Pay Transparency Across Four States and Two New Countries
Cedar Ridge Health Partners is a 2,300-employee US healthcare services company headquartered in Texas. It has 38 employees in Colorado, 112 in California, 26 in New York State, and 14 in Washington, and it now hires remotely nationwide. Recruiters have been posting 'salary commensurate with experience' for all roles. An internal pay equity review found that women in clinical manager roles earn 7.2% less than men in the same grade, largely because starting salaries are set by negotiation. The CHRO wants an exposure assessment and a compliance plan before a 60-person hiring wave. Separately, the company plans to open small entities in Ireland and Germany within 12 months and has no global pay-gap reporting process. The CEO is worried about both legal risk and employer-brand damage, and has asked whether the company should simply stop posting salaries in states that require ranges.
1. Identify which pay transparency and pay equity obligations apply to Cedar Ridge by jurisdiction, and assess the CEO's suggestion to stop posting ranges.
Read the worked answer
Map obligations to where work is performed, not where the employee sits. Colorado: the Equal Pay for Equal Work Act requires a compensation range and benefits in postings for positions that could be performed in Colorado, including remote roles; 2024 amendments add career-progression disclosure. California: SB 1162 requires pay scales in postings for employers with 15+ employees and pay data reports for 100+; Cedar Ridge is covered. New York State: employers with 4+ employees must include a compensation range in postings. Washington: 15+ employees must include a wage scale; at 14 employees Cedar Ridge is close to the threshold. Texas has no general posting law. The CEO's idea to stop posting ranges in covered states is not a safe harbor: the obligation is to disclose, not to avoid disclosure by omitting the range. A nationwide posting without ranges would still violate covered-state rules for remote roles. Use a single geo-neutral posting with a good-faith range, or state-specific postings managed by a workflow.
2. Design a pay equity remediation approach that addresses the 7.2% gap without creating new legal risk.
Read the worked answer
A 7.2% raw gap is a flag, not a finding. First, run a multivariate analysis controlling for grade, tenure, performance, location, and specialty. If the gap persists, identify where it enters: starting salary negotiation, promotion timing, or discretionary increases. Remove salary history from the process, publish starting-salary guidelines by grade, and require approvals for offers above midpoint. Train managers on negotiation and bias. Remediate outliers with a dedicated budget rather than an across-the-board increase, which would overcorrect and create new inequities. Work with counsel to privilege the analysis, document legitimate factors, and set a review cadence. Do not retaliate against employees who ask about pay.
3. What should the company do now to prepare for Ireland and Germany reporting?
Read the worked answer
Ireland: the Gender Pay Gap Information Act requires reporting by employers with 250+ employees (2022), 150+ (2024), and 50+ (2025), so a small entity may be below the threshold initially but should build data now. Germany: the Pay Transparency Act gives employees in companies with 200+ a right to comparator information; the EU Pay Transparency Directive must be transposed by June 2026 and adds pay reporting for employers with 100+ workers, worker right to information, and joint pay assessments. Build a global job architecture, collect gender and pay data lawfully under GDPR, define pay-gap metrics consistently, and run a dry-run report before the first deadline.