05FADD8556E71AD0872583A700834CB8 Hearing Summary

Senators Danielson and Pettersen, co-prime sponsors, presented SB19-085, concerning the equal pay for equal work act.   Senator Danielson explained how women earn less than men for the same work and emphasized that pay gaps are real and tangible. 

Senator Pettersen noted that federal law does not go far enough for equal pay and stressed the need for this measure on a state-wide level.  

Charlotte Sweeney, representing the Colorado Women's Bar Association, testified in support of the bill.  She explained the need for the bill and discussed similar measures in other states.  She discussed the six year time period in which an aggrieved person may obtain back pay, as proposed in the bill.

Katica Roy, representing herself, spoke in favor of the bill.  She discussed her experience as Chief Executive Officer of Pipeline Equity and explained a data driven approach to closing the gender gap.  She talked about the negative economic impacts of unequal pay.  She noted that 42% of women are heads of households.

Louise Myrland, representing the Women's Foundation of Colorado, testified in support of the bill. She discussed how women of color earn even less and the economic impacts of women falling further behind.  She answered questions about gender plus another protected class.

Ashley Panelli, representing 9to5, spoke in support of the bill.  She discussed economic discrepancies and lower wages based on past salaries.  

Wendy Rockwell, representing herself, testified in favor of the measure.  She described a personal experience of confronting her boss about unequal wages. 

Catherine Smith, representing herself, spoke in support of the bill.  As a professor at the the University of Denver Sturm College of Law, she discussed how she worked on a comprehensive pay scale overhaul.  She answered questions about salary disclosure in the private sector, remedies in the bill, backpay, and protected classes of people.     

Sonya Ulibarri, executive director of Girls Inc., testified in support of the bill. She discussed her work with young girls and generational change.

Karen Hester, representing the Center for Legal Inclusiveness, testified in favor of the bill.  She provided timelines about how long it would take for women of color to make the same money as other white women and men.  She discussed how inclusivity helps with retention.

Judith Marquez, representing 9to5, spoke in support of the bill. She discussed wage inequity and the consequences of pay discrimination. She noted that men are more likely to negotiate for a wage than women and addressed unconscious bias in hiring. She answered questions about gender plus other protected classes. 

Debra Brown, representing Good Business Colorado, spoke in support of the bill and shared testimony from a board member.  She addressed root causes of pay inequity and small businesses. 

Amy Ross, representing herself, spoke in support of the bill.  She discussed that the bill will make it easier for women to bring complaints forward and recoup back pay.  She noted how male teachers are often paid better than female ones. 

Lydia Waligorski, representing Violence Free Colorado, spoke in support of the bill.  She noted that equal pay will help families.

Karla Gonzales Garcia, representing Colorado Organization for Latina Opportunity and Reproductive Rights, spoke in support of the bill.

Dilpreet Jamma, representing Interfaiith Alliance, testified in favor of the bill.  He explained his faith and the inclusion of women and distributed a handout about job markets (Attachment A).  

Samuel Lopez, representing Interfaith Alliance, testified in support of the bill.  He discussed income equality.

Mari Newman, representing the Colorado LGBT Bar Association, spoke in favor of the measure.  She discussed women staying in bad relationships because of pay disparities, as well as impacts on single and LGBTQ women.  She gave a brief overview of historical discrimination and answered questions about women in protected classes and available remedies for wage discrimination.   

Peg Perl, representing the Women's Lobby of Colorado, testified in support of the bill.  She noted how women lose ground when staying home with their kids.  She discussed the importance of retaliation protections. 

Braedon Miguel, representing herself as a small business owner, testified in support of the bill.  She explained how the bill is pro employee and pro business. 

Ginny Axon, representing Interfaith Alliance, spoke in support of the bill.

Jan Rose, representing herself, spoke in support of the bill.  She told a personal experience about a male colleague making more money and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaints.

Dorsa Djalilzadeh, representing the Bell Policy Center, testfied in favor of the bill.  She distributed a handout about work and implications for women (Attachment B).  She also discussed non-traditional work environments.

Kathy Nesbitt, Vice President for Administration at the University of Colorado, Boulder, spoke in support of the bill if amended.  She discussed the difficulties of posting all positions, as required in the bill, and the implications on workplace morale.  She also testified about financial impacts and market factors and answered questions from the committee.  

Tony Gagliardi, representing NFIB, spoke against the bill.  He discussed how provisions in the bill could easily bankrupt a small business, particularly the one regarding six years of backpay.  He stressed that many small businesses do not have a human resources person and would have difficulties implementing the bill. 

Jennifer Waller, representing the Colorado Bankers Association, spoke against the bill as written.  She discussed how grievances should first go through the Civil Rights Division instead of to the courts, as proposed in the bill.  Other concerns she had addressed record keeping, wage differential factors other than sex, liquidating damages, geographical locations, wage history, and attorney fees for the prevailing party. 

Stacy Aurich, representing the Colorado Bankers Association, testified in opposition to the bill as written.  She suggested amendments to help protect business owners. 

Robert Golden, representing the South Metro Denver Chamber of Commerce, testified against the bill as written.  He addressed concerns about private right of action. He answered questions about job postings and geographic locations.

Mary Medley, representing the Colorado Society of Certified Public Accountants, spoke against the bill as written.  She expressed concerns that the bill does not take into consideration geographical differences and pay scales for businesses spanning large areas.  She also noted the six year back pay provision as a concern.  

Dan Coombs, representing the Colorado Civil Justice League, spoke in support of the bill if amended.  He suggested that factors other than sex be included and had concerns about wage rate histories. 

Meredith McDonald, representing Colorado Defense Lawyers Association, spoke against the bill as introducted.  She expressed concerns about liability and the absence of catch-all factors. 

Dorothy Jones, representing the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce, testified against the bill as written.  She noted concerns about the mechanics of the bill and the narrow list of exceptions, as well as other issues.

Sonia Riggs, representing the Colorado Restaurant Association, spoke in support of the bill if amended.  She discussed that the bill does not work for all women as written and claimed that the private right of action may deter women from filing claims.  She explained how the restaurant industry would have some difficulties adhering to all provisions in the bill. 

Rachel Beck, representing the Colorado Springs Chamber of Commerce, testified that she would like to see the bill amended. She expressed concerns about the private right of action.

Jeannie Valliere, representing the Colorado Society for Human Resources Management, testified against the bill, She noted challenges with record retention,posting salary requirements, and collecting data.

Amanda Ericson, representing the Colorado Society for Human Resources Management, opposed the bill as written.

Tanya Kelly-Bowry, representing the University of Colorado, stated a neutral position on the bill with amendments.  She discussed the unique position of higher education in relation to the bill.

Loren Furman, representing the Colorado Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support of the bill as amended. She discussed a need to strike a balance between workers and employers and expressed concerns about the private right of action. 

Sarah Parady, representing the Colorado Women's Bar Assocation, made closing remarks in support of the bill.   She addressed concerns raised by the business community about right of private action, the six year back pay time period, job postings, and protected classes.   

Senators Danielson and Pettersen presented amendments to the bill.  

Senator Danielson explained amendment L. 033 (Attachment C) regarding shift work.  

Senator Danielson presented amendment L. 001 (Attachment D) regarding geographic location, education, and travel in relation to job postings and compensation.  

Senator Gardner presented amendment L. 003 (Attachment E) as a substitute amendment for L. 001. 

Senator Danielson presented and discussed Amendment L. 034 (Attachment F) regarding grievances filed with the Colorado Civil Rights Division.

Senator Danielson presented and explained Amendment L.031 (Attachment G) regarding the role of the court in awarding liquidated damages.  

Senator Danielson presented and explained the following amendments:

• Amendment L. 015 (Atachment H) regarding striking provisions about job postings and wage rates;
• Amendment L. 027 (Attachment I) regarding a technical change; and
• Amendment L. 016 (Attachment J) regarding extending the effective date.  

Senator Gardner presented and explained Amendment L. 008 (Attachment K) regarding attorney fees.  

Senator Cooke presented and explained Amendment L. 004 (Attachment L) regarding salary negotiations.  

Senator Cooke presented and explained Amendment L. 010 (Attachment M) regarding job postings and qualifications.  

Senator Lee presented and explained Amendment L. 021 (Attachment N) regarding the back pay statute of limitations. 

Committee members expressed their support of, or opposition to, the bill. 

The bill sponsors made closing remarks.