Revise laws relating to wage transparency
SB 313 would create the “Wage Opportunity and Transparency Act,” a new set of wage-transparency and pay-equity rules for Montana employers. The bill prohibits wage discrimination based on sex, including sex in combination with another protected status, for substantially similar work, and it bars employers from relying on prior wage history to justify current pay disparities. It also restricts employers from asking applicants about wage or salary history, from retaliating against workers who discuss or disclose wages, and from requiring wage-secrecy agreements or waivers.
The bill also requires employers with 15 or more employees to include pay information in job postings, disclose salary ranges for internal promotions and transfers, and make reasonable efforts to notify current employees of promotion opportunities. Employers would have to keep job descriptions and wage-history records for the length of employment plus two years after separation. The commissioner would be authorized to investigate complaints, mediate disputes, adopt rules, and enforce the act, while aggrieved workers could also bring civil actions in district court and seek back pay, liquidated damages, attorney fees, and other relief.
If enacted, SB 313 would add a new part to Title 39, chapter 3 of Montana law and expand state wage-discrimination protections and transparency requirements. It would create new employer duties regarding pay-setting, job postings, promotion notices, recordkeeping, and applicant screening, while giving the labor commissioner enforcement authority and creating a private right of action for affected workers. The bill would affect public and private employers, especially those with 15 or more employees, and would likely influence hiring practices, compensation policies, and internal promotion procedures across the state.
The available voting history suggests the bill had some support but not enough to advance, with the Senate Business, Labor and Economic Affairs Committee voting 10-2 to table the measure. That indicates a generally favorable or at least serious policy discussion around wage transparency, but also enough opposition to stop it in committee. The bill ultimately died in process, so it did not move forward to become law.
The main points of contention likely centered on the bill’s breadth and compliance burden for employers, including mandatory pay-range disclosures, restrictions on salary-history inquiries, recordkeeping requirements, and exposure to damages, liquidated damages, fines, and attorney fees. Employers and business groups would be expected to object to the administrative and litigation risks, while supporters would emphasize pay equity, transparency, and protections against wage discrimination and retaliation. The committee’s decision to table the bill suggests those concerns outweighed support at that stage.