I
107TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 781
To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide more effective
remedies to victims of discrimination in the payment of wages on the
basis of sex, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
FEBRUARY 28, 2001
Ms. DELAURO (for herself, Mr. ABERCROMBIE, Mr. ALLEN, Mr. ANDREWS,
Mr. BACA, Mr. BALDACCI, Ms. BALDWIN, Mr. BARCIA, Mr. BARRETT,
Mr. BECERRA, Ms. BERKLEY, Mr. BERMAN, Mr. BLAGOJEVICH, Mr.
BLUMENAUER, Mr. BONIOR, Mr. BORSKI, Mr. BOSWELL, Ms. BROWN of
Florida, Mr. BROWN of Ohio, Mrs. CAPPS, Mr. CAPUANO, Ms. CARSON
of Indiana, Mrs. CHRISTENSEN, Mrs. CLAYTON, Mr. CONYERS, Mr.
COSTELLO, Mr. COYNE, Mr. CROWLEY, Mr. CUMMINGS, Mr. DEFAZIO,
Mr. DELAHUNT, Mr. DEUTSCH, Mr. DICKS, Mr. ENGEL, Ms. ESHOO, Mr.
EVANS, Mr. FARR of California, Mr. FILNER, Mr. FRANK, Mr. FROST,
Mr. GEPHARDT, Mr. GREEN of Texas, Mr. GUTIERREZ, Mr. HALL of
Texas, Mr. HINCHEY, Mr. HOLDEN, Mr. HOLT, Mr. HOYER, Mr. INSLEE,
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, Ms. EDDIE BER-
NICE JOHNSON of Texas, Mrs. JONES of Ohio, Ms. KAPTUR, Mr. KEN-
NEDY of Rhode Island, Ms. KILPATRICK, Mr. KLECZKA, Mr. KUCINICH,
Mr. LANTOS, Mr. LARSON of Connecticut, Mr. LEVIN, Mrs. LOWEY, Mrs.
MALONEY of New York, Mr. MALONEY of Connecticut, Mr. MATSUI, Ms.
MCCARTHY of Missouri, Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York, Ms. MCCOLLUM,
Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. MCNULTY, Mr. MEEHAN, Mrs.
MEEK of Florida, Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD, Mr. GEORGE MILLER of
California, Mrs. MINK of Hawaii, Mr. MOORE, Mr. MORAN of Virginia,
Ms. NORTON, Mr. OBEY, Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. PASTOR, Mr. PAYNE, Ms.
PELOSI, Mr. POMEROY, Mr. PRICE of North Carolina, Mr. REYES, Ms.
RIVERS, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, Mr. RODRIGUEZ, Mr. RUSH, Ms.
SANCHEZ, Mr. SANDERS, Mr. SANDLIN, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr.
SERRANO, Mr. SHERMAN, Mr. SHOWS, Ms. SLAUGHTER, Mr. STRICK-
LAND, Mr. STUPAK, Mrs. TAUSCHER, Mr. TIERNEY, Mr. TOWNS, Mr.
UDALL of New Mexico, Ms. WATERS, Mr. WATT of North Carolina, Mr.
WAXMAN, and Ms. WOOLSEY) introduced the following bill; which was re-
ferred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce
disparities can only be due to continued intentional
discrimination or the lingering effects of past dis-
crimination.
(3) The existence of such pay disparities—
(A) depresses the wages of working fami-
lies who rely on the wages of all members of the
family to make ends meet;
(B) prevents the optimum utilization of
available labor resources;
(C) has been spread and perpetuated,
through commerce and the channels and instru-
mentalities of commerce, among the workers of
the several States;
(D) burdens commerce and the free flow of
goods in commerce;
(E) constitutes an unfair method of com-
petition in commerce;
(F) leads to labor disputes burdening and
obstructing commerce and the free flow of
goods in commerce;
(G) interferes with the orderly and fair
marketing of goods in commerce; and
(H) in many instances, may deprive work-
ers of equal protection on the basis of sex in
violation of the 5th and 14th amendments to
the United States Constitution.
(4)(A) Artificial barriers to the elimination of
discrimination in the payment of wages on the basis
of sex continue to exist even decades after the enact-
ment of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29
U.S.C. 201 et seq.) and the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(42 U.S.C. 2000a et seq.).
(B) Elimination of such barriers would have
positive effects, including—
(i) providing a solution to problems in the
economy created by unfair pay disparities;
(ii) substantially reducing the number of
working women earning unfairly low wages,
thereby reducing the dependence on public as-
sistance; and
(iii) promoting stable families by enabling
all family members to earn a fair rate of pay;
(iv) remedying the effects of past discrimi-
nation on the basis of sex and ensuring that in
the future workers are afforded equal protection
on the basis of sex; and
(v) in the private sector, ensuring equal
protection pursuant to Congress’ power to en-
force the 5th and 14th amendments to the
United States Constitution.
(5) With increased information about the provi-
sions added by the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (29
U.S.C. 206) and generalized wage data, along with
more effective remedies, women will be better able to
recognize and enforce their rights to equal pay for
work on jobs that require equal skill, effort, and re-
sponsibility and that are performed under similar
working conditions.
(6) Certain employers have already made great
strides in eradicating unfair pay disparities in the
workplace and their achievements should be recog-
nized.
SEC. 3. ENHANCED ENFORCEMENT OF EQUAL PAY RE-
QUIREMENTS.
(a) REQUIRED DEMONSTRATION FOR AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSE.—Section 6(d)(1) (29 U.S.C. 206(d)(1)) is
amended—
(1) by inserting ‘‘(A)’’ after ‘‘(d)(1)’’; and
(2) by striking ‘‘(iv) a differential’’ and all that
follows through the period and inserting the fol-
lowing: ‘‘(iv) a differential based on a bona fide fac-
tor other than sex, such as education, training, or
experience, except that this clause shall apply only
if—
‘‘(I) the employer demonstrates that—
‘‘(aa) such factor—
‘‘(AA) is job-related with respect to
the position in question; or
‘‘(BB) furthers a legitimate business
purpose, except that this item shall not
apply where the employee demonstrates
that an alternative employment practice
exists that would serve the same business
purpose without producing such differen-
tial and that the employer has refused to
adopt such alternative practice; and
‘‘(bb) such factor was actually applied and
used reasonably in light of the asserted jus-
tification; and
‘‘(II) if the employer makes the demonstration
described in subclause (I), the employee fails to dem-
onstrate that the differential produced by the reli-
ance of the employer on the factor described in such
subclause is the result of discrimination on the basis
of sex by the employer.
‘‘(B) An employer that is not otherwise in compliance
with this paragraph may not reduce the wages of any em-
ployee in order to achieve such compliance.’’.
(b) APPLICATION OF PROVISIONS.—Section 6(d) (29
U.S.C. 206(d)) is amended by adding at the end the fol-
lowing:
‘‘(5) The provisions of this subsection shall apply to
applicants for employment if such applicants, upon em-
ployment by the employer applied to, would be subject to
any other subsection of this section.’’.
(c) ELIMINATION
OF ESTABLISHMENT REQUIRE-
MENT.—Section 6(d)(1) (29 U.S.C. 206(d)(1)) is
amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘, within any establishment in
which such employees are employed,’’; and
(2) by striking ‘‘such establishment’’ each place
it appears.
(d) NONRETALIATION PROVISION.—Section 15(a)(3)
(29 U.S.C. 215(a)(3)) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘employee’’ the first place it ap-
pears and inserting ‘‘employee (or applicant for em-
ployment in the case of an applicant described in
section 6(d)(5))’’;
(2) by inserting ‘‘(or applicant)’’ after ‘‘em-
ployee’’ the second place it appears;