The Wage Gap Exists! Just Ask Apple.

There has long been talk about the wage gap between men and women. But how does it break down? How do we prove that it's due to discrimination, or that the data is reliable?

Let's take a look at the recent Apple case in California. The case is at the beginning, but a motion to dismiss the case by Apple was largely denied by the court, meanign that the court found that, under the facts in the complaint, the 12,000 plaintiffs - no, that number's not a typo - have a plausible complaint.

California and Illinois are among states that adopted new pay transparency laws. Of course, Illinois and California often lead the way with protecting their populations, so that's no big shock.

What's so interesting about equal pay litigation is that it's such a grey area. There have been so many reasons in the zeitgeist since at least the Goodyear decision that point out different reasons for the pay gap that have nothing to do with discrimination. The cases themselves actually litigate these supposed reasons.

For example, in the Western District of Texas, the court actually analyzed the idea that men are paid more because they are better negotiators (the classic idea that they have more confidence in their worth). The court was not buying that, and shot that justification down. The Sixth Circuit looked at the same "affirmative defense" and just threw it back in the employer's face.

In the end, it all comes down to data. Can the employer show through comparing prior experience of men versus women employees, their success at their positions, their education, or numerous other factors, that discrimination was not the reason for the wage gap?

Fascinating. An area of the law totally based on facts. And, I'm convinced, it's on the up and up!