. Employers should review how compensation-related information is collected across the entire hiring workflow to ensure compliance. Instead of looking backward at what a candidate earned, employers should focus on forward-looking questions like salary expectations or a targeted range discussion.
Key Takeaway # 9: Compression is becoming more visible
Pay transparency can expose compression, and compression is increasingly present across levels, not only hourly roles. Monitoring and documenting starting pay decisions relative to incumbent pay helps reduce downstream employee relations issues and claim risk.
Key Takeaway #10: Monitor your pay practices through regular pay studies
A pay equity study is the foundation for credible pay transparency. By analyzing compensation across roles, levels, and demographics, employers can identify and address unexplained pay differences before ranges are published or discussed with candidates. That makes posted ranges more accurate, strengthens the “good faith” behind them, and reduces the risk of employee distrust or legal scrutiny. In practice, organizations that invest in pay equity analysis are far better positioned to support transparent, consistent, and defensible pay decisions.