Rhode Island Pay Equity

Statute

Classes Protected

Key language on Pay Discrimination

Exceptions for Pay Disparities (Including Affirmative Defenses)

Prohibition on Salary History Inquiry 

• Employers may not “[r]ely on the wage history of an applicant when deciding whether to consider the applicant for employment” or in determining the wages the applicant will be paid upon hire.
• Employers may not “seek the wage history of an applicant” or require that an applicant’s prior wages meet minimum or maximum criteria as a condition of being considered for employment.
• Employers may consider wage history after an initial offer is made to justify increasing the compensation offered to an applicant if wage history is voluntarily provided without prompting from the employer. After an initial offer, an employer may seek to confirm the wage history of the applicant to support a wage higher than the wage offered.
• “Nothing in this section shall penalize an employer for having knowledge of an employee’s wage history at that employer if the employee currently works for the employer.”
• “An employer may not refuse to interview, hire, promote, or employ an applicant for employment or employee and may not retaliate against that individual because he or she did not provide a wage history or because he or she requested the wage range for a position[.]”

Anti-Retaliation

• Prohibits retaliation

Wage Disclosure Requirements

• Employers must provide a wage range when an employee is hired, a current employee moves into a new position, and/or upon the employee’s request. The employer also must provide a wage range upon an applicant’s request and “should” provide a wage range to an applicant prior to discussing compensation.
• “No employer shall prohibit an employee from inquiring about, discussing, or disclosing the wages of such employee or another employee or retaliate against an employee who engages in such activities.”

Safe Harbor for Pay Evaluations

• An affirmative defense is available to employers if:
  • The employer conducts a self-evaluation of its pay practices between January 1, 2023 and June 30, 2026, and within two years of the lawsuit and
  • Any wage disparities found as a result of the audit were eliminated within 90 days from the date of completion of its self-evaluation and prior to the lawsuit.
• The law instructs courts to consider the following facts in evaluating the sufficiency of employers’ pay evaluations:
  • Whether the audit includes all relevant jobs and employees within those relevant jobs;
  • Whether the audit makes a reasonable effort to identify similar jobs and employees using a consistent, fact-based approach;
  • Whether the employer has tested explanatory factors for an unbiased and relevant relationship to pay;
  • Whether the audit considers all reasonably relevant and available information; and
  • Whether the audit is “reasonably sophisticated” in its analysis of potentially comparable work, employee compensation, and permissible reasons for wage differentials.
• After June 30, 2026, employers conducting pay evaluations and remedying any differentials identified as a result will only be relieved of liability for liquidated damages and compensatory damages but will no longer be eligible for an affirmative defense.

Other Key Provisions