The Warshawsky Law Firm represents Chef Anita Eisenhauer, who has been a faculty member at the Culinary Institute of America since 2002, and who has been paid less than a similarly-situated male colleague despite having six years greater seniority, teaching a wider variety of culinary classes, having the exact same college degrees, and progressing through each academic rank (from Lecturing Instructor up to Professor) earlier than the comparator.  On its face, this violates the federal and state equal pay statutes.

In this case CIA argues that the difference in their starting salaries – the comparator received a higher starting salary when he was hired in 2008 (six years after Chef Eisenhauer) – when applied to the “purely formulaic” application of the college’s gender-neutral compensation plan justifies the pay disparity.  We argue that the differences in their pay today cannot be justified by Chef Eisenhauer receiving a lower starting salary more than  20 years ago, because the ongoing pay disparity (since 2017) does not reflect any actual differences in their qualifications, experience, job duties, or job performance.  In all relevant respects, they are equal at their jobs – so they should be paid the same.

We have been fighting this case on behalf of Chef Eisenhauer since 2019, when we first filed the case in federal court asserting claims under both the federal and state equal pay statutes.  Unfortunately, as reported previously, we lost the federal law claim – but we still have the state law claim, which we now are pursuing in state court.

We are much more confident that we will prevail under the state law, because the law was amended in 2015 to strengthen women’s right to “equal pay for equal work.”  Under the New York State Equal Pay Law, the employer must show that the reason for the pay disparity is “job-related with respect to the position in question” and “consistent with business necessity,” i.e., “a factor that bears a manifest relationship to the employment in question.”  EPL § 194(1)(B)(iv), § 194(2).  This is a much more stringent test than under the federal Equal Pay Act.

The parties currently are briefing their competing motions for summary judgment – each side is asking the judge to rule in their favor based on the undisputed facts of the case.  We filed our opening brief on behalf of Chef Eisenhauer earlier this month.  Opposition briefs are due next month.  We expect a decision later this year.

The case is Anita Eisenhauer v. Culinary Institute of America, Index No. 2024-53041 (Dutchess County Supreme) (Hon. Christi J. Acker).  Steven M. Warshawsky is lead counsel for the plaintiff.