Equal Pay Act: an old law with new twists

The Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA) is the oldest federal law prohibiting pay discrimination based on sex. The EPA is narrow in scope, applying only to employees working in the same workplace and preforming jobs that are the same or substantially similar. The law is highly prescriptive on the defenses an employer can use to defeat an EPA claim. Employers will avoid liability only if they prove the pay difference at issue is justified by a seniority system, merit system, incentive system, or any other factor other than sex.

EPA claims typically turn on whether the employee and her comparator are performing substantially similar jobs. Two recent federal court decisions, however, address novel issues arising under this 59-year-old law.

‘Wages’ refers to individual components of pay

In Sempowich v. Tactile Systems Technology, Inc., an employee filed an EPA claim alleging her base pay was less than that of her male colleague performing the same job in the same establishment. The district court dismissed her claim on the basis that her total wages exceeded that of her male comparator.

The U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court’s decision, holding the term “wages” in the EPA refers to each individual component of pay. In doing so, the court relied on the Act’s text, which “unambiguously states” an employer may not discriminate between employees on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees at a rate less than the rate it pays employees of the other sex.