Royal

Trends in State Pay Equity Laws

June 22, 2022

 In recent years, pay equity and salary transparency have been prominent issues for legislators and employers. Four years ago, on July 1, 2018, the updated the Massachusetts Equal Pay act took effect. The law was one of the first in the country to ban all employers from asking job applicants how much they made at their last job. Since then, many states have followed suit, passing their own pay equity laws.


 The latest trend in legislation promoting pay equity are disclosure laws that require employers to provide salary ranges for open positions. Connecticut and Rhode Island both passed pay scale disclosure laws in 2021. In Connecticut the law took effect on October 1, 2021, and the Rhode Island law will go into effect on January 1, 2023.


 While the laws may seem similar, there are differences that employers need to be aware of. For example, the laws each have their own definition of the term “wage range” and mandate different timing for when in the hiring process the pay scale disclosure is required. Due to these differences, employers with employees in both Connecticut and Rhode Island should be careful when creating a uniform policy to comply with these laws.


 With similar bills introduced in other states, including Massachusetts, all employers should pay attention to this emerging trend and take stock of their own pay practices.


If you have any questions regarding Pay Equity legislation or related issues, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm, LLP.

Massachusetts’ Superior Court Judge Rules Recording in Workplace Admissible

February 19, 2025
The Massachusetts Superior Court found that Massachusetts’ wiretap statue does not bar employers from using allegedly illegally obtained recordings in civil proceedings. In a recent case, an employee claimed she was forced to resign. Plaintiff’s coworker recorded an argument between the Plaintiff and her supervisor without her consent and shared it with supervisors. The employee then sued for discrimination and retaliation, along with two counts for violation of the wiretap statute. Massachusetts is a two-party consent state but, in this case, it was found that the consent of only one party was needed because nothing in the Wiretap Statute bars the use of an allegedly illegally obtained communication in a civil proceeding. The court found that the provisions about the use of illegally obtained communications in evidence are limited to criminal trials. However, depending on the court, results may differ, as this recording was central to proving and/or disproving the Plaintiff’s claim, and as such, the recording was indispensable as a piece of evidence. Issues with unauthorized recordings have been arising all the time in civil proceedings because recording devices are everywhere, whether they be a cell phone, laptop or other recording device. This ruling is good for employers, as if there is an otherwise inadmissible recording that is made that disproves an employee’s claims, it can be admissible as evidence if meets the same scenario above. However, employers must be careful to use these recordings as they may be inadmissible and may not show the same thing that the employer believes in the court’s eyes. This being said, it is prudent to consult an attorney before utilizing a recording for any employment action or in legal action to avoid unwanted consequences. If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

After the DEI Executive Order

February 14, 2025
What Are the Compliance Requirements for Private Employers?
Share by: