Employment Law:  Federal District Court in Pittsburgh Upholds Equal Pay Act Claims

Discrimination in wages is prohibited by the federal Equal Pay Act and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act.  The EPA prohibits employers from paying different wages to employees of the opposite sex where the employees perform equal work.  In order to make out a prima facie case of discriminatory pay under the PHRA, a plaintiff must prove, among other things, that she was performing work substantially equal to that of male employees who were compensated at a higher level than the plaintiff.  In Plavan v. Pittsburgh Leadership Foundation, 2007 WL 320773 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 30, 2007), Judge Ambrose reviewed the required elements of proof under both of these statutes, and denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment.  With respect to the EPA claim, the Court observed that the three elements were:  (1) the defendant employed the plaintiff and a male employee in jobs requiring substantially equal skill, effort and responsibility; (2) the two jobs were performed under similar working conditions; and (3) the plaintiff was paid a lower wage than the male employee doing substantially equal work.  Judge Ambrose held that the plaintiff was entitled to proceed to trial because, among other reasons, there were genuine issues of disputed fact surrounding the question of whether the jobs to be compared were equal - i.e., whether the jobs had a "common core" of tasks.