Código Penal de Nicaragua Artículo 315 (employment discrimination)
Article 315 of the Nicaraguan Penal Code criminalizes employment discrimination.
Article 315 of the Nicaraguan Penal Code criminalizes employment discrimination.
Section 3 of the Equal Pay Act 1994 makes it an offence for an employer to pay male and female employees unequally for performing the same or equivalent work. Employers found in violation are subject to a fine of up to $2,000, and in the case of a continuing offence, an additional fine of up to $100 for each day the offence continues after conviction. The court may also order the employer to pay the affected employee any wages found to be owed.
The Australian Services Union applied to Fair Work Australia (‘FWA’) (now the Fair Work Commission) on behalf of non-government workers in the Social, Community and Disability Services (SACS) industry for an equal remuneration order to address gender-related underpayment. They argued that because the majority of workers in the SACS industry were female, they were compensated less than other state and local government employees in more male-dominated fields. The Full Bench of FWA found that gender had an important influence on the alleged pay gap, even though it was not the sole cause.
New York State requires equal pay for “substantially similar work,” a standard that is broader than the federal “equal work” requirement. Pay differentials must be tied to job-related, non-discriminatory factors. The laws also restrict employers from seeking or relying on salary history and require written pay notices. The measures target gender-based wage gaps and strengthen enforcement tools for employees.
The work of caring for the elderly is “predominately performed by women.” Caregivers employed by Terranova alleged that both male and female caregivers were being paid less “than would be the case if caregiving of the aged were not work predominantly performed by women.” Terranova appealed the judgment of the Employment Court. On appeal, Terranova argued that the Act referred specifically to equal pay, rather than pay equity. The Court of Appeal rejected their argument, stating that “Pay equity is about equal pay.