Compliance Stuff

Joining approximately twenty-five other state or local jurisdictions, two states—Maine and Virginia—have enacted new pay transparency requirements slated to take effect in July 2026. Virginia’s House Bill (HB) 636 / Senate Bill (SB) 215 takes effect on July 1, 2026, and Maine’s Legislative Document (LD) 54 becomes effective on July 29, 2026. 00:00 10:50 Though neither Virginia nor Maine requires the disclosure of benefits information, both states’ laws require employers to disclose compensation information in job postings . Further, they continue the trend of the laws varying in nuanced and significant ways. For example, Maine imposes a ten-employee coverage threshold for purposes of its job posting requirements, and also incorporates recordkeeping and employee-request obligations; Virginia combines its p osting requirements with a salary history ban, anti-retaliation protections, and, importantly, a dual-enforcement scheme that includes a private right of action but limits civil p...

California pay scale requirements have been in place for several years, yet many employers remain uncertain about what compliance truly requires. Now that we are in 2026, recent amendments to California’s pay transparency laws make one point clear. Compliance is no longer satisfied by posting a pay range and moving on. The focus is now on whether the pay scale reflects reality. Labor Code section 432.3 requires covered California employers to disclose pay scales in job postings and to provide a pay scale upon request to applicants and employees (Lab. Code, § 432.3 (a), (c)) . Although many employers initially treated pay transparency as a posting requirement, enforcement agencies and plaintiffs’ attorneys are increasingly focused on a different question: Was the pay range meaningful and made in good faith? What is a “Pay Scale” Under California’s 2026 Amendments Effective January 1, 2026, amendments to California’s pay scale law clarified what qualifies as a compliant pay scale. A pay ...

In  Iloff v. LaPaille , the California Supreme Court addressed when “liquidated” or double damages may be avoided by an employer for minimum wage violations and how employees can pursue paid leave claims under California’s  Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act  (HWHFA), the statewide paid sick and safe time law.    Defense to Liquidated Damages for Minimum Wage Violations : Under  California Labor Code section 1194.2 , liquidated damages in an amount equal to the amount of unpaid minimum wages are mandatory, unless an employer can demonstrate that it acted “in good faith and that the employer had reasonable grounds for believing that the act or omission was not a violation of any provision of the Labor Code relating to minimum wage, or an order of the [Industrial Welfare Commission].” If an employer can show that it had a good-faith and reasonable belief that it was not violating the law regarding minimum wages, a trial court has the discretion to...