By Monmouth Watchdog
Here he goes again.
It’s getting to be a monotonous drone of a drumbeat with Assemblyman Declan O’Scanlon’s mind boggling, head scratching, dangerous votes in the Assembly. The vote: a "NO" vote regarding women's pay equality. It may be a "NO" vote-- but a significant "NO" vote that was decided and voted upon without much notice in March of 2016.
Currently, females earn approximately 20% less than their male counterparts doing exact or similar work. Equality in pay would greatly aid two- income couples seeking to pay bills, and raise a family, without children suffering. It would greatly aid young women—with children--ran by struggling single mother households.
How can any legislator be against this? Well, Assemblyman Declan O’Scanlon, through his vote, has indicated he is against a bill that concerns equal pay for women and addressing workplace discrimination and retaliation issues.
Thankfully, and despite O’Scanlon’s “NO” vote, the bill, A-2750, passed by a margin of 54 to 14 (with 12 legislators inexplicably not voting). A similar bill (S-992), passed in the Senate by a margin of 28 to 4 (with 8 inexplicably not voting).
The bill—after passing both houses, was vetoed by Governor Chris Christie.
The protections to women—barring Christie’s veto—would have provided women with the following workplace safeguards:
1. Prohibit unequal pay for “substantially similar” work, under the Law Against Discrimination (LAD). The legislation would make it unlawful for an employer to pay a rate of compensation, including benefits, to an employee of one sex less than the rate paid to an employee of the other sex for substantially similar work when viewed as a composite of skill, effort and responsibility, unless specific conditions apply.
2. Require different rates of compensation be justified by factors other than sex. The bill permits an employer to pay a different rate of compensation if the employer demonstrates that the differential is made pursuant to a seniority system, a merit system, or is based on legitimate, bona fide factors other than sex, such as training, education, experience, or the quantity or quality of production. It requires that each factor is applied reasonably, that one or more of the factors account for the entire wage differential, and that the factor or factors do not perpetuate a sex-based differential in compensation, are job-related and based upon legitimate business necessities. Comparison of wage rates would be based on those in all of an employer’s operations or facilities.
3. Restart statute of limitations for each instance of discrimination. Provides that a discriminatory compensation decision or other employment practice that is unlawful under the LAD occurs each time that compensation is paid in furtherance of that discriminatory decision or practice – effectively making each paycheck another instance of discrimination, reflecting the language in the federal Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. In addition, the bill provides that liability shall accrue and an aggrieved person may obtain relief for back pay for the entire period of time in which the violation has been continuous, if the violation continues to occur within the statute of limitations. This provision is stronger than the federal Lilly Ledbetter Act, which has a two-year cap on back pay.
4. Prohibit employer retaliation against employee for disclosing compensation. Employers could not take reprisals against an employee for disclosing information about the job title, occupational category, and rate of compensation of any employees or former employees, as well as other information. It would prohibit an employer from requiring an employee or prospective employee to forgo rights to make or request those disclosures
5. Require transparency in state contracting. Requires contractors to provide information on gender, race, job title, occupational category and compensation, and to report certain changes during the course of the contract; information must be filed with Labor Commissioner and Division of Civil Rights. The bill requires disclosure to employees and their authorized representatives upon request.
Assemblyman Declan O’Scanlon, a former Little Silver councilman, is seeking the Senate seat from the retiring Joe Kyrillos. He is the CEO of FSD Enterprises in Red Bank. His firm negotiates with wireless communications companies on behalf of government entities. His recent votes in the Assembly have caused controversy, consternation and angst regarding his vote to raise the tax on gasoline; his horrendous voting record on public safety issues affecting law enforcement officers, and being the ONLY Assemblyman in the state legislature--out of 80--that voted AGAINST enhanced penalties for drunk drivers operating with minors as passengers.
His opponent, Democrat Sean Byrnes of Middletown, is a former Middletown committeeman; veteran with the US Coast Guard, and attorney.
*******************************************
This is the opinion of the Monmouth Watchdog.
