Great Lakes Wire

Massachusetts, California, and Washington have each introduced new pay transparency requirements that employers must follow.

In Massachusetts, a law signed on July 31, 2024, will take effect on October 29, 2025. This law requires private employers with 25 or more employees to include the pay range for a position in both internal and external job postings. The rule applies to any advertisement or job posting intended to recruit applicants for a specific employment position, including those posted through recruiters or third parties. The law defines "pay range" as the salary or hourly range that the employer reasonably expects to pay for the position at the time of posting. For commission-based roles, expected commissions may also need to be listed, though further guidance is anticipated.

To determine if an employer meets the 25-employee threshold in Massachusetts, all full-time, part-time, seasonal, and temporary employees whose primary workplace is in the state must be counted. Remote employees are included if their main work location is Massachusetts. If a remote worker will report to a Massachusetts office, the employer must comply with these transparency rules.

The law also requires employers to disclose the pay range for positions offered as promotions or transfers to current employees. Additionally, any employee or applicant can request the pay range for a specific position. Holland & Knight stated: "The pay range disclosure in response to a request by an employee is for the ‘particular and specific employment position’ held by that employee. Employers should be clear regarding the ‘particular and specific’ position for which it is disclosing the range and consider whether that ‘particular and specific’ position may account for differences in geographic location, level or seniority, education or experience, or other clarifying factors."

Since earlier this year, employers with 100 or more employees in Massachusetts must file their EEO-1 reports with the state. This count includes all full-time, part-time, seasonal, temporary, and remote workers whose primary workplace is in Massachusetts.

In California, SB 642 was signed into law on October 8, 2025. The bill revises the definition of "pay scale," extends the statute of limitations for equal pay claims to three years with recovery allowed for up to six years, and defines key terms such as "wages." These changes take effect January 1, 2026.

Under SB 642, employers must post the salary or hourly wage range they reasonably expect to pay "upon hire." Wages now include all forms of compensation—such as life insurance, vacation pay, holiday pay, stock options, and bonuses. There are questions about how stock options and bonuses should be reported; however, employers are not required to include these additional forms of compensation in posted pay ranges.

The law also updates language regarding sex discrimination: employers cannot pay employees of another sex less for performing substantially similar work. The phrase "another sex" replaces "opposite sex" to make definitions more inclusive.

Governor Newsom also signed SB 464 into law. This measure expands California's pay reporting requirements starting with the 2027 reporting cycle. Employers will need to use 23 job categories aligned with Standard Occupation Classification (SOC) groups instead of the previous 10 EEO-1 categories due to uncertainty about continued federal use of EEO-1 categories.

In Washington State, a Supreme Court decision issued on September 4, 2025 (Branson v. Washington Fine Wine & Spirits, LLC), clarified who can sue under the state's Pay Transparency law. The court ruled that anyone who applies to a job posting qualifies as a "job applicant" and does not need to prove they were genuinely seeking employment.

As a result, employers in Washington with 15 or more employees must include wage scale or salary range information and a general description of benefits in job postings. If this information is missing, applicants can seek damages—including statutory damages of $5,000 per violation—even without proof of financial harm. This increases potential liability for businesses that do not comply.

These updates reflect growing efforts across several states to increase transparency around pay practices and address wage equity concerns.