JUDGE CHUTKAN
Posted on 05/14/2019 3:53:19 PM PDT by spintreebob
The federal government plans to collect pay data by race, ethnicity and gender from businesses by Sept. 30. Any business with over 100 employees will have to provide this data. It will use it to develop a pay equity analysis to combat discrimination. President Donald Trump's administration failed to block this collection in federal court, clearing the path for this action.
Business groups have supported Trump's efforts to stop this reporting to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). They have complained of technical challenges in bridging HR information systems with payroll data. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said pay equity analysis reports will add "a total burden of $1.3 billion per year" on businesses.
Former President Barack Obama's administration approved the pay equity analysis data collection. It was reversed by Trump in 2017, with little explanation. The National Women's Law Center (NWLC) filed a lawsuit in response.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan recently ruled in favor of the NWLC, disagreeing with the Trump administration and its argument that the pay equity analysis data collection will have "disruptive consequences."
HR has been showing interest in pay equity analysis, along with antibias tools. Analysts recently identified antibias HR tools as a new and fast-growing market.
HR is adopting pay equity tools UltiPro HR system, includes a pay equity analysis tool. It is used by Courtney Paulsen, an HR analyst at Alameda Electrical Distributers, an Alcal Industries Inc. mechanical, electrical and plumbing distributor and contractor in Hayward, Calif.
Paulsen said the pay equity tool helps the company see if it's fairly paying its workers. It also provides insights to managers when making pay recommendations, she said.
The tool puts data into a manager's hands, which can help managers reduce biases and make compensation recommendations or raises more than a gut-based decision, according to Paulsen. "It's bringing a lot of transparency to it," she said.
EEOC's mixed messages about readiness Samuel Haffer, chief data officer at the EEOC, warned the court in testimony that undertaking this collection by the Sept. 30 deadline will raise "major data validity and reliability issues."
EEOC spokeswoman Kimberly Smith-Brown said the agency wouldn't be commenting on Haffer's testimony.
But the agency's acting chairwoman, Victoria Lipnic, said in a prepared statement that it could meet the court order. "We, at the EEOC, understand the difficulties of these first-ever pay data collections in this time frame," she said.
One person who works with workforce data, Carol Rogers, deputy director and CIO of the Indiana Business Research Center at Indiana University's Kelley School of Business, doesn't believe it will be difficult for employers to comply with the law.
Employers are already submitting some characteristics of their workforce to the EEOC. "It wouldn't seem that difficult to add pay," Rogers said. The pay data information is already submitted to the IRS, she said.
Collecting pay data may help uncover systemic problems in industries, whether people are overpaid or underpaid relative to each other, Rogers said. But the data won't necessarily help analysts understand, for instance, whether women who have babies are penalized relative to men, or whether men who become fathers get a bump in pay, Rogers said.
The data also isn't attached to a resume, so some information may be missing, Rogers said. Still, collecting pay data "may be able to spot a trend in a particular type of industry," and this industrywide data may be helpful for firms in improving talent attraction, she said.
White highly paid white employees will be let go and brought in as contractors/consultants.
Everyone will game the system. The EEOC and especially the IRS will realize they are being played and take action to get revenge and teach business a lesson of who is in control. The IRS will make the life of those who can't fight back, those not skilled at playing the game.
Employment and Consulting will not be based on qualifications, but on irrelevant business but very relevant regulatory considerations.
Pay is not equal. Everyone is paid by ability except Jennifer at WKRP in Cincinnati who is paid for looking good..... : )
[Former President Barack Obama’s administration approved the pay equity analysis data collection. It was reversed by Trump in 2017, with little explanation. The National Women’s Law Center (NWLC) filed a lawsuit in response.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan recently ruled in favor of the NWLC, disagreeing with the Trump administration and its argument that the pay equity analysis data collection will have “disruptive consequences.” ]
Isn’t covered in the U.S. Constitution, yet is covered as a communist talking point.
If any doesn’t believe in the deep state, here it is.
Recommended
‘The Upside of Inequality” by Edward Conrad
The pay equity analysis which will be later law because this is what is important not ability and work ethic, this will be bastardized and manipulated to favor those who are WHAT they are rather than WHO they are. All roads lead to race and gender. blacks, browns and women, white men are the target who will pay the price for being the bread winner
So more meaningless data will be collected, and used by liberals to allegedly prove there is discrimination.
For example, we all know the vast majority of secretarial/clerical workers are women. And we know the vast majority of construction workers are men. And we know that the majority of construction workers make far more than the secretarial or clerical workers. So where exactly is there sex discrimination in this example?
The vast majority of partners in law firms are men, yet there are huge numbers of women attorneys. The higher compensation of the law partners will skew the average pay of male attorneys to be higher than females. But that difference would not be due to discrimination.
President Trump should cancel this fiasco. It will result in a can of worms subject to agenda driven interpretations. The end result will be lower quality workforce, and higher costs to business, and worst of all, more racial and class hatred/division. Bureaucracy at its worst.
President Donald Trump's administration failed to block this collection in federal court, clearing the path for this action.
JUDGE CHUTKAN
Are they going to interview every single woman who walks high voltage power lines during blizzards in Maine during January or just a few of them?
None of the government’s business. Companies should refuse to comply. Trump should refuse to enforce.
Just like Obama’s school policy that decreed schools had to discipline just as many white students as black student to achieve balance in school discipline regardless of who was actually causing problems.
This product of affirmative action is the same activist judge who forced the Office of Refugee Resettlement to allow abortions and who let the Awan brothers off the hook. She's from David Boies's law firm, and her husband Peter Arno Krauthamer is another Obama judge.
Man that judge has a chip on her racist shoulder a mile long.
She just reeks hatred. If looks could kill, every white person would be dead.
It is another way to sow discord and destroy the Country from the inside.
“regardless of who was actually causing problems.”
Sheere insanity, but not a surprise.
A big step forward for State Socialism.
Excellent analysis.
If you’re skilled, talented and motivated to succeed don’t be an employee at a large firm, government agency or organization. Be a contractor. You’re better off in so many ways.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.