Thirteen states, and additional city jurisdictions, have enacted pay transparency requirements. Many are far reaching and include job posting requirements for jobs that are remote or could be performed in the state. Massachusetts and California are the most recent states to mandate pay transparency actions or make changes to the requirements already in place. Employers with employees in Massachusetts and California should evaluate their hiring and pay transparency practices to avoid costly penalties. Also, visit this link to view replays of our 4-part webinar series addressing legal challenges facing multijurisdictional employers.
Massachusetts: New Pay Transparency Requirements Effective October 29, 2025
The Massachusetts Act Relative to Salary Range Transparency (the Act) requires covered employers to provide wage ranges in job postings and to applicants and current employees upon request. The Massachusetts Office of the Attorney General issued Frequently Asked Questions to help employers understand the law’s requirements and explain potential penalties for non-compliance.
Here are some key provisions to understand:
- The Act applies to employers who had at least 25 employees with their “primary place of employment” as Massachusetts in the previous calendar year, including remote workers working in the state. The definition of “primary place of employment” is complex and depends on the circumstances of each individual’s employment. It also includes positions that can be performed remotely to a Massachusetts worksite and remote workers with a primary place of work in Massachusetts. Therefore, any job posting made by a covered employer that could be performed in Massachusetts, even if not specified on the posting, must be compliant.
- The Act requires employers to provide the minimum and maximum annual salary or hourly wage for each posted position. This requirement can be met by including a range extending from the lowest to the highest annual salary or hourly wage the employer reasonably and in good faith believes at the time of the posting it would pay for the advertised job, promotion, or transfer opportunity.
- The Act also requires employers with 100 or more employees who are subject to the federal EEO Data Reports filing requirements to submit their EEO Data Reports to the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
California Updates Equal Pay Act, CA Labor Code 432.3 and 1197.5
On October 8, 2025, Governor Gavin Newson signed changes to California’s Equal Pay Act (the CA EPA) into law, which become effective January 1, 2026. The CA EPA amendment clarified job posting requirements and made key changes that affect the equal pay requirements.
Key changes to the CA EPA include:
- The Pay Transparency Sections of the CA EPA apply to employers with at least 15 total employees (and at least one located in California) when the employer is posting a job that may be filled by a worker in California.
- While California already requires pay transparency when advertising a position, employers will now only need to provide the “expected wage range that an employer reasonably expects to pay for the position upon hire” and that “is made in good faith.” All employers with California employees, regardless of size, should ensure that applicants and current employees receive the relevant position pay scale upon request.
- For the purpose of equal pay claims, no other aspects of the Act (like the pay transparency section), the terms “wages” and “wage rates” encompasses all forms of compensation. This includes, but not limited to, salary, overtime pay, bonuses, stock, stock options, profit sharing and bonus plans, life insurance, vacation and holiday pay, cleaning or gasoline allowances, hotel accommodations, reimbursement for travel expenses, and benefits.
- CA will adopt a non-binary definition of “sex” as used in the pay transparency and wage disparity provisions of the CA EPA. Currently, employers are prohibited from paying employees of the “opposite sex” less for performing substantially similar work. However, in January 2026, “opposite sex” will be replaced with “another sex” in order to address potential wage disparities involving non-binary identifying employees.
- The statute of limitations for civil actions brought under the CA EPA will increase from its current two years to three years after the last discriminatory pay act occurred. Plaintiffs will be able to seek relief for the entire time during which a violation exists, but any potential recovery will be limited to a period of up to six years.
Key Takeaways
The Massachusetts Act and California’s amendment to the CA EPA changes are the latest pay transparency laws sweeping across the country. Other states include Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Vermont, Minnesota, Nevada, Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Ohio (localities only), Washington, and Washington, D.C. These laws not only include requirements for job postings but often prohibit employers from retaliating against applicants and employees for asking for compensation data or discussing compensation with others. If you are a multijurisdictional employer advertising a position that may be filled in multiple states, or by remote workers working in a variety of states, it is important to understand each state’s requirements to avoid liability. The penalties for violations can range from a warning to several thousand dollars in fines in each state and an employer could be subject to violations in multiple states for the same posting.
Attorneys in PilieroMazza’s Labor & Employment Group regularly assist multijurisdictional employers in evaluating pay practices and policies to be complaint with pay transparency requirements across various jurisdictions. If you have any questions or would like assistance, please contact Nichole Atallah, Sara Ryan, or another member of the Group. Remember to visit this link to check out our 4-part webinar series addressing legal challenges facing multijurisdictional employers.
