29 C.F.R. § 1620.17

Jobs requiring equal responsibility in performance

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) In general. The equal pay standard applies to jobs the performance of which requires equal responsibility. Responsibility is concerned with the degree of accountability required in the performance of the job, with emphasis on the importance of the job obligation. Differences in the degree of responsibility required in the performance of otherwise equal jobs cover a wide variety of situations. The following illustrations in subsection (b), while by no means exhaustive, may suggest the nature or degree of differences in responsibility which will constitute unequal work.

(b) Comparing responsibility requirements of jobs. (1) There are many situations where one employee of a group performing jobs which are equal in other respects is required from time to time to assume supervisory duties for reasons such as the absence of the regular supervisor. Suppose, for instance, that it is the employer's practice to pay a higher wage rate to such a “relief” supervisor with the understanding that during the intervals in which the employee performs supervisory duties the employee is in training for a supervisory position. In such a situation, payment of the higher rate to the employee might well be based solely on the additional responsibility required to perform the job and the equal pay provisions would not require the same rates to be paid to an employee of the opposite sex in the group who does not have an equal responsibility. There would clearly be no question concerning such a wage rate differential if the employer pays the higher rate to both men and women who are called upon from time to time to assume such supervisory responsibilities.

(2) Other differences in responsibilities of employees in generally similar jobs may require similar conclusions. Sales clerks, for example, who are engaged primarily in selling identical or similar merchandise may be given different responsibilities. Suppose that one employee of such a group (who may be either a man or a woman) is authorized and required to determine whether to accept payment for purchases by personal checks of customers. The person having this authority to accept personal checks may have a considerable, additional degree of responsibility which may materially affect the business operations of the employer. In this situation, payment of a higher wage rate to this employee would be permissible.

(3) On the other hand, there are situations where one employee of the group may be given some minor responsibility which the others do not have (e.g., turning out the lights in his or her department at the end of the business day) but which is not of sufficient consequence or importance to justify a finding of unequal responsibility. As another example of a minor difference in responsibility, suppose that office employees of both sexes work in jobs essentially alike but at certain intervals a male and female employee performing otherwise equal work within the meaning of the statute are responsible for the office payroll. One of these employees may be assigned the job of checking time cards and compiling the payroll list. The other, of the opposite sex, may be required to make out paychecks, or divide up cash and put the proper amounts into pay envelopes after drawing a payroll check. In such circumstances, although some of the employees' duties are occasionally dissimilar, the difference in responsibility involved would not appear to be of a kind that is recognized in wage administration as a significant factor in determining wage rates. Under such circumstances, this difference would seem insufficient to justify a wage rate differential between the man's and woman's job if the equal pay provisions otherwise apply.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 42 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1978–2025 · leading case: Donna Krenik v. County of Le Sueur
Donna Krenik v. County of Le Sueur (1995) ca8 · cites it 3× “The district court turned to the Code of Federal Regulations for guidance and found an example in 29 C.F.R. § 1620.17 persuasive. The regulation, promulgated by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, approves a pay differential between substantially similar jobs when the…”
Clayton v. Vanguard Car Rental U.S.A., Inc. (2010) nmd · cites it 4× “” 29 C.F.R. § 1620.17 . The Code of Federal Regulations states: (b) Comparing responsibility requirements of jobs.”
Janet M. Merillat v. Metal Spinners, Incorporated (2006) ca7 “” 29 C.F.R. § 1620.17 (a). Ms. Merillat has therefore failed to establish a prima facie case under the Equal Pay Act.”
Ingram v. Brinks Incorporated (2005) ca1 “” 29 C.F.R. § 1620.17 . “Establishment,” as it is used in the Act, refers to “a distinct physical place of business rather than to an entire business or ‘enterprise’ which may include several separate places of business.”
Nyman v. Chairman, Federal Deposit Insurance (1997) dcd “29 C.F.R. § 1620.17 (1992). e. Working conditions encompasses two factors: (1) “surroundings,” which concern the nature and character of the environment in which the job is performed, including considerations of the elements to which the employee may be exposed; and (2)…”
Cooke v. United States (2008) uscfc “29 C.F.R. § 1620.17 (a). a. Skill Defendant acknowledges that each of the modal director positions calls for technical expertise in the respective transportation mode, knowledge of and expertise in accident investigation processes, leadership and supervisory skills, and the…”
Glunt v. GES Exposition Services, Inc. (2000) mdd “29 C.F.R. § 1620.17 . Higher supervisory responsibility is a well-recognized reason to make jobs not substantially equal for purposes of the EPA.”
Wildi v. ALLE-KISKI MEDICAL CENTER (2009) pawd “16 (a); and “[rjesponsibility is concerned with the degree of accountability required in the performance of the job, with emphasis on the importance of the job obligation,” 29 C.F.R. § 1620.17 (a). Drury v. Waterfront Media, Inc.”
Martin v. United States (2011) uscfc “” 29 C.F.R. § 1620.17 (a). “Effort is concerned with the measurement of the physical or mental exertion needed for the performance of a job.”
Hassman v. Valley Motors, Inc. (1992) mdd “In addition to these shared responsibilities, Plaintiff contends that she and her male co-workers held the title “business manager” and were introduced to customers and lending institutions by that title.”
Ellison v. United States (1992) cc “29 C.F.R. § 1620.17 (a). A. Ellison’s Duties at the USMS Teresa Ellison held the position of Chief of the Managerial Assessment & Development Branch (MAD Branch) in the Administrative Directorate of the U.”
Mehus v. Emporia State University (2004) ksd “As noted, ESU argues that plaintiffs job responsibilities are not substantially equal to those of Moe or Schneider because basketball has different recruiting rules, basketball *476 games are broadcast, basketball coaches provide radio shows, more fans attend basketball games,…”
— 29 C.F.R. § 1620.17(a) — 2 cases
Hassman v. Valley Motors, Inc. (1992) mdd “In addition to these shared responsibilities, Plaintiff contends that she and her male co-workers held the title “business manager” and were introduced to customers and lending institutions by that title.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.