punitive damages,’’ before ‘‘and the agree-
ment’’; and 
(B) by inserting before the period the fol-
lowing: ‘‘, or such compensatory or punitive 
damages, as appropriate’’; 
(2) in the second sentence, by inserting before 
the period the following: ‘‘and, in the case of a viola-
tion of section 6(d), additional compensatory or pu-
nitive damages’’; 
(3) in the third sentence, by striking ‘‘the first 
sentence’’ and inserting ‘‘the first or second sen-
tence’’; and 
(4) in the last sentence—
(A) by striking ‘‘commenced in the case’’ 
and inserting ‘‘commenced—
‘‘(1) in the case’’; 
(B) by striking the period and inserting ‘‘; 
or’’; and 
(C) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(2) in the case of a class action brought to en-
force section 6(d), on the date on which the indi-
vidual becomes a party plaintiff to the class action.’’. 
SEC. 604. TRAINING. 
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 
and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs,
subject to the availability of funds appropriated under sec-
tion 609, shall provide training to Commission employees 
and affected individuals and entities on matters involving 
discrimination in the payment of wages. 
SEC. 605. RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND OUTREACH. 
The Secretary of Labor shall conduct studies and 
provide information to employers, labor organizations, and 
the general public concerning the means available to elimi-
nate pay disparities between men and women, including—
(1) conducting and promoting research to de-
velop the means to correct expeditiously the condi-
tions leading to the pay disparities; 
(2) publishing and otherwise making available 
to employers, labor organizations, professional asso-
ciations, educational institutions, the media, and the 
general public the findings resulting from studies 
and other materials, relating to eliminating the pay 
disparities; 
(3) sponsoring and assisting State and commu-
nity informational and educational programs; 
(4) providing information to employers, labor 
organizations, professional associations, and other 
interested persons on the means of eliminating the 
pay disparities;
(5) recognizing and promoting the achievements 
of employers, labor organizations, and professional 
associations that have worked to eliminate the pay 
disparities; and 
(6) convening a national summit to discuss, and 
consider approaches for rectifying, the pay dispari-
ties. 
SEC. 606. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND EMPLOYER REC-
OGNITION PROGRAM. 
(a) GUIDELINES.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Labor shall 
develop guidelines to enable employers to evaluate 
job categories based on objective criteria such as 
educational requirements, skill requirements, inde-
pendence, working conditions, and responsibility, in-
cluding decisionmaking responsibility and de facto 
supervisory responsibility. 
(2) USE.—The guidelines developed under 
paragraph (1) shall be designed to enable employers 
voluntarily to compare wages paid for different jobs 
to determine if the pay scales involved adequately 
and fairly reflect the educational requirements, skill 
requirements, independence, working conditions, and 
responsibility for each such job with the goal of
eliminating unfair pay disparities between occupa-
tions traditionally dominated by men or women. 
(3) PUBLICATION.—The guidelines shall be de-
veloped under paragraph (1) and published in the 
Federal Register not later than 180 days after the 
date of enactment of this title. 
(b) EMPLOYER RECOGNITION.—
(1) PURPOSE.—It is the purpose of this sub-
section to emphasize the importance of, encourage 
the improvement of, and recognize the excellence of 
employer efforts to pay wages to women that reflect 
the real value of the contributions of such women to 
the workplace. 
(2) IN GENERAL.—To carry out the purpose of 
this subsection, the Secretary of Labor shall estab-
lish a program under which the Secretary shall pro-
vide for the recognition of employers who, pursuant 
to a voluntary job evaluation conducted by the em-
ployer, adjust their wage scales (such adjustments 
shall not include the lowering of wages paid to men) 
using the guidelines developed under subsection (a) 
to ensure that women are paid fairly in comparison 
to men. 
(3) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—The Secretary of 
Labor may provide technical assistance to assist an
employer in carrying out an evaluation under para-
graph (2). 
(c) REGULATIONS.—The Secretary of Labor shall 
promulgate such rules and regulations as may be nec-
essary to carry out this section. 
SEC. 607. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE NATIONAL AWARD FOR 
PAY EQUITY IN THE WORKPLACE. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—There is established the Secretary 
of Labor’s National Award for Pay Equity in the Work-
place, which shall be evidenced by a medal bearing the 
inscription ‘‘Secretary of Labor’s National Award for Pay 
Equity in the Workplace’’. The medal shall be of such de-
sign and materials, and bear such additional inscriptions, 
as the Secretary of Labor may prescribe. 
(b) CRITERIA FOR QUALIFICATION.—To qualify to 
receive an award under this section a business shall—
(1) submit a written application to the Sec-
retary of Labor, at such time, in such manner, and 
containing such information as the Secretary may 
require, including at a minimum information that 
demonstrates that the business has made substantial 
effort to eliminate pay disparities between men and 
women, and deserves special recognition as a con-
sequence; and
(2) meet such additional requirements and 
specifications as the Secretary of Labor determines 
to be appropriate. 
(c) MAKING AND PRESENTATION OF AWARD.—
(1) AWARD.—After receiving recommendations 
from the Secretary of Labor, the President or the 
designated representative of the President shall an-
nually present the award described in subsection (a) 
to businesses that meet the qualifications described 
in subsection (b). 
(2) PRESENTATION.—The President or the des-
ignated representative of the President shall present 
the award under this section with such ceremonies 
as the President or the designated representative of 
the President may determine to be appropriate. 
(d) BUSINESS.—In this section, the term ‘‘business’’ 
includes—
(1)(A) a corporation, including a nonprofit cor-
poration; 
(B) a partnership; 
(C) a professional association; 
(D) a labor organization; and 
(E) a business entity similar to an entity de-
scribed in any of subparagraphs (A) through (D);
(2) an entity carrying out an education referral 
program, a training program, such as an apprentice-
ship or management training program, or a similar 
program; and 
(3) an entity carrying out a joint program, 
formed by a combination of any entities described in 
paragraph (1) or (2). 
SEC. 608. COLLECTION OF PAY INFORMATION BY THE 
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COM-
MISSION. 
Section 709 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 
U.S.C. 2000e–8) is amended by adding at the end the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(f)(1) Not later than 18 months after the date of 
enactment of this subsection, the Commission shall—
‘‘(A) complete a survey of the data that is cur-
rently available to the Federal Government relating 
to employee pay information for use in the enforce-
ment of Federal laws prohibiting pay discrimination 
and, in consultation with other relevant Federal 
agencies, identify additional data collections that will 
enhance the enforcement of such laws; and 
‘‘(B) based on the results of the survey and 
consultations under subparagraph (A), issue regula-
tions to provide for the collection of pay information
data from employers as described by the sex, race, 
and national origin of employees. 
‘‘(2) In implementing paragraph (1), the Commission 
shall have as its primary consideration the most effective 
and efficient means for enhancing the enforcement of Fed-
eral laws prohibiting pay discrimination. For this purpose, 
the Commission shall consider factors including the impo-
sition of burdens on employers, the frequency of required 
reports (including which employers should be required to 
prepare reports), appropriate protections for maintaining 
data confidentiality, and the most effective format for the 
data collection reports.’’. 
SEC. 609. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 
There are authorized to be appropriated such sums 
as may be necessary to carry out this title. 
TITLE VII—PROTECTIONS FOR 
WORKERS 
Subtitle A—Protection for 
Undocumented Workers 
SEC. 701. FINDINGS. 
Congress finds the following: 
(1) The National Labor Relations Act (29 
U.S.C. 151 et seq.) (in this subtitle referred to as 
the ‘‘NLRA’’), enacted in 1935, guarantees the right 
of employees to organize and to bargain collectively
with their employers. The NLRA implements the na-
tional labor policy of assuring free choice and en-
couraging collective bargaining as a means of main-
taining industrial peace. The National Labor Rela-
tions Board (in this subtitle referred to as the 
‘‘NLRB’’) was created by Congress to enforce the 
provisions of the NLRA. 
(2) Under section 8 of the NLRA, employers 
are prohibited from discriminating against employ-
ees ‘‘in regard to hire or tenure of employment or 
any term or condition of employment to encourage 
or discourage membership in any labor organiza-
tion’’. (29 U.S.C. 158(a)(3)). Employers who violate 
these provisions are subject to a variety of sanctions, 
including reinstatement of workers found to be ille-
gally discharged because of their union support or 
activity and provision of backpay to those employees. 
Such sanctions serve to remedy and deter illegal ac-
tions by employers. 
(3) In Hoffman Plastic Compounds Inc. v. 
NLRB, 535 U.S. 137 (2002), the Supreme Court 
held by a 5 to 4 vote that Federal immigration pol-
icy, as articulated in the Immigration Reform and 
Control Act of 1986, prevented the NLRB from 
awarding backpay to an undocumented immigrant
who was discharged in violation of the NLRA be-
cause of his support for union representation at his 
workplace. 
(4) The decision in Hoffman has an impact on 
all employees, regardless of immigration or citizen-
ship status, who try to improve their working condi-
tions. In the wake of Hoffman Plastics, employers 
may be more likely to report to the Department of 
Homeland Security minority workers, regardless of 
their immigration or citizenship status, who pursue 
claims under the NLRA against their employers. 
Fear that employers may retaliate against employees 
that exercise their rights under the NLRA has a 
chilling effect on all employees who exercise their 
labor rights. 
(5) The NLRA is not the only Federal employ-
ment statute that provides for a backpay award as 
a remedy for an unlawful discharge. For example, 
courts routinely award backpay to employees who 
are found to have been discharged in violation of 
title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 
2000e et seq.) or the Fair Labor Standards Act of 
1938 (29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) (in retaliation for com-
plaining about a failure to comply with the minimum 
wage). In the wake of the Hoffman decision, defend-
ant employers will now argue that backpay awards 
to unlawfully discharged undocumented workers are 
barred under Federal employment statutes and even 
under State employment statutes. 
(6) Because the Hoffman decision prevents the 
imposition of sanctions on employers who discrimi-
nate against undocumented immigrant workers, em-
ployers are encouraged to employ such workers for 
low-paying and dangerous jobs because they have no 
legal redress for violations of the law. This creates 
an economic incentive for employers to hire and ex-
ploit undocumented workers, which in turn tends to 
undermine the living standards and working condi-
tions of all Americans, citizens and noncitizens alike. 
(7) The Hoffman decision disadvantages many 
employers as well. Employers who are forced to com-
pete with firms that hire and exploit undocumented 
immigrant workers are saddled with an economic 
disadvantage in the labor marketplace. The unin-
tended creation of an economic inducement for em-
ployers to exploit undocumented immigrant workers 
gives those employers an unfair competitive advan-
tage over employers that treat workers lawfully and 
fairly.
(8) The Court’s decision in Hoffman makes 
clear that ‘‘any ‘perceived deficiency in the NLRA’s 
existing remedial arsenal’ must be ‘addressed by 
congressional action[.]’ ’’ Hoffman Plastic Com-
pounds Inc. v. NLRB, 535 U.S. 137, 152 (2002) 
(quoting Sure-Tan, Inc. v. NLRB, 467 U.S. 883, 
904 (1984)). In emphasizing the importance of back 
pay awards, Justice Breyer noted that such awards 
against employers ‘‘help[] to deter unlawful activity 
that both labor laws and immigration laws seek to 
prevent’’. Hoffman Plastic Compounds Inc. v. 
NLRB, 535 U.S. 137, 152 (2002). Because back 
pay awards are designed both to remedy the individ-
ual’s private right to be free from discrimination as 
well as to enforce the important public policy against 
discriminatory employment practices, Congress must 
take the following corrective action. 
SEC. 702. CONTINUED APPLICATION OF BACKPAY REM-
EDIES. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 274A(h) of the Immigra-
tion and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a(h)) is amended 
by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(4) BACKPAY REMEDIES.—Backpay or other 
monetary relief for unlawful employment practices
shall not be denied to a present or former employee 
as a result of the employer’s or the employee’s—
‘‘(A) failure to comply with the require-
ments of this section; or 
‘‘(B) violation of a provision of Federal law 
related to the employment verification system 
described in subsection (b) in establishing or 
maintaining the employment relationship.’’. 
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 
subsection (a) shall apply to any failure to comply or any 
violation that occurs prior to, on, or after the date of en-
actment of this title. 
Subtitle B—Fair Labor Standards 
Act Amendments 
SEC. 711. SHORT TITLE. 
This subtitle may be cited as the ‘‘Workers’ Minimum 
Wage and Overtime Rights Restoration Act of 2004’’. 
SEC. 712. FINDINGS. 
Congress finds the following with respect to the Fair 
Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) (in 
this subtitle referred to as the ‘‘FLSA’’): 
(1) Since 1974, the FLSA has regulated States 
with respect to the payment of minimum wage and 
overtime rates. In Garcia v. San Antonio Metropoli-
tan Transit Authority, 469 U.S. 528 (1985), the Su-
100
preme Court upheld Congress’s constitutional au-
thority to regulate States in the payment of min-
imum wages and overtime. The prohibitions of the 
FLSA remain in effect and continue to apply to the 
States. 
(2) Wage and overtime violations in employ-
ment remain a serious problem both nationally and 
among State and other public and private entities 
receiving Federal financial assistance, and has invid-
ious effects on its victims, the labor force, and the 
general welfare and economy as a whole. For exam-
ple, seven State governments have no overtime laws 
at all. Fourteen State governments have minimum 
wage and overtime laws; however, they exclude em-
ployees covered under the FLSA. As such, public 
employees, since they are covered under the FLSA 
are not protected under these State laws. Addition-
ally, four States have minimum wage and overtime 
laws which are inferior to the FLSA. Further, the 
Department of Labor continues to receive a substan-
tial number of wage and overtime charges against 
State government employers. 
(3) Private civil suits by the victims of employ-
ment law violations have been a crucial tool for en-
forcement of the FLSA. In Alden v. Maine, 527
101
U.S. 706 (1999), however, the Supreme Court held 
that Congress lacks the power under the 14th 
amendment to the Constitution to abrogate State 
sovereign immunity to suits for legal relief by indi-
viduals under the FLSA. The Federal Government 
has an important interest in ensuring that Federal 
financial assistance is not used to facilitate viola-
tions of the FLSA, and private civil suits for mone-
tary relief are a critical tool for advancing that in-
terest. 
(4) After the Alden decision, wage and overtime 
violations by State employers remain unlawful, but 
victims of such violations lack important remedies 
for vindication of their rights available to all other 
employees covered by the FLSA. In the absence of 
the deterrent effect that such remedies provide, 
there is a great likelihood that State entities car-
rying out federally funded programs and activities 
will use Federal financial assistance to violate the 
FLSA, or that the Federal financial assistance will 
otherwise subsidize or facilitate FLSA violations. 
(5) The Supreme Court has upheld Congress’s 
authority to condition receipt of Federal financial 
assistance on acceptance by State or other covered 
entities of conditions regarding or related to the use
102
of those funds, as in Cannon v. University of Chi-
cago, 441 U.S. 677 (1979). 
(6) The Court has further recognized that Con-
gress may require State entities, as a condition of 
receipt of Federal financial assistance, to waive their 
State sovereign immunity to suits for a violation of 
Federal law, as in College Savings Bank v. Florida 
Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board, 
527 U.S. 666 (1999). 
(7) In the wake of the Alden decision, it is nec-
essary, in order to foster greater compliance with, 
and adequate remedies for violations of, the FLSA, 
particularly in federally funded programs or activi-
ties operated by State entities, to require State enti-
ties to consent to a waiver of State sovereign immu-
nity as a condition of receipt of such Federal finan-
cial assistance. 
(8) The Supreme Court has repeatedly held 
that State sovereign immunity does not bar suits for 
prospective injunctive relief brought against State 
officials acting in their official capacity, as in Ex 
parte Young (209 U.S. 123 (1908)). The injunctive 
relief available in such suits under the FLSA will 
continue to be the same as that which was available 
under those laws prior to enactment of this subtitle.
103
SEC. 713. PURPOSES. 
The purposes of this subtitle are—
(1) to provide to State employees in programs 
or activities that receive or use Federal financial as-
sistance the same rights and remedies for practices 
violating the FLSA as are available to other employ-
ees under the FLSA, and that were available to 
State employees prior to the Supreme Court’s deci-
sion in Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706 (1999); 
(2) to provide that the receipt or use of Federal 
financial assistance for a program or activity con-
stitutes a State waiver of sovereign immunity from 
suits by employees within that program or activity 
for violations of the FLSA; and 
(3) to affirm that suits for injunctive relief are 
available against State officials in their official ca-
pacities for violations of the FLSA. 
SEC. 714. REMEDIES FOR STATE EMPLOYEES. 
Section 16 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 
(29 U.S.C. 216) is amended by adding at the end the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘(f)(1) A State’s receipt or use of Federal financial 
assistance for any program or activity of a State shall con-
stitute a waiver of sovereign immunity, under the 11th 
amendment to the Constitution or otherwise, to a suit 
brought by an employee of that program or activity under
104
this Act for equitable, legal, or other relief authorized 
under this Act. 
‘‘(2) In this subsection, the term ‘program or activity’ 
has the meaning given the term in section 309 of the Age 
Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C. 6107).’’.
Æ