29 C.F.R. § 1620.23
Collective bargaining agreements not a defense
The establishment by collective bargaining or inclusion in a collective bargaining agreement of unequal rates of pay does not constitute a defense available to either an employer or to a labor organization. Any and all provisions in a collective bargaining agreement which provide unequal rates of pay in conflict with the requirements of the EPA are null and void and of no effect.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1987–2023 · leading case: Eisenhauer v. Culinary Inst. of Am., 84 F.4th 507 (2d Cir. 2023).
Eisenhauer v. Culinary Inst. of Am., 84 F.4th 507 (2d Cir. 2023). “22 ; and (5) collective bargaining agreements to “unequal rates of pay,” 29 C.F.R. § 1620.23 , meaning agreements to rates established on the basis of sex, see The Equal Pay Act; 16 1 The requirement that a “factor other than sex” be job related 2 appears nowhere in the EPA’s…”
Downs v. Gebco Mach., Inc., 873 F. Supp. 2d 1010 (S.D. Ill. 2012). “” 29 C.F.R. § 1620.23 . Moreover, plaintiff has alleged that defendant does have control over the union’s membership policies and the Court must take that allegation as true at this stage in the proceeding.”
Boyd v. City Of Chicago (N.D. Ill. 2023). “” 29 C.F.R. § 1620.23 . The City accuses Boyd of “confus[ing] a CBA which perpetuates discrimination between sexes versus multiple union contracts providing for salary determinations by various separately represented titles.”
Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, 677 F. Supp. 918 (N.D. Ill. 1987). “29 C.F.R. § 1620.23 (1985). An introductory comment accompanying the 1981 regulations stated: Paragraphs (b) and (c) of § 1620.”
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.