United States: NY Federal Court Significantly Limits Scope Of Equal Pay Case

For years, employment lawyers on both sides have disagreed on what is required to obtain class treatment in a Title VII discrimination case. On November 30, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York issued an opinion in Kassman v. KPMG LLP decidedly in favor of the employer, and laid out a structure for analyzing commonality in putative class actions involving manager discretion over pay and promotions.

The Dukes Rule

For class claims to proceed, Rule 23(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires there be "questions of law or fact" that are "common to the class." In Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 564 U.S. 338 (2011), the Supreme Court articulated the standard by which a plaintiff's attempts to demonstrate "commonality" must be measured. The Dukes plaintiffs contended that local managers at retail stores nationwide exercised discretion over pay and promotions in a manner that resulted in discrimination against female employees.

The Court denied class treatment, explaining that the Rule 23(a)(2) commonality requirement requires "a common contention – for example, the assertion of discriminatory bias on the part of the same supervisor." Discretionary acts by various supervisors and managers, the Court explained, could not tie a class together with any commonality. "[T]he whole point of discretionary decisionmaking is to avoid evaluating employees under a common standard." The Court observed that permitting local discretion is "a policy against having uniform employment practices" and, accordingly, could not bind a class through commonality under Rule 23(a)(2). Where discretionary decision-making is the company practice, plaintiffs must show a "common mode of exercising discretion that pervades the entire company" in order to sustain class treatment.

The Dukes decision left open the question many employment litigators have faced in the years since: what does a "common mode of exercising discretion that pervades the entire company" look like?

The Kassman Case

The recent opinion helps to answer that question. In Kassman, the plaintiffs raised disparate impact and disparate treatment claims of sex discrimination, and sought class treatment for both, and for a New York state class as well. They also raised claims under the Equal Pay Act, and sought collective treatment of those claims. The proposed nationwide classes amounted to over 10,000 female employees of KPMG – in positions as associates, senior associates, managers, senior managers/directors, and managing directors within the company's tax and advisory functions. Both parties agreed that, for each of those employees, a manager exercised discretion to decide the employee's pay and promotion.

However, plaintiffs focused on the fact that those discretionary decisions were made within company-wide structures for compensation and performance evaluations. For example, like many large companies, KPMG's compensation system set pay ranges for each position, based on factors such as job content, geography, and market value. Additionally, all employees at KPMG followed the same company-wide performance review process, the results of which directly impacted promotion potential and salary increases for those employees.

Plaintiffs argued that this framework for pay and promotion decision-making established the necessary commonality for class treatment. The court disagreed.

The Court's Decision: Title VII

Reviewing the plaintiffs' disparate impact claim, the court described four factors to consider when "determining whether a common mode of exercising discretion pervades the entire company." The factors are: (1) the nature of the purported class; (2) the process through which discretion is exercised; (3) the criteria governing the discretion; and (4) the involvement of upper management.

Each of these factors weighed against class certification in the Kassman case. First, the court noted that the putative class of over 10,000 plaintiffs was not confined to a specific job category, decision maker, or department. Second, the court observed that the company-wide pay and promotion procedures – though applicable to all employees – were no more than a framework that defined who would exercise such discretion, but did not provide direction as to how that discretion should be exercised. Third, the court observed that the individual managers at KPMG relied on a variety of highly generic criteria for pay and promotion changes and that such subjective criteria, prone to different interpretations, suggested that any discretion would not be exercised in a "common" manner. Finally, the court considered the involvement of upper-level management, noting that it was insufficient for plaintiffs to show that upper-level managers had "final review" of pay and promotions when such review, in practice, was limited to an aggregate review for budgetary approvals only.

Reviewing the plaintiffs' disparate treatment claim, the court found insufficient evidence of a "systemwide pattern or practice of discrimination" sufficient to show class commonality. Plaintiffs argued that their nationwide statistical evidence demonstrated gross disparities among men and women – a difference between 2% and 3% of wages – and that this evidence suggested discriminatory intent by the company. The court disagreed, and held that the statistical evidence did not demonstrate disparate treatment because the plaintiffs had not shown that promotion policies and practices were uniform across KPMG as required to make statistical evidence relevant under Dukes. The court then rejected the plaintiffs' argument that KPMG ignored evidence of gender discrimination. Rejecting both the disparate treatment and disparate impact class theories, the court denied class treatment under Rule 23.

The Court's Decision: Equal Pay Act

Relying on a similar analysis, the court also denied final certification of the plaintiffs' Equal Pay Act collective action. The court opined that the plaintiffs could not demonstrate that the nearly 1,200 women who opted into the collective action were a part of a single "establishment" for the EPA because, as previously found, the centralized structure for pay and promotion decision-making did not influence the decisions of individual managers sufficiently to bind the class claims together. The court further held that the collective members were not "similarly situated," even those in the same job category. Specifically, the court observed that it would be "impractical if not impossible" to "match opt-ins with 1,100 unique proposed male comparators" and make individual factual assessments as to whether those comparators performed work equal to the plaintiffs.


By setting specific factors to assess the scope of discretionary decision-making in putative class actions, the Kassman case provides one court's answers to the many questions about common business practices for pay and promotion decisions, post-Dukes. Employers are encouraged to assess their own unique circumstances under these complex rules.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions