Resistance from a handful of Republican lawmakers wasn’t enough to prevent the House from passing a bill Wednesday that expands the state’s equal pay act.
H.99 requires employers to consider requests for flexible work schedules, and it prohibits them from retaliating against employees who request these arrangements or who inquire about co-workers’ wages.
A small, vocal, and mostly Republican contingency voted against the bill. It passed, 115-22, during a roll call vote on Wednesday.
The vote came one day after the state’s original equal pay act, passed in 2002, made its debut in court.
Prior to its arrival on the House floor, H.99 encountered pushback from several business trade groups that considered certain provisions “too prescriptive.”
House Minority Leader Don Turner was more blunt in his appraisal of the bill: “It’s anti-business.”
Most of the objections coming from members of the Republican caucus are part of broader campaign to stem the tide of bills that unfairly target Vermont businesses, Turner said. “They feel this bill sends the message that Vermont businesses are not treating their employees fairly.”
Rep. Linda Waites-Simpson, D-Essex Junction, who sits on the Judiciary Committee, said the bill was revised to address concerns raised by business representatives, and the Vermont Chamber of Commerce and the Lake Champlain Chamber of Commerce were content with the changes.
While the Republican caucus didn’t take a formal stance on the issue, a number of its members voiced concerns about the bill. Much of the dissent centered on the provisions that prohibit retaliation against wage inquiries and require consideration of flex time requests. Opponents to the bill argued that these stipulations would spawn unintended problems and besiege already overburdened small businesses.
Rep. Michael Herbert, R-Vernon, said the bill could even discourage businesses from moving to the state.
The bill requires employers to respond within 30 days of a request for flexible work schedules and to make a decision within two weeks of their response. It limits the number of requests an employee can make to two per year. Employers are free to reject these requests if they are “inconsistent with its business operations or its legal or contractual obligations.”
H.99 also prevents businesses from penalizing people from asking about other employees’ wages, though it does not require anyone to disclose this information.
Other lawmakers took issue with the core concept of the bill — that further steps should be taken to shrink the wage gap between genders in Vermont. The refrain “this is a bill in search of a problem” was repeated several times.
Rep. Douglas Gage, R- Rutland City, said strengthening equal pay law doesn’t make sense at a time when “women are elevated to new levels all the time and men quite frankly on the decline.”
(Rep. Richard Marek, D-Newfane, countered that if men face wage discrimination in the future, this bill would protect them as well.)
Rep. Robert Bouchard, R-Colchester, said the bill tries to solve a problem that economic forces will eradicate anyway. “I understand there may be a gender gap but I think the market is working and taking care of that on its own.”
On Wednesday, Bouchard offered an amendment that would exempt small businesses — those with 25 employees or fewer — from the law.
Waites-Simpson said Attorney General Bill Sorrell informed her committee that roughly 90 percent of Vermont businesses fall into that category. The amendment was rejected.
Turner also made the case that the bill doesn’t have the “teeth” necessary to make a difference. “Why pass something that doesn’t really do anything?” he asked, pointing out that H.99 doesn’t spell out specific ramifications for businesses if they don’t comply with its provisions. Businesses could, however, face lawsuits for failing to comply.
When the bill was first introduced in January, Sorrell described its primary purpose as “giving teeth to what is our existing law.”
