A. No employer shall discriminate, within any establishment in which such employees are employed, between employees on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees in the establishment at a rate less than the rate that the employer pays wages to employees of the opposite sex in the establishment for equal work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort and responsibility and that are performed under similar working conditions, except where the payment is made pursuant to a:

(1) seniority system;

(2) merit system; or

(3) system that measures earnings by quantity or quality of production.

B. An employer shall not reduce the wage of an employee to comply with this section.

C. No agreement between an employer and an employee for a specific wage in violation of the Fair Pay for Women Act shall prevent the employee from raising a claim based on a violation of the Fair Pay for Women Act.

History: Laws 2013, ch. 12, § 3.

Effective dates. — Laws 2013, ch. 12 contained no effective date provision, but, pursuant to N.M. Const., art. IV, § 23, was effective June 14, 2013, 90 days after the adjournment of the legislature.

Fair Pay for Women Act inapplicable on federal enclave. — Congress has exclusive authority over federal enclaves, and therefore plaintiffs' claims were barred by the federal enclave doctrine, where plaintiffs, employees of Sandia corporation (Sandia labs) located on Kirtland air force base, brought state-law employment discrimination claims against Sandia labs, a federally funded research and development contractor operating under contract for the department of energy. Kennicott v. Sandia Corp., 314 F.Supp.3d 1142 (D.N.M. 2018)

The state of New Mexico is an employer subject to claims brought under the Fair Pay for Women Act. — The state, an entity capable of suing and being sued, is a legal entity that falls within the definition of "person" and thus is subject to suit for violating the terms of the Fair Pay for Women Act. Wolinsky v. N.M. Corrections Dep't, 2018-NMCA-071, cert. denied.

State employee's right to pursue wage discrimination claims. — Where plaintiff sued her employer, the New Mexico corrections department, for sex-based pay discrimination in violation of the Fair Pay for Women Act (FPWA), alleging that her salary was approximately $8,000 less than that of a male employee in the same position, the district court erred in dismissing plaintiff's case based on the conclusion that defendant, a state agency, was not subject to the FPWA, because the state, an entity capable of suing and being sued, is a legal entity that falls within the definition of "person" and thus is subject to suit for violating the terms of the FPWA; the FPWA provides state employees the same right to pursue sex-based wage discrimination claims that persons employed by private employers possess. Wolinsky v. N.M. Corrections Dep't, 2018-NMCA-071, cert. denied.